What is happening with the MULTICOM?
Thread Starter
What is happening with the MULTICOM?
I have started this new thread because I think most have lost interest on the old threads on this issue.
From what I can understand, CASA has now made a final decision which still states that if there is an unmarked aerodrome, the taxi and circuit calls should be given on the area ATC frequency.
Of course they don’t mention helipads. Presumably if it is an unmarked helipad that someone is flying in or out of, they should give the calls on the area ATC frequency.
Is that how everyone understands it?
From what I can understand, CASA has now made a final decision which still states that if there is an unmarked aerodrome, the taxi and circuit calls should be given on the area ATC frequency.
Of course they don’t mention helipads. Presumably if it is an unmarked helipad that someone is flying in or out of, they should give the calls on the area ATC frequency.
Is that how everyone understands it?
Last edited by Dick Smith; 31st Oct 2018 at 23:04.
I have started this new thread because I think most have lost interest on the old threads on this issue.
From what I can understand, CASA has now made a final decision which still states that if there is an unmarked aerodrome, the taxi and circuit calls should be given on the area ATC frequency.
Of course they don’t mention helipads. Presumably if it is an unmarked helipad that someone is flying in or out of, they should give the calls on the area ATC frequency.
Is that how everyone understands it?
From what I can understand, CASA has now made a final decision which still states that if there is an unmarked aerodrome, the taxi and circuit calls should be given on the area ATC frequency.
Of course they don’t mention helipads. Presumably if it is an unmarked helipad that someone is flying in or out of, they should give the calls on the area ATC frequency.
Is that how everyone understands it?
What isn't clear to me is that if your unmarked field is within the CTAF of a marked airfield what frequency do you use?
So it follows than you cannot be "within" a CTAF. If the unmarked field is withing the "normal" circuit size of the aerodrome which has a CTAF then as you say, common sense says use the CTAF.
https://www.casa.gov.au/file/182536/...token=ev1DY9ng
After exploring options for change and considering all feedback, we believe the safest and simplest system is the one currently in place. In other words, the recommended radio frequency to use in non-controlled airspace are:
- ‘in the vicinity’—within 10nm, and at a height where your operations could be in the way of other traffic—of any non-controlled aerodrome published on aeronautical charts, pilots should use the CTAF (126.7 MHz or discrete frequency) as published
- anywhere within a Broadcast Area, pilots should use the dedicated Broadcast Area CTAF
- in all other non-controlled airspace, pilots should be on Area VHF .
* (and it’s not the area freq)
I don’t know about any of the above. IMHO what makes using a single multicom frequency unviable is simply the verbal diarrhoea that flows from most pilots mouths whenever they get the chance. In particular I single out RAA and private pilots. The clear winner here is the running circuit commentary that so many love. Goodbye MULTICOM, hello chatter.
Aussie Bob:
Speaking as a PPL, you can go and get (censored). There are three issues here, all of which have killed students and inexperienced pilots.
1) The skygods like Aussie Bob who are so used to voice procedure that it is a point of honour to make a transmission so fast as to be unintelligible except to other cognoscenti. I first encountered this in military fire control, but that was amongst a small group who new each other; as in "firemission grid yabba yabba etc." The aviation equivalent is "trffc mildu ayabber yabber in 10". Unintelligible plonkers.
2) The poor feckng chinese or indian student who, despite having passed Cambridge level 3 English, doesn't have a hope in hell of deciphering what Aussie Bob said and carries on regardless in silence.
3) The poor fecking PPL like me who tries to follow CASA dictums that it is better to try and communicate than not.
....and all we get is condescending BS about making too much noise? Tell that to Holly Smith and the poor indian kid who died at YMMB.
I don’t know about any of the above. IMHO what makes using a single multicom frequency unviable is simply the verbal diarrhoea that flows from most pilots mouths whenever they get the chance. In particular I single out RAA and private pilots. The clear winner here is the running circuit commentary that so many love. Goodbye MULTICOM, hello chatter.
1) The skygods like Aussie Bob who are so used to voice procedure that it is a point of honour to make a transmission so fast as to be unintelligible except to other cognoscenti. I first encountered this in military fire control, but that was amongst a small group who new each other; as in "firemission grid yabba yabba etc." The aviation equivalent is "trffc mildu ayabber yabber in 10". Unintelligible plonkers.
2) The poor feckng chinese or indian student who, despite having passed Cambridge level 3 English, doesn't have a hope in hell of deciphering what Aussie Bob said and carries on regardless in silence.
3) The poor fecking PPL like me who tries to follow CASA dictums that it is better to try and communicate than not.
....and all we get is condescending BS about making too much noise? Tell that to Holly Smith and the poor indian kid who died at YMMB.
Yes Sunny, an element of truth in what you say but you forget I am a career GA instructor well versed in teaching pilots to fly. Sorry to disappoint, but I don’t teach rapid speak. I do however discourage continuous dribble to an empty circuit.
I gather you are continuously guilty of the above, hogging bandwidth and unintentionally preventing others from having their say.
The observation that it is mostly private and RAA pilots running this commentary game is from direct experience conducting heaps of flight reviews with these folk. I am old enough not to give a rats ass about any of it, I am just saying how it is.
I gather you are continuously guilty of the above, hogging bandwidth and unintentionally preventing others from having their say.
The observation that it is mostly private and RAA pilots running this commentary game is from direct experience conducting heaps of flight reviews with these folk. I am old enough not to give a rats ass about any of it, I am just saying how it is.
