$5,000 fine for not monitoring the radio
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: australia
Age: 81
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think there is a mandatory final call, just a joining the circuit call. From my observation the folk who call every leg are the least likely to respond to any call directed at them, they simply keep reading out their position which is an easy thing to teach from a school perspective I guess 
Heard the other day: "Jabbything this is Qlink, is this circuit for a touch and go or a full stop?"
Jabbything: Jabbything downwind 24
Qlink: "Can you confirm it for a full stop or a touch and go?"
Jabbything: "Jabbything turning base runway 24"
Some decent education is badly needed.
Heard the other day: "Jabbything this is Qlink, is this circuit for a touch and go or a full stop?"
Jabbything: Jabbything downwind 24
Qlink: "Can you confirm it for a full stop or a touch and go?"
Jabbything: "Jabbything turning base runway 24"
Some decent education is badly needed.
As I have often said in other threads, until we get rid of the "pingya" approach to "education", there will be no improvement.
That the "radio" is for communications, not for "practicing radio work".
For those of you who are not familiar, re. the "recommended" circuit calls: "You must make all the calls all the time, "then they can't pingya".
In an atmosphere of perceived draconian compliance and enforcement, using commonsense (sometime called airmanship) to tailor your radio calls to the circumstances is just not seriously considered.
Also illustrated in another post ---- somebody just going through the rituals, as long as the call is made, you have complied.
"Compliance" has been elevated to a level that totally obscures why you are making the calls in the first place. In my experience, several "Regionals" are very good at this. A taxi call is made, in the circuit you reply, regardless they still taxi out and line up when you are on final. A good mate of mine recently had it happen twice in one day, two different "Regionals".
Finally, only $5000, that's cheap, almost all offenses are 50 penalty points, almost $11,000.
Tootle pip!!
The Qlink one is the one that is questionable.
Has anyone ever been "pinged" by CASA for not making a required broadcast?
And I don't mean one that resulted in or was a factor in an incident or accident - I mean a missed broadcast where no issue was presented but the pilot got "pinged" anyway.
And I don't mean one that resulted in or was a factor in an incident or accident - I mean a missed broadcast where no issue was presented but the pilot got "pinged" anyway.
Leadsled is on the money. The culture is about compliance, not airmanship. Airmanship requires that the pilot understand and be granted free will and be encouraged and granted the right to exercise independent thought. Nothing CASA does seems to encourage such awareness at all. Why for example, the new fuel rules require a mandatory mayday call, no room for individual responsibility there.
The same mindset applies to road laws. The problem is that it is possible to be perfectly legal and suicidally stupid at the same time. The lawyers do not wish to acknowledge this. They have no use for the concept of common sense and leave no space for its development or exercise.
....Speaking as someone who routinely sets 104kph on the cruise control
The same mindset applies to road laws. The problem is that it is possible to be perfectly legal and suicidally stupid at the same time. The lawyers do not wish to acknowledge this. They have no use for the concept of common sense and leave no space for its development or exercise.
....Speaking as someone who routinely sets 104kph on the cruise control
I suspect the reason is that if you make 8 broadcasts, there is no scope for CASA to ping you for failing to make a required broadcast.
Hence so many pilots make 8 broadcasts...
What is your theory about cause and effect, in the case of in-vicinity broadcasts, CM?
I don't think so Harry. The Jabby does a touch and go and the runway is quickly clear. The Jabby does a landing on the piano keys then taxis for 3 minutes to the runway exit and more room is needed to position for final. Qlink were only asking, the Jabby driver showed a total lack of any awareness or airmanship by not answering. No doubt they just did the latter and gave him a wide berth.
I am not saying that was the case here but I think it worth considering we may be mixing with people of limited experience at some aerodromes. I remember what it was like I was a student and when talking on the radio was daunting and responding to anything other than the standard calls left me bewildered. Maybe allowing for peoples lack of experience is also airmanship too?
Like I said that may not be the case here but most people don't deliberately try to act badly - usually it is because they are out of their depth. A student not getting what someone is asking is not uncommon.
I also know of one ag pilot doing water bombing in a military control zone who hadbeen given a long and fast clearance and replied very slowly with a country drawl... "just to let you know, I can only think about as fast as I talk, so you might want to slow down a bit with the radio calls"
I just asked the question, because there seems an inference here that some pilots at least are scared poop-less about getting hung by CASA for simply missing a broadcast, and I wondered if it had ever happened - in the circumstance I outlined.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back in the days of FS, a particular pilot was known for is non standard calls, "look out the window" responses to traffic info etc... He was eventually pinged for not giving the outbound track in a departure report. But it was understood that his file in Fort Fumble was a big one!
