Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

Mooney accident pilot refused a clearance at 6,500'

The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Mooney accident pilot refused a clearance at 6,500'

Old 11th Nov 2019, 09:44
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 344
For those that have flown in the ATC system of other countries, the comments above only serve to confirm the comments of a friend that had done many ferry (non RPT) flights from both Europe and the USA. It is not the system here, but the culture of those that work the system. It maybe safe, but it does not flow very well, hence some of the comments above re VFR ops.

"Everywhere else they treat you as a professional until you prove your an idiot, but crossing the FIR boundary into Oz you are treated like an idiot until you prove your a professinal"
Maybe ASA should reflect on their culture?
cogwheel is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2019, 10:03
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 332
Originally Posted by Capn Bloggs View Post
Cloudee, don't be ridiculous. Read the rest of what ausatc said.
I did read the rest of it, but the first thing he/she said indicated there were many people trying to access the airspace and being denied. I have no idea where that is and Iím not blaming the controller but if LAX can have safe usable VFR corridors why canít we design our airspace to provide the same? No, our solution is to just say no, cut Airservices staff and pay the boss a bonus for doing that. I think we should be aiming for better than that.
Cloudee is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2019, 10:07
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 824
Absolute nonsense.
Yeah - nah.
The name is Porter is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2019, 11:01
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Left base, RWY01
Posts: 162
This is what I’ve heard from the Townsville refueller....

No flight plan lodged

Clearance requested very close to the CTA step

Controller unable to issue the clearance without first completing coordination with CFS tower, “standby” is an unacceptable response , required response is “remain clear of controlled airspace” in this circumstance apparently

Controller was himself/ herself a GA pilot, would have been willing to help as they could

No further request for help/ advice received, no expression of doubt/alarm/distress

Um , that’s about it, my aircraft was refuelled by then....
TwoFiftyBelowTen is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2019, 11:01
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sydney
Age: 57
Posts: 372
Thereís no way our ATS system could be at fault - itís the second best in the world.
roundsounds is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2019, 11:10
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Left base, RWY01
Posts: 162
You’re in love with Jacinda too, huh roundy?
TwoFiftyBelowTen is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2019, 11:36
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,325
Originally Posted by TwoFiftyBelowTen View Post
This is what Iíve heard from the Townsville refueller....
It is interesting how airport refuellers often know more than the authorities do... they are a bit like a golf caddy.
Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2019, 21:42
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 399
Originally Posted by kaz3g View Post
My experience with towers as a rather geriatric Auster driver has always been fine. I flew to Essendon a couple of weeks ago and phoned up before takeoff to see if I could get a direct via Kalkallo. Lovely chap suggested I plan via Doncaster because MELBOURNE was using east-west.
That's not good service. You basically got "Clearance not available" from Melbourne Centre before you even took off. It's marginally better than telling you to plan via Westgate Bridge but not much.

Good service would be a clearance e.g. Broadford or Kilmore to Essendon, with vectors to keep you out of the way of the Tullamarine traffic. ATC can do that but they choose not to.
andrewr is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2019, 22:20
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,532
Itís quite clear that GA are ďsecond class citizensĒ. Itís a culture thing and self reinforcing. VFR pilots in general perhaps avoid controlled airspace except during the obligatory excursion at the flight review. We are thus rusty, clumsy and hesitant which makes more work for ATC. Who then perhaps get a little curt and annoyed and the cycle continues.

YMEN must be sick of our tentative efforts during reviews and sick of requests for city orbits. No one would think of calling YMML because the answer is always going to be ďnoĒ and the thought of the paperwork and threat of prosecution if one caused an RA to an A380 freezes the blood.

To put that another way, considering the demonstrated proclivities of the regulator, dealing with officialdom of any sort is akin to stopping your car next to a police vehicle to ask for directions.

Having said that, I was always very comfortable with the wonderful and patient ATC at YMMB, who have always been a joy to talk to.

However thatís my perception.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 02:07
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 161
While we at it why not blame the authorities for not mandating Synthetic Vision in all aircraft so they can see the rock solid stuff coming. Or even ďbasicĒ TAWS. Because VFR into IMC and/or CFIT keeps happening.
Dick always bangs on about how we are not as good as the USA. Australia could have *bettered* the US requirement to have TAWS in anything turbine with more than 12 seats (1992) or more than 6 seats (1998) by requiring it in ALL aircraft here. Accident likely avoided.

