Radio alerting failures happening any more?
So, just to be clear Bloggs, your professional view is that, in Australia, “G is better than E”.
Is that correct?
Is that correct?
Yes, I am serious.
And I’d like to hear from other professional pilots who agree with your view.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Darwin, Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
Unbelievable the lack of understanding regarding Class E vs Class G. A quick summary of the differences:
Class E
Transponder Required
Radio Required
No reduced VMC permitted - Minimum 1,500m horizontal 1,000ft distance from cloud, minimum 5,000m VIS below 10,000ft.
Australian Class G
No Transponder Required
Radio only required in certain circumstances (ie certified aerodrome or reduced VIS)
Reduced VMC clear of cloud, and for helicopters minimum visibility of 800m available at low levels providing radio used.
The direct cost for a VFR aircraft to fly in Class E is a transponder and a radio, plus indirect costs as a result of less access to airspace due to the greater meteorological minima.
If people are playing by the rules, Class E has to be safer, even if may at times be less efficient for IFR aircraft.
Not knowing the fundamentals does nothing for the credibility of your position.
Class E
Transponder Required
Radio Required
No reduced VMC permitted - Minimum 1,500m horizontal 1,000ft distance from cloud, minimum 5,000m VIS below 10,000ft.
Australian Class G
No Transponder Required
Radio only required in certain circumstances (ie certified aerodrome or reduced VIS)
Reduced VMC clear of cloud, and for helicopters minimum visibility of 800m available at low levels providing radio used.
The direct cost for a VFR aircraft to fly in Class E is a transponder and a radio, plus indirect costs as a result of less access to airspace due to the greater meteorological minima.
If people are playing by the rules, Class E has to be safer, even if may at times be less efficient for IFR aircraft.
Not knowing the fundamentals does nothing for the credibility of your position.
If people are playing by the rules, Class E has to be safer, even if may at times be less efficient for IFR aircraft.
Not knowing the fundamentals does nothing for the credibility of your position.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: AUS
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LB
Errr? Because it takes two to Tango and experience has taught me not to trust amateurs. Not bagging all amateur pilots of course but I don't know which ones I can trust and which ones I can't, so I don't trust any of them unless I can see them.
I want what Dick said in post#25
Class D minimum for High Capacity Jet Ops.
I'm not interested in the cost. That's somebody else's affordable safety crusade.
So why do you think that the airspace system in Australia requires you to do that?
I want what Dick said in post#25
I suggest if you cant see out properly from your aircraft you should be only flying in a minimum of class D airspace.
I'm not interested in the cost. That's somebody else's affordable safety crusade.
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Perth
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a solution to this - ADSB-in and ADSB-out in a ubiquitous manner. Just make it affordable, please, and reliable (backup systems available, perhaps augmented by 3G/4G networks - a GPS fix from a mobile phone/table transmitted out via 3G/4G is better than nothing).
I have said this before - we are apparently the "innovation nation" but everybody wants to fly without a radio with no broadcasts and use their eyes only.
This aint rocket science - it's basic 21st century comms, GPS and a bit of foresight in figuring out potential issues/degradation cases.
I have said this before - we are apparently the "innovation nation" but everybody wants to fly without a radio with no broadcasts and use their eyes only.
This aint rocket science - it's basic 21st century comms, GPS and a bit of foresight in figuring out potential issues/degradation cases.
Originally Posted by Werbil
Unbelievable the lack of understanding regarding Class E vs Class G.
I say again:
In G:
VFR require a radio and use it above 5k;
VFR require a radio in a CTAF;
ANY aircraft in any airspace above 10k requires a transponder
ANY aircraft that has a transponder MUST use regardless of the airspace or the altitude.
Read your AIP!
If people are playing by the rules, E is a costly WOFTAM.
Go the Absolute Fokker.
But at the levels in G where the collision risk is highest, transponders are not mandatory for VFR.
Transponders are mandatory for VFRs in E at whatever level (unless the aircraft does not have a continuous power source and is operating below 10,000’).
I can now see the fundamental gap in your understanding, Bloggs. You think the collision risk is higher above 5,000’ than it is below 5,000 in the vicinity of an aerodrome. Do you think all the ultralights buzzing around in the vicinity of e.g. Mildura have transponders?
Take a deep breath and think about it, please.
Back Seat Driver: You’re forced to do it because of the likes of Bloggs (whom I’m sure the bean counters in the airlines love), not because of the likes of Dick. Do you think Australian E is less safe than Australian G?
Transponders are mandatory for VFRs in E at whatever level (unless the aircraft does not have a continuous power source and is operating below 10,000’).
I can now see the fundamental gap in your understanding, Bloggs. You think the collision risk is higher above 5,000’ than it is below 5,000 in the vicinity of an aerodrome. Do you think all the ultralights buzzing around in the vicinity of e.g. Mildura have transponders?
Take a deep breath and think about it, please.
Back Seat Driver: You’re forced to do it because of the likes of Bloggs (whom I’m sure the bean counters in the airlines love), not because of the likes of Dick. Do you think Australian E is less safe than Australian G?
Agree with Bloggs. No Jet should be going anywhere were un - alerted see and avoid is the norm.