That sounds similar to someone who used to fly IFR around Victoria in the 70's & early 80"s.
He used to tell FS on first contact "Traffic information not required", which of course FS was obliged to pass, whether he wanted it or not. And on one occasion, the conflict was opposite direction same level - the other was @ a non-quadrantal level
On one occasion he was given traffic on a VFR, who then called him with a lengthy chapter and verse about where he was, where going, etc. he responded with:
"Are you IFR or VFR?
"VFR Cessna 172, we passed xxxxx ..." (same chapter & verse just given)
"Well, if you're VFR, keep your eyes open and your mouth shut".
Nothing further was heard from the C172.
He used to tell FS on first contact "Traffic information not required", which of course FS was obliged to pass, whether he wanted it or not. And on one occasion, the conflict was opposite direction same level - the other was @ a non-quadrantal level
On one occasion he was given traffic on a VFR, who then called him with a lengthy chapter and verse about where he was, where going, etc. he responded with:
"Are you IFR or VFR?
"VFR Cessna 172, we passed xxxxx ..." (same chapter & verse just given)
"Well, if you're VFR, keep your eyes open and your mouth shut".
Nothing further was heard from the C172.
I heard a crusty old Chief Pilot give the best radio advice for uncontrolled airports / airstrips.
"Who are you talking to? And why are you talking?" IE what is the point of the broadcast.....
(Mind you, the same advice probably applies for domestic bliss.....)
"Who are you talking to? And why are you talking?" IE what is the point of the broadcast.....
(Mind you, the same advice probably applies for domestic bliss.....)
Care to expand on this? Having flown in both countries I prefer the more relaxed way Australians talk to each other over the radio. Over here the phraseology is very strict and you are expected to follow it rigidly.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eagles Nest
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Casa are operating like an airline or military , trying to introduce a SOP for any little infringement . Setting fines and rules to manage individuals at times . Who is the chief pilot of Australian aviation ? Type A personality trying to control everyone’s radio calls . Good luck !
Last edited by Squawk7700; 2nd Aug 2018 at 22:11.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think about calls, if there is traffic about then multiple circuit calls may be needed.
If you are the only one in the sky then you can restrain yourself to the minimum.
It is all about situational awareness.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Goolwa
Age: 59
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The way I see it is thus; CAR 166 basically says that you must make a call to reasonably avoid a collision, so the only mandatory call is the one to avoid a collision. Now, if the recommended calls are made, i.e. Taxiing, entering a runway, inbound, joining circuit, straight-in AND other pilots in the area are LISTENING then the recommended calls should trigger an appropriate response from other aircraft in the vicinity. So, ABC makes a Taxiing call for runway 19, DEF who is on Base for 19 then makes a call to alert ABC. GHI calls 10nm inbound from the west, ABC is departing the circuit to the east so doesn't need to respond. DEF calls joining the circuit on downwind, ABC who is turning crosswind doing circuits makes a call to alert DEF.
Now, if ABC is blindly making calls on every leg of the circuit then what can happen is just as DEF calls entering the runway, ABC calls turning final, thus nobody hears the call and a potential collision could take place.
The biggest problem I have seen is where the instructor is a; teaching a call on every leg and b; talking to the student in-between each call. I can understand there is a lot going on in the early hours of learning to fly but learning to listen, evaluate then respond if necessary on the radio is as important as keeping the ball in the middle, and hopefully it will become just as instinctive.
Now, if ABC is blindly making calls on every leg of the circuit then what can happen is just as DEF calls entering the runway, ABC calls turning final, thus nobody hears the call and a potential collision could take place.
The biggest problem I have seen is where the instructor is a; teaching a call on every leg and b; talking to the student in-between each call. I can understand there is a lot going on in the early hours of learning to fly but learning to listen, evaluate then respond if necessary on the radio is as important as keeping the ball in the middle, and hopefully it will become just as instinctive.
Originally Posted by Tank Engine
Contrary to the other two responders above who didn’t get it
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I assume that is directed at me. My comment was related to the CFI who, from the text posted, implied one doesn't say anything and that radio calls are a waste of time. If the said CFI requires his students/pilots to make the recommended/mandatory calls, as nicely outlined by Dexta, then I wholeheartedly and unreservedly apologise for calling him a fool. If however he is in the no talkies camp, then he is indeed a fool!
Constant blathering on the radio is possibly even more dangerous than none!