BK GA Lane
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BK GA Lane
I enjoyed the Flight Safety Forum in Sydney on Saturday. Very professionally organised, with some informative and important safetly lectures but some intersting anecdotes as well.
One of the questions posed in the QA session at the end was something like this:
'I've been using the GA lane at Banksotwn for years and have been concerned about the gorwing number of pilots making radio calls as thy fly up and down, in the mistaken belief that this makes the lane safer. Why are these calls being made?'
Well as a regular user of the lane, and someone who uses the radio at the same time, I was surprised at this. I got my PPL in the UK, and when I did training and local familiarisation with NAVAIR, I was encouraged to make one call at PRT when heading north; and one call at BBG when heading south.
Safety wise, the importance of these calls was demonstrated by a flight I did with my old man a few months back. He no longer flies but in his younger days had a PPL. I was glad he was there that day, for as I approached BBG at 2200, he said to me: 'there's another PA28 slightly behind you, at your height and converging from the right'. I'd never have seen him from the left hand seat. Anyway, at that point I made my radio call, to which the guy behind immediatly responded, by making an orbit and then confirming he had us in sight and would climb to 2.5k. He obviously hadn't seen us at that point, and had we not seen him, that radio call could have been the difference between a pleasant flight and a near miss. Why would you want to lessen communication between aircaft that are at low altitude and all converging?
One of the questions posed in the QA session at the end was something like this:
'I've been using the GA lane at Banksotwn for years and have been concerned about the gorwing number of pilots making radio calls as thy fly up and down, in the mistaken belief that this makes the lane safer. Why are these calls being made?'
Well as a regular user of the lane, and someone who uses the radio at the same time, I was surprised at this. I got my PPL in the UK, and when I did training and local familiarisation with NAVAIR, I was encouraged to make one call at PRT when heading north; and one call at BBG when heading south.
Safety wise, the importance of these calls was demonstrated by a flight I did with my old man a few months back. He no longer flies but in his younger days had a PPL. I was glad he was there that day, for as I approached BBG at 2200, he said to me: 'there's another PA28 slightly behind you, at your height and converging from the right'. I'd never have seen him from the left hand seat. Anyway, at that point I made my radio call, to which the guy behind immediatly responded, by making an orbit and then confirming he had us in sight and would climb to 2.5k. He obviously hadn't seen us at that point, and had we not seen him, that radio call could have been the difference between a pleasant flight and a near miss. Why would you want to lessen communication between aircaft that are at low altitude and all converging?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YSBK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really enjoyed the Sydney Safety Forum too last Saturday.
In regards to the YSBK lane of entry, I too was taught to give a radio call at Parramatta (North Bound) and Brooklyn Bridge (South Bound) .
It is a bit of a hard call which way is right and which way is wrong. There are some days when the airways are so crowed, by the time you get a chance to give your call, you are either already at Brooklyn Bridge or have past it. The same travelling North Bound from Parramatta.
It all comes down to developing your sight and see skills as number one , just in case someone has no radio, or they are too scared to use it, or the local area frequency is so congested that you cannot get a break to transmit your position. You have to realise sometimes the other aircraft may not of been able to transmit there position due to an over crowed frequency too. This can happen because airservices (Syd Radar) has one person looking after both the Northern and Southern area frequencies and not only that you hear all the transmissions going on in both areas.
In regards to the YSBK lane of entry, I too was taught to give a radio call at Parramatta (North Bound) and Brooklyn Bridge (South Bound) .
It is a bit of a hard call which way is right and which way is wrong. There are some days when the airways are so crowed, by the time you get a chance to give your call, you are either already at Brooklyn Bridge or have past it. The same travelling North Bound from Parramatta.
