Whatever you do, don't change anything - CASA Multicom
Thread Starter
Whatever you do, don't change anything - CASA Multicom
I love it. CASA has just sent out what is probably their final consultation paper regarding "Frequency use in Class G airspace". Here is a link.
Note once again there are no names - no one has the confidence to put their name on any document while earning up to $300,000 per year.
Of course, I could have written the wording in their email notification “We believe the safest and simplest system is the one currently in place.” This is entirely consistent with the whole of CASA. That is, never change anything, never show a skerrick of leadership. Never copy the best from overseas and incorporate with the best we already do here. Just make sure the status quo remains so no one could ever possibly be held accountable for making a decision.
What about the extraordinary cost in CASA doing this, which is paid by the industry? Or the cost of industry people and RAPAC members going to meetings? It is not quite the $1.4 billion waste from the Super Seasprite fiasco but it is the same incompetence.
Imagine working for the place. It must be really demoralising. You have to live dishonestly during the day and then presumably go home and tell your kids and grandkids to be honest.
I presume when they did the study, Mr Carmody said to them, “Whatever you do, don’t look at what happens overseas. In fact I prohibit it completely. You must not look at countries such as the USA, Canada or Europe as our minds are fixed in concrete and there is no way we will ever copy the best in the world. After all, we made the Nomad, and they only made the Airbus A380, the Boeing 747 and the space shuttle.”
Note once again there are no names - no one has the confidence to put their name on any document while earning up to $300,000 per year.
Of course, I could have written the wording in their email notification “We believe the safest and simplest system is the one currently in place.” This is entirely consistent with the whole of CASA. That is, never change anything, never show a skerrick of leadership. Never copy the best from overseas and incorporate with the best we already do here. Just make sure the status quo remains so no one could ever possibly be held accountable for making a decision.
What about the extraordinary cost in CASA doing this, which is paid by the industry? Or the cost of industry people and RAPAC members going to meetings? It is not quite the $1.4 billion waste from the Super Seasprite fiasco but it is the same incompetence.
Imagine working for the place. It must be really demoralising. You have to live dishonestly during the day and then presumably go home and tell your kids and grandkids to be honest.
I presume when they did the study, Mr Carmody said to them, “Whatever you do, don’t look at what happens overseas. In fact I prohibit it completely. You must not look at countries such as the USA, Canada or Europe as our minds are fixed in concrete and there is no way we will ever copy the best in the world. After all, we made the Nomad, and they only made the Airbus A380, the Boeing 747 and the space shuttle.”
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If this stuff was printed 50 years ago, it would be have immediately been cut into quarters and pushed on a nail in the outhouse where it belongs today.
CASA is constantly on the lookout for ways to waste Taxpayers money, to engage in the delusional world of where they hang their hat on "Safety"
rather than reality and the facts. The ideas of logical reasoning, based on necessity and reliability started down the gurgler decades ago
and the whirlpool has only gotten worse.
CASA think they need to reinvent the wheel that worked well before they decided to to demonstrate corporate narcissism and
engage in financial rape of the aviation industry.
In the USA or Canada, 126.7 is the Class G as they call it frequency for uncontrolled airspace. It's fine for the really remote areas.
Get closer to the big smoke and up high, you hear every clown within 100 miles going thru those long winded radio calls
endlessly yabbering "Conflicting traffic please advise" instead of using eyeballs.
There are other concerns that are more important, with GPS everyone flies a railroad in the sky,
yet do we ever hear of any rules to fly to the right of a direct track when closing speeds can be
a few seconds a mile.
CASA have removed the vocabulary that was common with overseas countries and replaced it with
their own that makes CASA look stark raving mad in the international world.
Now back to reading the sacred scrolls of CASA.
CASA is constantly on the lookout for ways to waste Taxpayers money, to engage in the delusional world of where they hang their hat on "Safety"
rather than reality and the facts. The ideas of logical reasoning, based on necessity and reliability started down the gurgler decades ago
and the whirlpool has only gotten worse.
