A bit of ATC history please
Thread Starter
Captain. That would mean if you are cruising at 7500' 80 nm SE of Charlieville and monitoring the "correct " frequency you would not receive a flight information / hazard alert service but if you broke the rules and monitored the nearest ATC outlet at St George you would.
That's why NAS put the biscuits on the charts and gave monitoring the closest outlet as one suggestion.
No not rocket science or a gps that showed " nearest ". Just being able to read a map and gauge the nearest .
And do you really believe a pilot monitoring hundreds of re transmitted calls over one third of Australia -98% which are not relevant -will be able to pick out what is relevant ? No test has ever been done on this but I reckon I know the answer.
That's why NAS put the biscuits on the charts and gave monitoring the closest outlet as one suggestion.
No not rocket science or a gps that showed " nearest ". Just being able to read a map and gauge the nearest .
And do you really believe a pilot monitoring hundreds of re transmitted calls over one third of Australia -98% which are not relevant -will be able to pick out what is relevant ? No test has ever been done on this but I reckon I know the answer.
Last edited by Dick Smith; 20th Mar 2017 at 06:40.
And do you really believe a pilot monitoring hundreds of re transmitted calls over one third of Australia -98% which are not relevant -will be able to pick out what is relevant ?
Your once quoted example of hearing hundreds of what you considered to be irrelevant calls when flying from one side of the country to the other is an extreme example and not typical. In any case, did you have difficulty determining what calls were relevant to you?
Now, the problem will likely be an issue with MULTICOM 126.7. High performance aircraft will need to monitor & broadcast on MULTICOM at quite some distance and altitude from their destination due to their speed. What is VHF coverage @ A100 30NM out?
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now, the problem will likely be an issue with MULTICOM 126.7. High performance aircraft will need to monitor & broadcast on MULTICOM at quite some distance and altitude from their destination due to their speed. What is VHF coverage @ A100 30NM out?
That would mean if you are cruising at 7500' 80 nm SE of Charlieville and monitoring the "correct " frequency you would not receive a flight information / hazard alert service but if you broke the rules and monitored the nearest ATC outlet at St George you would.
And in the example you cite - and also relevant to no lines and instead "biscuit" scenario - the nearest VHF outlet may not be for the ATC sector responsible for the airspace in which you are flying, in which case you may not monitor FIS broadcasts etc. relevant to you.
And do you really believe a pilot monitoring hundreds of re transmitted calls over one third of Australia -98% which are not relevant -will be able to pick out what is relevant ? No test has ever been done on this but I reckon I know the answer.
Think about it logically, we do a pretty good job of responding to our call sign in a busy area where there's non-stop radio work (think capital city), or pricking our ears up when we hear something that might be near to us (we hear a location).
Or do you have a little difficulty with doing that? If you do, I can understand where you are coming from.
Thread Starter
A professional pilot flying with an IFR plan is being paid to monitor the radio all the time.
A person flying in outback Australia for sight seeing purposes is quite different .
Captain. You ask whether I had difficulty in working out what calls were relevant
Yes. For sure. Many cases I had no idea what airports the pilots were going into when I was en route in WA. I spent a lot of time looking down on my map .
A person flying in outback Australia for sight seeing purposes is quite different .
Captain. You ask whether I had difficulty in working out what calls were relevant
Yes. For sure. Many cases I had no idea what airports the pilots were going into when I was en route in WA. I spent a lot of time looking down on my map .
A person flying in outback Australia for sight seeing purposes is quite different .
Thread Starter
Traffic. Not necessary to design just around one group. If you follow ICAO classifications you can have a versatile system that allows both.
If it works in the U.K., Europe, Canada and the US. Why not give it a go here?
Plazbot. Come on now. I bet you would not want to go back to the dual ATC/FS system that existed before I made the changes. OCTA pilots could not even benefit from the existing radar.
Why then support a half wound back system.
If it works in the U.K., Europe, Canada and the US. Why not give it a go here?
Plazbot. Come on now. I bet you would not want to go back to the dual ATC/FS system that existed before I made the changes. OCTA pilots could not even benefit from the existing radar.
Why then support a half wound back system.
Dick, look up TCADS and see what a radar service would have looked like in FS. Separation is still a NO but traffic a big YES. With ADS-B, even more so. You just jumped too quick without studying what was already happening. If you waited just a bit more and studied what TAAATS could do you would have discovered that a hell of a lot more service could have been provided for little extra money.
Hint.......did FS need to be locally based to do the same job?
Hint.......did FS need to be locally based to do the same job?
Yes. For sure. Many cases I had no idea what airports the pilots were going into when I was en route in WA. I spent a lot of time looking down on my map.
However I would put that down to my being completely unfamiliar with the area, not a shortcoming in the airspace, sector design or air traffic management.
Personally, flying in an unfamiliar area and hearing such calls I would find reassuring, knowing that if I have a problem someone, either ATC or another aircraft in contact with them, will hear me.
Those familiar with the area they fly in I suspect have little trouble assimilating what they hear.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: S37.54 E145.11
Posts: 639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Hijack
Hey Mods, what started out as a very interesting historical thread has now been hijacked by Dick Smith to push his own wheelbarrow on MDX.
Maybe it's time to close it down or insist the thread gets back on topic?
Maybe it's time to close it down or insist the thread gets back on topic?
