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

Moorabbin ATIS IA in VMC ?

Old 10th Aug 2020, 22:26
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Karratha,Western Australia
Age: 41
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by lucille View Post
Is YMMB that much busier now than it was in the 70s and 80s? I donít recall such Byzantine ATC complications in those days when there were a host of charter and freight operations running along with numerous busy flying schools.

Ahhh....the halcyon days of an inbound call and a base call and flying with your eyes and ears wide open seem to have gone.

A bygone era when ATC was razor sharp, helpful and possessed superhuman powers of SA.
GAAP vs Class D is why it seems so complicated probably. Quite different processes from both ATC and pilot perspectives.
Awol57 is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2020, 23:19
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 2,144
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes on 7 Posts
The good old days, 35L and 35R for circuits, IFR arrivals and departures 35 centre.

Up to eight aircraft in each circuit, and then the IFR traffic was everything from Lear jets down to John Correls twin Comanche going out on IFR sorties.

Stationair8 is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2020, 03:47
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Aus
Posts: 514
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
So back to the original post/question, EIP on the ATIS does not mean you can't ask for or wouldn't be cleared a visual approach, particularly because the conditions you've listed are VMC. There is no need to request SVFR. It is just an expectation broadcast on the ATIS, nothing more and nothing less.
junior.VH-LFA is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2020, 10:21
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Sydney
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Thread Drift.....

John Correll... Memories... (Correll Advanced Flight Training as I recall). Did my initial IR in the Link, the Comanche (single), then the Twin Comanche. You had to commit to full time training every week day (not weekends) in order to train there. Even though jobs were scare in the early 70s, my IR from CAFT got me a gig flying across Bass St in C310s and Aztecs.

Even then, there were always many aircraft in the holding bays at MB awaiting airways clearances. Busy airspace never seemed to be a problem to ATC, wth both ML and EN operating as well as MB, but I think it was simpler then. Learning to fly IFR was more about developing skills to cope with a wide range of instrument flying conditions, and less about knowing back to front the equivalent of the CASRs Part 61 and AIP .

SB
Seabreeze is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2020, 12:00
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, that could depend on minimas, INTER or TEMPO... any forecast information that could require limitations to VFR or clear minimas, DA/MDA
Keith Gray is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2020, 00:53
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I do not think this has anything to do with visibility.
It sounds like there may be a problem with multiple IFR flights arriving close to each other on visual approaches without cancelling IFR.
They therefore must still be separated from each other by the Class D tower controllers who have no standards available to them in these ridiculously small Class D control zones. (Not so at the regional Class Ds where there is more airspace available to the controllers)
The solution is for the Tower to insist that all IFR flights are processed via an instrument approach. This means that they are surveillance separated in Class C airspace by Melbourne Centre and then processed one at a time, with the VFR traffic, by the Tower controllers.
If it is VMC then an IFR flight can cancel IFR and be processed as a VFR flight without the delay incurred by an instrument approach.

This was the situation in the old GAAP system where CASA decreed that when an IFR flight contacted a GAAP Tower the pilot's IFR status was automatically changed to VFR. This changed when CASA made the Zones Class D.
Unfortunately the CASA/Airservices system has not caught up with the airspace status change, otherwise Moorabbin would be operated in the same way as Avalon, Albury, Launceston and so on.
Mr Approach is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.