Who was the boss of CAA in 1992 and CASA in 1998?
AmarokGTI is online now  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 02:32
  #91 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,187
I have to plead guilty.

As CAA/CASA Chairman I was concentrating on reducing unnecessary costs - not increasing costs!

Last edited by Dick Smith; 12th Nov 2019 at 08:56.
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 03:31
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 13
Credit where credit due, the Adelaide controllers have always been extremely accommodating to VFR aircraft.
havick is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 04:21
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Left base, RWY01
Posts: 162
Originally Posted by Squawk7700 View Post


It is interesting how airport refuellers often know more than the authorities do... they are a bit like a golf caddy.
If I really wanted any more detail, Iím sure my hairdresser could help. Hi Candice!
TwoFiftyBelowTen is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 11:24
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: brisbane, australia
Posts: 24
Originally Posted by Dick Smith View Post
I have to plead guilty.

As CAA/CASA Chairman I was concentrating on reducing unnecessary costs - not increasing costs!
... and there is the real issue. If you want clearance for VFR in C, or you want C changed to E, it is going to cost. AsA would need more controllers, more consoles, and more ADSB sites.
1 new controller is a minimum $300K before they get anywhere near seperating traffic.

Dick, if you can convince the minister to remove the requirement for AsA to return a dividend to the government that would be a great first step!

The requirement to run as a business restricts services to to nonpaying clients.

(The townsville refueller seems on the money)

​​​
​​​​
​​
malroy is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2019, 09:48
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 399
Originally Posted by malroy View Post
... and there is the real issue. If you want clearance for VFR in C, or you want C changed to E, it is going to cost.
​​
What makes you think it isn't costing VFR already?

If I want to go to Essendon to cover CTA on a flight review, it probably costs an extra $80 to go in and out via Westgate than a more direct clearance through CTA.
I heard what was obviously a training flight (with an annoyed instructor) denied a clearance into CTA. If that flight needs to be repeated to tick off CTA, it could easily cost the aspiring CPL an extra $500.
If it takes an extra 10 minutes to track around Melbourne OCTA instead of direct, at $300/hr that's $50. Look at all the aircraft that track OCTA from one side of Melbourne to the other and back e.g. student navs. That cost might be an extra $100 per flight.

VFR pilots are paying a truckload of money to make life easier for ATC.

What do IFR aircraft pay in enroute charges? If you charged VFR aircraft e.g. 100km of enroute charges at double the IFR rate every time they received a clearance, and clearances were available as freely as they are for IFR it would probably be a fantastic deal.
andrewr is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2019, 11:44
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: QLD - where drivers are yet to realise that the left lane goes to their destination too.
Posts: 2,155
VFR pilots don't want to pay airport charges. What makes you think they'll pay en-route fees? When you have a user pays system, the user paying for it gets priority.
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2019, 08:32
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: The Rio
Posts: 14
Originally Posted by Traffic_Is_Er_Was View Post
VFR pilots don't want to pay airport charges. What makes you think they'll pay en-route fees? When you have a user pays system, the user paying for it gets priority.
Don’t think VFRs are subject to enroute charges.But the ones who are probably won’t like E above D in regional airspace as it would congest the terminal area too much. Also unless there is some sort of ADSB mandate for VFR the safety risk may be too high with unknown tracking on random VFR in and out of surveillance coverage in busy terminal type airspace mixing it with high performance commercial traffic.
10JQKA is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2019, 10:38
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 2,839
Originally Posted by 10JQKA View Post


Donít think VFRs are subject to enroute charges.But the ones who are probably wonít like E above D in regional airspace as it would congest the terminal area too much. Also unless there is some sort of ADSB mandate for VFR the safety risk may be too high with unknown tracking on random VFR in and out of surveillance coverage in busy terminal type airspace mixing it with high performance commercial traffic.
Bollocks.

And to satisfy minimum post length parameters: Complete bollocks.
Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2019, 11:27
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Oz
Posts: 11
So no one seems to want to answer my question. Probably because it would render dicks argument the rubbish that it is if what I suspect is true.

How far past the cta boundary did the accident occur?
iron_jayeh is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2019, 12:27
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,532
How many IFR rpt flights per day into/out of Coffs? Ten? So much for high performance jets mixing it with VFR traffic. Some of you make the East coast sound like LAX.
Sunfish is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.