It all comes down to developing your sight and see skills as number one , just in case someone has no radio, or they are too scared to use it, or the local area frequency is so congested that you cannot get a break to transmit your position. You have to realise sometimes the other aircraft may not of been able to transmit there position due to an over crowed frequency too. This can happen because airservices (Syd Radar) has one person looking after both the Northern and Southern area frequencies and not only that you hear all the transmissions going on in both areas.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LOE radio calls
I also use and encourage my students to make radio calls at PRT and BBG, it costs "0" and could save your life, don't go back to Tricky Dicky ideas on radio calls, just 'cause he cannot use a radio don't let this stop you.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silence is golden, but in the air, it is not.
If in doubt, speak, let the whole world (or frequency rather
) know where you are and what you are doing.
If you hear someone else, and let them know you are there, make sure you know they know, if they don't reply, then bug them till they acknowledge you.
But there's still more!!!
Trap for young players, the best method is still to open your eyes, keep a scan of the skies. There is alot of air up there, but chances are, as our old buddy Murphy has said, there will be someone right up your clacker when you least expect it.
SEE AND AVOID!!
(edited due to dyslexic fingers)
If in doubt, speak, let the whole world (or frequency rather
) know where you are and what you are doing.If you hear someone else, and let them know you are there, make sure you know they know, if they don't reply, then bug them till they acknowledge you.
But there's still more!!!
Trap for young players, the best method is still to open your eyes, keep a scan of the skies. There is alot of air up there, but chances are, as our old buddy Murphy has said, there will be someone right up your clacker when you least expect it.
SEE AND AVOID!!
(edited due to dyslexic fingers)
CASA's newly released tape on operations around the control steps categorically states that radio calls are NOT required when in the lane. Many a day is there when 124.55 is saturated with callse by VFR in the lane, so much so that IFR guy can't get a word in.
Calls in the lane are a wast of air time and have no use or justification.
Calls in the lane are a wast of air time and have no use or justification.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Nulla
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The way the system should work in the lane in my opinion is, 2,500ft Southbound and 2,000ft Northbound. A quick call at the beginning of each entry and a call if seperation is possibly going to be breached.
OZGRADE 3, just because CASA say that it is not required certainly doesn't mean its a waste of time. I do agree that it is sometimes hard to get a word in when IFR but restricting safety by not calling is madness, that would be the reason why CASA have not and will never ridecule pilots making these calls. Further more if you were plowing down the lane at 200kts trying to get into BK octa after an IFR leg wouldn't you want to get a call out for a little situational awareness or are you going to dodge the C172s etc like a game of asteroids. Alot of IFR guys/gals do this. If the airwaves are used appropriately it works. This brings us to the debate re the useless drivel that is blurted out on the radio these days which reflects poor training and poor BFR checks.
I do agree that the lane dominates SY RAD/TERM frequencies and I can not see why the lane doesn't have a frequency for itself, much like Victor 1 which has significantly less traffic. It should also be directed further away from BK and move possibly into the RIC airspace a few miles this would then stop the penetration of SY airspace, well the frequency of penetrations anyway and also aid better channeling to BK. Student pilots, PPLs etc would also find the workload easier due the longer legs and less stress as they approach BK itself. This, I believe would solve the problem.
Anyway thats me done.
OZGRADE 3, just because CASA say that it is not required certainly doesn't mean its a waste of time. I do agree that it is sometimes hard to get a word in when IFR but restricting safety by not calling is madness, that would be the reason why CASA have not and will never ridecule pilots making these calls. Further more if you were plowing down the lane at 200kts trying to get into BK octa after an IFR leg wouldn't you want to get a call out for a little situational awareness or are you going to dodge the C172s etc like a game of asteroids. Alot of IFR guys/gals do this. If the airwaves are used appropriately it works. This brings us to the debate re the useless drivel that is blurted out on the radio these days which reflects poor training and poor BFR checks.
I do agree that the lane dominates SY RAD/TERM frequencies and I can not see why the lane doesn't have a frequency for itself, much like Victor 1 which has significantly less traffic. It should also be directed further away from BK and move possibly into the RIC airspace a few miles this would then stop the penetration of SY airspace, well the frequency of penetrations anyway and also aid better channeling to BK. Student pilots, PPLs etc would also find the workload easier due the longer legs and less stress as they approach BK itself. This, I believe would solve the problem.