The argument about radio failure/misuse and the incompetence of a pilot is a red herring because it applies to any airspace and amateur/professional alike.
There are a number of issues conflated here in my opinion.
1. Alerted see and avoid isn't perfect. I prefer to call it "radio arranged separation" because, as Bloggs says, the time and window space just isn't there in a jet and the very last thing I want to have to do is rely on seeing a jet in time to avoid.
My personal practice on being alerted to an RPT aircraft approaching is to alter course to remove the possibility of having to spot the jet. For example I will extend my circuit or orbit until I know she is past or landed. This is akin to marine rules - early and obvious action to avoid risk of collision, no matter who thinks they have right of way.
2. The vindictive nature of CASA probably means that very few airprox are reported unless a TCAS RA is recorded.
3. The ADSB solution was stuffed up by ASA/ CASA requiring a $10,000 + GPS source for a VFR aircraft although I believe relaxation is under consideration.
The argument about radio failure/misuse and the incompetence of a pilot is a red herring because it applies to any airspace and amateur/professional alike.
There are a number of issues conflated here in my opinion.
1. Alerted see and avoid isn't perfect. I prefer to call it "radio arranged separation" because, as Bloggs says, the time and window space just isn't there in a jet and the very last thing I want to have to do is rely on seeing a jet in time to avoid.
My personal practice on being alerted to an RPT aircraft approaching is to alter course to remove the possibility of having to spot the jet. For example I will extend my circuit or orbit until I know she is past or landed. This is akin to marine rules - early and obvious action to avoid risk of collision, no matter who thinks they have right of way.
2. The vindictive nature of CASA probably means that very few airprox are reported unless a TCAS RA is recorded.
3. The ADSB solution was stuffed up by ASA/ CASA requiring a $10,000 + GPS source for a VFR aircraft although I believe relaxation is under consideration.
Let’s take it piece by piece.
Is a lowest common denominator VFR pilot a greater risk to the world when flying an aircraft fitted with a transponder than when flying an aircraft not fitted with a transponder?
In what class of airspace may a VFR pilot operate an aircraft that is not fitted with a transponder?
Is a lowest common denominator VFR pilot a greater risk to the world when flying an aircraft fitted with a transponder than when flying an aircraft not fitted with a transponder?
In what class of airspace may a VFR pilot operate an aircraft that is not fitted with a transponder?
Originally Posted by LB
Take a deep breath and think about it, please.
In what class of airspace may a VFR pilot operate an aircraft that is not fitted with a transponder?
If you lot (Dick and LB) are serious, just implement PURE ICAO airspace. Oh hang on, that would mean we'd have to put D towers everywhere. See, you can't have it both ways. Either you bastardise (I mean modify) the ICAO alphabet soup airspace (which by now it is painfully obvious that is a dog's breakfast)t to suit, or you use "as is". Make up your minds. If you're going to bastardise it, add transponder requirements to CTAFs.
whom Im sure the bean counters in the airlines love
Sunfish: another post from a sensible pilot who has a practical grasp of the issues.
Lets take it piece by piece.
Is a lowest common denominator VFR pilot a greater risk to the world when flying an aircraft fitted with a transponder than when flying an aircraft not fitted with a transponder?
In what class of airspace may a VFR pilot operate an aircraft that is not fitted with a transponder?
Is a lowest common denominator VFR pilot a greater risk to the world when flying an aircraft fitted with a transponder than when flying an aircraft not fitted with a transponder?
In what class of airspace may a VFR pilot operate an aircraft that is not fitted with a transponder?
And the next piece of the puzzle:
In what class of airspace in Australia may a VFR pilot operate an aircraft that is not fitted with a radio?
In what class of airspace in Australia may a VFR pilot operate an aircraft that is not fitted with a radio?
And the piece after that:
What are the mandatory calls to be made by pilots of radio equipped aircraft operating in the vicinity of aerodromes in class G airspace in Australia? The mandatory ones.
What are the mandatory calls to be made by pilots of radio equipped aircraft operating in the vicinity of aerodromes in class G airspace in Australia? The mandatory ones.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: AUS
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish, the diff between amateur and professional (broadly speaking VFR v IFR) is important because we speak a different language.
Position 69dme 142 radial ABC tracking to ABCSI for the RVAV Z is a definitive position in IFR speak but gibberish to the VFR driver as is "about to cross Farmer Brown's top paddock near the sheep dip" is to me. I don't have the charts and at 4-8 miles/minute and possibly still in IMC, I don't have the time.
LB, I get what you are playing at but I've seen on many occasions TCAS symbols leap miles across the screen instantaneously, so I would not use it for separation.
Position 69dme 142 radial ABC tracking to ABCSI for the RVAV Z is a definitive position in IFR speak but gibberish to the VFR driver as is "about to cross Farmer Brown's top paddock near the sheep dip" is to me. I don't have the charts and at 4-8 miles/minute and possibly still in IMC, I don't have the time.
LB, I get what you are playing at but I've seen on many occasions TCAS symbols leap miles across the screen instantaneously, so I would not use it for separation.
Originally Posted by Back Seat Driver
ABCSI for the RVAV Z is a definitive position in IFR speak but gibberish to the VFR driver