CASA think they need to reinvent the wheel that worked well before they decided to to demonstrate corporate narcissism and
engage in financial rape of the aviation industry.
In the USA or Canada, 126.7 is the Class G as they call it frequency for uncontrolled airspace. It's fine for the really remote areas.
Get closer to the big smoke and up high, you hear every clown within 100 miles going thru those long winded radio calls
endlessly yabbering "Conflicting traffic please advise" instead of using eyeballs.
There are other concerns that are more important, with GPS everyone flies a railroad in the sky,
yet do we ever hear of any rules to fly to the right of a direct track when closing speeds can be
a few seconds a mile.
CASA have removed the vocabulary that was common with overseas countries and replaced it with
their own that makes CASA look stark raving mad in the international world.
Now back to reading the sacred scrolls of CASA.
In the USA or Canada, 126.7 is the Class G as they call it frequency for uncontrolled airspace. It's fine for the really remote areas.
Get closer to the big smoke and up high, you hear every clown within 100 miles going thru those long winded radio callsendlessly yabbering "Conflicting traffic please advise" instead of using eyeballs
Get closer to the big smoke and up high, you hear every clown within 100 miles going thru those long winded radio callsendlessly yabbering "Conflicting traffic please advise" instead of using eyeballs
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was simple and it worked prior to the change in 2013 then made without consultation. In effect we have gone back to that time but at significant cost and confusion!
Well done and it took 5 years to do it!!
Well done and it took 5 years to do it!!
This is entirely consistent with the whole of CASA. That is, never change anything, never show a skerrick of leadership.
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,967
Received 93 Likes
on
54 Posts
and up high, you hear every clown within 100 miles going thru those long winded radio calls
endlessly yabbering "Conflicting traffic please advise" instead of using eyeballs.
endlessly yabbering "Conflicting traffic please advise" instead of using eyeballs.
As far as I'm aware, neither of these two other Clubs host any powered aircraft.
I learned to fly Gliders at one of those strips way back in 1970 and flew there regularly (like every flamin' weekend!) throughout the 70's. We made no radio calls in the circuit; only one Glider had a radio anyway! But we kept our eyes up and out of the cockpit.
There was only one incident during that time. I had a mid-air collision.......with a Wedge-Tailed Eagle!
'Nuff said.
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Currently: A landlocked country with high terrain, otherwise Melbourne, Australia + Washington D.C.
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 750
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...
I learned to fly Gliders at one of those strips way back in 1970 and flew there regularly (like every flamin' weekend!) throughout the 70's. We made no radio calls in the circuit; only one Glider had a radio anyway! But we kept our eyes up and out of the cockpit.
There was only one incident during that time. I had a mid-air collision.......with a Wedge-Tailed Eagle!
'Nuff said.
I learned to fly Gliders at one of those strips way back in 1970 and flew there regularly (like every flamin' weekend!) throughout the 70's. We made no radio calls in the circuit; only one Glider had a radio anyway! But we kept our eyes up and out of the cockpit.
There was only one incident during that time. I had a mid-air collision.......with a Wedge-Tailed Eagle!
'Nuff said.
kaz
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: act
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No no, you’re all wrong. Read Carmody’s piece in today’s Australian . CASA is improving under his watch. Increased customer satisfaction, improved performance. Didn’t say what the parameters were, or if they were changed from the ones used previously, which is the normal way of improving performance. Think train performance
no one could ever possibly be held accountable for making a decision.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
megan; You are correct in that there are very few individuals that have their name to anything. Yes Mr Walker has a role and since he moved across from Airservices some 2 years ago the communications out of CASA have improved significantly. There are those within the organisation that still do their own thing and to hell with the industry they are meant to serve. Unfortunately Mr Walker does not have control of those individuals. The sooner those individuals are identified and shown the door the better - what some might say is the last of the iron ring? Those staff are only there for the money and their own ego. CASA is not only a regulator but a service provider. The sad part is that it does far more regulating than it does in service provision. They really need to get the legal people out of the letter writing and decision making - it might be more relevant to aviation then?