Anyway thats me done.
PPRuNeaholic
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Cairns FNQ
Posts: 3,255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The YSBK LoE as always been a bit of a worry, it seems to me. I was always extra careful in there, when I haunted that airspace back in the mid to late 70s and very early 80s. I think that the idea of a separate frequency for the lane is an excellent one, but perhaps it can go one step further... why not make the YSBK LoE a MBZ?
This would mean that the IFR guys on the various FIS sector frequencies can do their thing. It also means that everyone who uses the LAL calls at PRT and BBG.
If you disagree with this, I'm sure we'd all like to know why. Any other thoughts? Maybe we can come up with something that can be put up to CASA, something that will make the Lane easier and safer.
This would mean that the IFR guys on the various FIS sector frequencies can do their thing. It also means that everyone who uses the LAL calls at PRT and BBG.
If you disagree with this, I'm sure we'd all like to know why. Any other thoughts? Maybe we can come up with something that can be put up to CASA, something that will make the Lane easier and safer.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Finland
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bankstown info
I really appreciate this kind of regional information in this Forum. Personally I have an interest in Bankstown because in about a year or so I'm expecting to move to/near Sydney. I'm searching the web what would be my new home base for PPL type of flying if I lived around Sydney and Bankstown seems to be the place, and PPL->CPL training seems to be readily available there, too.
I've also come across Camden & Hoxton Park, but are they not smaller GA airports west of Sydney?
So those who frequently post in the Dunnunda forum I might email you also directly in my search of further info / advice.
cheers
-headwind
I've also come across Camden & Hoxton Park, but are they not smaller GA airports west of Sydney?
So those who frequently post in the Dunnunda forum I might email you also directly in my search of further info / advice.
cheers
-headwind
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Nulla
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MBZ. Excellent idea and I still believe that it should be moved or widened into the RIC airspace. This as I said before will allow easier Navigation, especially at night and the possibility of raising the upper limit. Of course this will only offer short term respite.
What's going to happen when the new 'Badgeries Creek' opens or RIC becomes SYs' second airport. Everybody moves from BK to CN, HOX gets closed down?
What's going to happen when the new 'Badgeries Creek' opens or RIC becomes SYs' second airport. Everybody moves from BK to CN, HOX gets closed down?
The way the system should work in the lane in my opinion is, 2,500ft Southbound and 2,000ft Northbound. A quick call at the beginning of each entry and a call if seperation is possibly going to be breached.
The main problem would be in days of marginal wx. From what I remember there were no specific heights. This would resolve a lot of the problem.
See and avoid.
SU/C
There is nothing wrong with the Lane of Entry as it is, easy enough to get up and down it with using old fashioned pilotage, you know, flying an accurate heading, using your chart to maintain your track. Get back to basics...its simple enough.
350 degapprox to Parramatta. Then 025 deg to pick up the strobe at the Carlinford shops, identify the Sanitaruim hospital off to your right and make sure you stay west of it to stay out of the CTA. Soon enough you will be able to see Hornsby and thereafter the Hawksbury river that you head for.
Comming back is even easier, from Brooklyn Bridge its 210 deg all the way to Prospect, hell you can even see it from BBG on a clear day. Just make sure you stay to the east of the electrical substation that will be just right of your track before Round Corner.
What can be easier. Instead of whining about how hard it is, just get back to basics, once you can navigate visually its easy peasy.
As far as radio use is concerned. the training area gets equally busy, should you announce yourself every location, or 30 secs, or HDG/ALT change?? of course not, and thats in an area of random manouvering. The lane is an orderly flow of same direction traffic. I do however agree with 2000' for Northbound traffic and 2,500' for Southbound.
One are where the radio should be used is at Hoxton Park, today I followed another wally around the circuit for 35 mins without a peep from him, finally he says hes' full stopping. More brilliant airmanship.
