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

Airservices Class E changes

Old 1st Apr 2021, 23:04
  #461 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,351
You say you have flown extensively in the US and the UK.

Both of these countries have higher traffic densities but do not have an Australian type transponder mandate in class E.

Why would this be so if they were necessary for safety?
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2021, 23:11
  #462 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2021
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by Dick Smith View Post
You say you have flown extensively in the US and the UK.

Both of these countries have higher traffic densities but do not have an Australian type transponder mandate in class E.

Why would this be so if they were necessary for safety?
correct. So either change the rules here that transponder is not required in class E or mandate them.
most pilots I know in USA have transponders. Bit like rules around bike helmets. Not every state mandates cyclists to wear helmets, but you a bloody fool if you don't. Same for transponders
Pinky1987 is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2021, 23:22
  #463 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2021
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by Dick Smith View Post
You say you have flown extensively in the US and the UK.

Both of these countries have higher traffic densities but do not have an Australian type transponder mandate in class E.

Why would this be so if they were necessary for safety?
also see and avoid does not always work Mr Smith. Jet approach angle, small windows, high wing low wing and miscommunication can all line up for a collision. Last line of defence is TCAS. 3000 dollar transponder and simple squawk 1200 to prevent 150 people falling out of the sky?

Last edited by Pinky1987; 1st Apr 2021 at 23:41.
Pinky1987 is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2021, 02:26
  #464 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,351
No. If see and avoid does not give an adequate level of risk reduction you put in class D or higher airspace.

ICAO has no radio requirement for VFR aircraft in E,F and G airspace because there is no way of knowing if the radio is actually working and on the correct frequency.

Pretty simple really. Sounds as if you are putting profits in front of safety if you do not support Class D where see and avoid is not adequate.

Or do you support airline pilots looking down at the TCAS screen in the terminal area rather than remaining vigilant and keeping a good lookout?
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2021, 03:01
  #465 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2021
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by Dick Smith View Post
No. If see and avoid does not give an adequate level of risk reduction you put in class D or higher airspace.

ICAO has no radio requirement for VFR aircraft in E,F and G airspace because there is no way of knowing if the radio is actually working and on the correct frequency.

Pretty simple really. Sounds as if you are putting profits in front of safety if you do not support Class D where see and avoid is not adequate.

Or do you support airline pilots looking down at the TCAS screen in the terminal area rather than remaining vigilant and keeping a good lookout?
I support everyone looking out the window in VMC Mr Smith. I support G airspace and I am not suggesting RPT pilots stare at their TCAS any more than I stare at my IPAD when flying. But as an inexpensive addition to my aircraft, I do support transponders in all aircraft as a last line of defence when all the holes line up. TCAS is an alerting system Mr Smith it is not intended as a situational awareness system to replace looking out the window. I am not arguing about classification of airspace I am suggesting that pilots fit transponders regardless of airspace and regulations.
bit like reversing cameras on cars and aural obstacle warnings on cars. Not legally required and if you look out the window you'll never hit a person, but sure comes in handy when all the holes line up and a life is saved.
Are you anti transponder? Would you fly around the east coast in G without a transponder and radio cause the rule says you don't have to? When I was a kid seatbelts were not required in the back-seat of cars. My mum made me wear one anyway. Saved my life in an accident mate - risk mitigation 101. Light up your aircraft, use your bloody radio, squawk 1200 look out the windows, avoid IFR routes and IAPs regardless of classification of airspace. And yes regulator should spend a bit of time working on protecting airports where RPT fly into with no tower by classifying the airspace to protect hundreds of people sitting in the back from ill-equipped aircraft being flown by pilots who are living on the dark ages.

Pinky1987 is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2021, 03:22
  #466 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,351
Of course I support transponders.

But I donít support replacing the obvious need for class D at a place like Ballina with a world unique transponder mandate.

Itís a classic example of the airlines pushing the cost of safety upgrades to anyone other than themselves.

Do you agree that a tower should have gone in at Ballina before the $13 m fire station?
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2021, 04:12
  #467 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 8,120
Oh come on Dick, you can't be serious.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2021, 04:43
  #468 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: You live where
Posts: 453
Originally Posted by Dick Smith View Post
Do you agree that a tower should have gone in at Ballina before the $13 m fire station?
Yes or at the same time in a co-located facility like BRM.

An airport like Ballina, like Port Macquarie, like Yulara, like Gladstone, like Dubbo, like Mildura should be able to establish a service such as a Certified Air/Ground Radio Operator or a Control Tower based on a commercial or operational decision. Above that there should be clear guidelines issued by CASA that mandate when a service must be provided, based on such factors as risk, traffic mix.
missy is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2021, 06:11
  #469 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,351
Pinky. It looks as if you are flying without ADSB.