The new 'customer satisfaction 'results show that Carmody can and does polish a turd.
As for the wombats in their burrows...and those individuals have been identified, but the chances of any of them being shown the door are Buckley's and none.
Crimes, cronyism and corruption means nothing to these people. Its all done for the good of "safety"
CAsA rocks on, in its own sweet way...at colossal expense and great detriment to GA.
Ops normal.
As for the wombats in their burrows...and those individuals have been identified, but the chances of any of them being shown the door are Buckley's and none.
Crimes, cronyism and corruption means nothing to these people. Its all done for the good of "safety"
CAsA rocks on, in its own sweet way...at colossal expense and great detriment to GA.
Ops normal.
Yes , article in the “Australian” was certainly poorly timed.
There are obviously staff in CASA that have the Director hoodwinked and have allowed their own narrow uninformed views to rule the day, disregarding the views of industry.
They also seem to lack the ability to write something that is easy for the reader to understand in yet another attempt to bend the results of industry preference to suit their own sheltered ideas!
One must remember that the change in 2013 was made within CASA with no justification, consultation or safety case and then those same officers fought tooth and nail for five years to try and justify their crap decision, and from Thursday’s email they are still there. God knows what this exercise cost?
There are obviously staff in CASA that have the Director hoodwinked and have allowed their own narrow uninformed views to rule the day, disregarding the views of industry.
They also seem to lack the ability to write something that is easy for the reader to understand in yet another attempt to bend the results of industry preference to suit their own sheltered ideas!
One must remember that the change in 2013 was made within CASA with no justification, consultation or safety case and then those same officers fought tooth and nail for five years to try and justify their crap decision, and from Thursday’s email they are still there. God knows what this exercise cost?
In the USA or Canada, 126.7 is the Class G as they call it frequency for uncontrolled airspace. It's fine for the really remote areas.
Get closer to the big smoke and up high, you hear every clown within 100 miles going thru those long winded radio calls
endlessly yabbering "Conflicting traffic please advise" instead of using eyeballs.
Get closer to the big smoke and up high, you hear every clown within 100 miles going thru those long winded radio calls
endlessly yabbering "Conflicting traffic please advise" instead of using eyeballs.
This is entirely consistent with the whole of CASA. That is, never change anything, never show a skerrick of leadership. Never copy the best from overseas and incorporate with the best we already do here.
I do share your sentiments about why we tend not to copy the best of the world, we seem to believe we are different. I love hearing the navy brass tell the media how our submarine requirements are "unique" compared to the rest of the world that is why we cannot buy off the shelf. Not one reporter asks "what is unique about our requirements" all sheep.
The sad part of his change is that CASA have disregarded the views of industry and made significant consultation with the RAPACs and others a waste of time. They can’t even write up the changes in a manner that can be understood. And it is my bet many pilots will continue to what they have done since 2003 and use 126.7 at low levels regardless if operating in the vicinity of airfields marked or unmarked on charts. Having a second frequency which promotes frequency separation is clearly less safe and the majority of pilots know that.
What cracks me up is that, in Canada, although the equivalent of the ‘low level’ area frequency in G is 126.7, the equivalent of the default CTAF is 123.2. In other words, the ‘default’ frequency for use at places that are not marked on charts is NOT 126.7.
Some people seem to be advocating for 126.7 to be the quasi area frequency in G AS WELL AS the default CTAF. That’s NOT how it works in Canada.
From the RAC chapter of the Canadian version of the AIP:
Some people seem to be advocating for 126.7 to be the quasi area frequency in G AS WELL AS the default CTAF. That’s NOT how it works in Canada.