Last edited by Aussie Bob; 2nd Nov 2018 at 19:25.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish, unfortunately Aussie bob is correct in that many pilots in the circuit area of rural airfields, in particular, just talk far too much. In making 6 or 8 calls around the circuit they are only jamming whatever frequency they are using for no other reason than to hear their own voice!
If you taxi out and make a call and nobody answers, perhaps it is wise to say no more unless someone else calls taxi or inbound. Perhaps only a downwind or base call is the only call that needs to be made around the circuit, unless it is determined that there may be a conflict. The answer to this is education which needs to start with the instructors many of whom teach this talkfest!
If you taxi out and make a call and nobody answers, perhaps it is wise to say no more unless someone else calls taxi or inbound. Perhaps only a downwind or base call is the only call that needs to be made around the circuit, unless it is determined that there may be a conflict. The answer to this is education which needs to start with the instructors many of whom teach this talkfest!
There are minimum required calls for operating in the circuit and some flying schools in CTAF’s teach students to make 400% of them. Simply not necessary for your average airport !
As an aside to this and slightly off topic, I see two interesting trends happening, the first being the use of the word "midfield" as in XYZ joining midfield crosswind for runway 19. This is now so commonplace I hear it several times per day but a word search of the AIP brings up the word only twice in the entire 800 odd pages. Neither instance remotely relates to a radio call. Often the aircraft saying this are nowhere near the middle of the field either.
The other thing that is now commonplace is the acknowledgement of a transmission by a double key of the microphone. Once never heard, I hear this on an almost day to day regularity.
Again, I don't give a rats business, just saying what I hear and noting a developing trend.
The other thing that is now commonplace is the acknowledgement of a transmission by a double key of the microphone. Once never heard, I hear this on an almost day to day regularity.
Again, I don't give a rats business, just saying what I hear and noting a developing trend.
Not even that.
[T]he use of the word "midfield"..
That's why the CAAP produced by the people with these opinions now has a picture (Figure 3) of an aircraft described as joining circuit "at (midfield) crosswind". However, that description is an inaccurate description of what the picture depicts and what the text says at paragraph 5.6.3: "somewhere between midfield and the departure end of the runway". What the people in CASA with strong opinions want you to actually do is join somewhere between the halfway point of the runway and the upwind end of the runway, but that's entered the folklore as "midfield".
All that said, wherever someone happens to be joining crosswind, if they have to blab about it all they should be saying is "joining crosswind".
Don't get me started on "joins" this and "joins" that and "joins" the other thing...
Sunfish, unfortunately Aussie bob is correct in that many pilots in the circuit area of rural airfields, in particular, just talk far too much. In making 6 or 8 calls around the circuit they are only jamming whatever frequency they are using for no other reason than to hear their own voice!
----- they are using for no other reason than to hear their own voice!
Actually not so, they are just doing as they have been trained, or as demanded on their last check -- on pain of "failing" what was supposed to be a review, but has becomes a license renewal, and all too often a method of exploitation by certain organizations.
This is all about the "pingya" system, where legal compliance overrides everything else, but in particular supersedes what once was called "airmanship", or as I prefer, common sense.
If you make every call , every time, "they can't pingya".
Tootle pip!!
PS: One org. recently advised me that "CASA required/mandated a minimum of five hours dual before I could "attempt" a flight review".
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
The poor feckng chinese or indian student who, despite having passed Cambridge level 3 English,
Sorry Sunfish, but I tend to side with Aussie Bob in part. Some of these students will make up to four calls in just one circuit of the airfield.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 750
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A pilot of an aircraft fitted with radio must maintain a listening watch...CAR 243
CAR 166C sets out when calls must be made. The most relevant para is:
(2) The pilot must make a broadcast that includes the following information whenever it is reasonably necessary to do so to avoid a collision, or the risk of a collision, with another aircraft:
(a) the name of the aerodrome;
(b) the aircraft's type and call sign;
(c) the position of the aircraft and the pilot's intentions
The rest of the CARs 166* are also instructive. CAAP 166 sets out the recommended calls.
Kaz
Well, the local airfield gets a fairly constant stream of the above quoted Nationality of students on some days and I wish that they all indeed did have Cambridge level 3 English, as I find most of them quite hard to understand! Some of them have very heavy accents. I will admit though to having over 800 hours in 'Bongo Vans' ( and 1400 or so in Pa-25s) which certainly has not helped!
Sorry Sunfish, but I tend to side with Aussie Bob in part. Some of these students will make up to four calls in just one circuit of the airfield.
Sorry Sunfish, but I tend to side with Aussie Bob in part. Some of these students will make up to four calls in just one circuit of the airfield.
That's because, in Australia, more talk on the radio equals more safety.
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
To hear three FTA aircraft trying to separate themselves coming in to Waikerie or Renmark is just a joke. “ I’m here,where are you” ,time after time. It’s their personal chat channel.
I have experienced the above mentioned more than once. A Gliding Club Instructor (with no power experience) was once heard, upon hearing an exchange similar to the above quote to comment along the lines of....
"FFS you blokes! Try looking out of the cockpit and bloody well STFU!"
For the record; That particular Gliding Instructor has well over 4,000 Gliding hours and regularly flew Gliders at this airfield back in the days of radio in very few gliders and there being a GA Flying School in residence. And the Gliders that had radio were limited to the Gliding frequencies.