Why would you be doing that? Surely safety would be improved if your aircraft came up on the ATCs ADSB display.
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2021, 06:12
  #470 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 3,441
Deja vu, all over over over over again.

Please, Pinky1987, explain to me how the average VFR pilot can practicably “avoid IFR routes and IAPs”.

Start by explaining how the average VFR pilot will know where the waypoints in an IAP are.

Then explain how a VFR pilot can fly from A to B, if there is an IFR route from A to B.

Fantasy world.
Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2021, 06:38
  #471 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,351
Mmmm. About to install.

What is the estimated cost of one with ADSB in or havenít you got a quote yet?
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2021, 07:13
  #472 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,351
So what is your estimate for the ADSB out including installation and certification?
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2021, 07:41
  #473 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,974
I like the way you think that youíre safe and snuggy with your ADSB-out. The Mangalore aircraft were both fitted with ADSB-out and they still collided.

ADSB-in on a display may have helped them where ATC werenít able to.


Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2021, 12:21
  #474 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,036
Did anyone here participate in the ASA web 'discussions' on plan B? I understand that some got a bit heated???
triadic is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2021, 14:18
  #475 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 8,120
Pinky, I think I like you.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2021, 07:02
  #476 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,951
Pinky,
In terms of cost effectiveness, you do realise, do you, that there has never been an accident on an Australian airfield, in the history of Australian aviation, where the presence or absence of an on-airport fire service has made any difference to the outcome.
A classical example of economic waste, when the real risk, as opposed to perceptions of risk, (or mindless following of ICAO, where it is NOT required we follow) are used in decision making.
Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2021, 07:17
  #477 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,951
Originally Posted by Geoff Fairless View Post
Hi Dick and Bloggs,
If I read the KLAX airspace charts correctly then the airspace for a Qantas flight heading for RWY 24 or 25 might be:
  • From over Santa Catalina Island once below 18,000 feet - in Class E
    • this also is where the Mode C transponder veil starts at 30NM LAX
  • overfly Santa Ana Class C above 4400feet - in Class E + veil
    • I do not have any STAR information so
  • assuming Socal vectors QF to final either overflying Ontario Class C above 5000feet - in Class E + veil
  • or penetrate Ontario Class C on final leading into LAX Class B
So a fair amount of Class E.
I am not an airline pilot, I am just looking at a VFR hybrid chart, so if I am wrong please let me know!
Geoff,
Having done it countless times, that sound pretty right -- it's only in Australia that some pilots get themselves in a knot about the nominal class of airspace,
If you work for Qantas longhaul, or any other international airline, you will be in anything from A to G ., all part of a day's work.
Tootle pip!!
PS: And having flown somewhat smaller aircraft under and around in the LA basin, for more years than I care to remember.
LeadSled is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2021, 09:13
  #478 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,974
Originally Posted by LeadSled View Post
Pinky,
In terms of cost effectiveness, you do realise, do you, that there has never been an accident on an Australian airfield, in the history of Australian aviation, where the presence or absence of an on-airport fire service has made any difference to the outcome.
A classical example of economic waste, when the real risk, as opposed to perceptions of risk, (or mindless following of ICAO, where it is NOT required we follow) are used in decision making.
Tootle pip!!
How could you ever prove that?

For example, a 737 lands at YMML with brakes on fire. The on-site fire team puts out the fire and everyone safely escapes.

Do you have a crystal ball to tell us what would have happened if they didnít use the foam or whatever?
Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2021, 09:45
  #479 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 482
Do you have a crystal ball to tell us what would have happened if they didn’t use the foam or whatever?
Sorry but the batteries are flat in my crystal ball however I well recall the resident volleyball team at Tulla spraying water on the hot brakes of an A300 and then ducking for cover as those brakes explosively shattered. Clever, not!

CC
Checklist Charlie is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2021, 22:55
  #480 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 3,441
I check the ERC and DAP I mark this on my visual charts and keep the hell away from the initial fix and RNAV approach. Once in the cruise I am not worried about the IFR route as I fly VFR level and the high performers are in the high teens or class A by then.
once within 20 nm of an aerodrome with high performers, I have the approaches on my map. Takes an extra 5 mins to draw up but always there for future use. If I need to cross the approach I make a broadcast that I am at xx level crossing the rmav xx.
So you cruise at VFR levels rather than IFR levels, when flying VFR. Pure genius. Someone should make that a rule.

And you and your instructor should lobby CASA and RAAus to add plotting IAP waypoints on visual charts to the RPC/PPL syllabus. Maybe just add them to the visual charts in the first place?

Would the RPC/PPL holders have to review and understand RNAV-related NOTAMS to make sure the plotted IAP waypoint information is accurate?

Do you think heavy metal pilots do or should believe a VFR pilot’s assertion as to his or her location with respect to an IAP waypoint, absent third party or TSO equipment confirmation?
Lead Balloon is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.