From the RAC chapter of the Canadian version of the AIP:
4.5 Aircraft Operations — Uncontrolled Aerodromes
4.5.1 General
An uncontrolled aerodrome is an aerodrome without a control tower, or one where the tower is not in operation. There is no substitute for alertness while in the vicinity of an uncontrolled aerodrome. It is essential that pilots be aware of, and look out for, other traffic, and exchange traffic information when approaching or departing from an uncontrolled aerodrome, particularly since some aircraft may not have communication capability. To achieve the greatest degree of safety, it is essential that all radio-equipped aircraft monitor a common designated frequency, such as the published MF or ATF, and follow the reporting procedures specified for use in an MF area, while operating on the manoeuvring area or flying within an MF area surrounding an uncontrolled aerodrome.
• MF area means an area in the vicinity of an uncontrolled aerodrome for which an MF has been designated. The area within which MF procedures apply at a particular aerodrome is defined in the Aerodrome/Facility Directory Section of the CFS, under the heading COMM.
Normally, the MF area is a circle with a 5-NM radius capped at 3 000 ft AAE.
At uncontrolled aerodromes without a published MF or ATF, the common frequency for the broadcast of aircraft position and the intentions of pilots flying in the vicinity of that aerodrome is 123.2 MHz.
…
9.13 IFR Procedures at an Uncontrolled Aerodrome in Uncontrolled Airspace
Pilots operating under IFR in uncontrolled airspace should, whenever practical, monitor 126.7 MHz and broadcast their intentions on this frequency immediately prior to changing altitude or commencing an approach. Therefore, when arriving at an aerodrome where another frequency is designated as the MF, descent and approach intentions should be broadcast on 126.7 MHz before changing to the MF. If conflicting IFR traffic becomes evident, this change should be delayed until the conflict is resolved. Once established on the MF, the pilot shall make the reports listed in RAC 9.12 (see RAC 4.5.4 for MF procedures, and RAC 4.5.5 for the use of 123.2 MHz where a UNICOM does not exist.
4.5.1 General
An uncontrolled aerodrome is an aerodrome without a control tower, or one where the tower is not in operation. There is no substitute for alertness while in the vicinity of an uncontrolled aerodrome. It is essential that pilots be aware of, and look out for, other traffic, and exchange traffic information when approaching or departing from an uncontrolled aerodrome, particularly since some aircraft may not have communication capability. To achieve the greatest degree of safety, it is essential that all radio-equipped aircraft monitor a common designated frequency, such as the published MF or ATF, and follow the reporting procedures specified for use in an MF area, while operating on the manoeuvring area or flying within an MF area surrounding an uncontrolled aerodrome.
• MF area means an area in the vicinity of an uncontrolled aerodrome for which an MF has been designated. The area within which MF procedures apply at a particular aerodrome is defined in the Aerodrome/Facility Directory Section of the CFS, under the heading COMM.
Normally, the MF area is a circle with a 5-NM radius capped at 3 000 ft AAE.
At uncontrolled aerodromes without a published MF or ATF, the common frequency for the broadcast of aircraft position and the intentions of pilots flying in the vicinity of that aerodrome is 123.2 MHz.
…
9.13 IFR Procedures at an Uncontrolled Aerodrome in Uncontrolled Airspace
Pilots operating under IFR in uncontrolled airspace should, whenever practical, monitor 126.7 MHz and broadcast their intentions on this frequency immediately prior to changing altitude or commencing an approach. Therefore, when arriving at an aerodrome where another frequency is designated as the MF, descent and approach intentions should be broadcast on 126.7 MHz before changing to the MF. If conflicting IFR traffic becomes evident, this change should be delayed until the conflict is resolved. Once established on the MF, the pilot shall make the reports listed in RAC 9.12 (see RAC 4.5.4 for MF procedures, and RAC 4.5.5 for the use of 123.2 MHz where a UNICOM does not exist.