350 degapprox to Parramatta. Then 025 deg to pick up the strobe at the Carlinford shops, identify the Sanitaruim hospital off to your right and make sure you stay west of it to stay out of the CTA. Soon enough you will be able to see Hornsby and thereafter the Hawksbury river that you head for.
Comming back is even easier, from Brooklyn Bridge its 210 deg all the way to Prospect, hell you can even see it from BBG on a clear day. Just make sure you stay to the east of the electrical substation that will be just right of your track before Round Corner.
What can be easier. Instead of whining about how hard it is, just get back to basics, once you can navigate visually its easy peasy.
As far as radio use is concerned. the training area gets equally busy, should you announce yourself every location, or 30 secs, or HDG/ALT change?? of course not, and thats in an area of random manouvering. The lane is an orderly flow of same direction traffic. I do however agree with 2000' for Northbound traffic and 2,500' for Southbound.
One are where the radio should be used is at Hoxton Park, today I followed another wally around the circuit for 35 mins without a peep from him, finally he says hes' full stopping. More brilliant airmanship.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: CB, Aust.
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its about avoiding mid-airs
The point of the thread is not how easy it is to navigate the lane, but whether or not a mid-air is more likely in it. Whenever you concentrate aircraft by defining a track you do make it easier to know where to look to spot the other aircraft (assuming they are following the published procedures), but you also put aircraft closer together more often than random manoeuvering and therefore create an organisational level risk - the first layer of swiss cheese if you get my drift.
If you think back to your aviation medicine training, one issue to remember is that meeting an aircraft head on or overtaking at the same altitude, such as in a lane, is the hardest way to spot conflicting aircraft, especially with an urban background. In this situation the aircraft cross section is the smallest it can be, and the 'ballooning rush' as you get really close is the biggest amount of relative movement. By then it can be too late. The training area on the other hand with its more random tracking creates more relative velocity and crossing movement, with bigger cross sections, which attracts your attention earlier.
So the question is: Is everybody in the lane maintaining a excellent lookout to minimise (but not eliminate)the risk? Well if they are having to look at maps and compasses or heaven forbid the GPS set to navigate the lane, I would suggest not. So can a radio call help? Yes. Directed lookout is more effective and therefore safer than lookout on its own. You still need to look out though as a matter of course and not just rely on the calls. Isn't that what radar advisory services for VFR traffic are about?
What is the real problem here: Is it the people making the radio call (ie self provided directed lookout) or is it the overcrowding of a radio frequency? It would be safer and do more to avoid mid-airs to provide another frequency than to outlaw the calls.
Regards.
If you think back to your aviation medicine training, one issue to remember is that meeting an aircraft head on or overtaking at the same altitude, such as in a lane, is the hardest way to spot conflicting aircraft, especially with an urban background. In this situation the aircraft cross section is the smallest it can be, and the 'ballooning rush' as you get really close is the biggest amount of relative movement. By then it can be too late. The training area on the other hand with its more random tracking creates more relative velocity and crossing movement, with bigger cross sections, which attracts your attention earlier.
So the question is: Is everybody in the lane maintaining a excellent lookout to minimise (but not eliminate)the risk? Well if they are having to look at maps and compasses or heaven forbid the GPS set to navigate the lane, I would suggest not. So can a radio call help? Yes. Directed lookout is more effective and therefore safer than lookout on its own. You still need to look out though as a matter of course and not just rely on the calls. Isn't that what radar advisory services for VFR traffic are about?
What is the real problem here: Is it the people making the radio call (ie self provided directed lookout) or is it the overcrowding of a radio frequency? It would be safer and do more to avoid mid-airs to provide another frequency than to outlaw the calls.
Regards.
PPruNaholic!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Buckinghamshire
Age: 61
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good thread. I will be flying in Sydney region for first time this Christmas (I have a UK PPL and will be visiting), so will be transiting this lane a bit whilst in the area. Is the "2000' nth bound / 2500' sth bound" stuff promulgated officially, or just "local practice"?
Cheers,
Cheers,
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: the other America
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aussie Andy,
Nope, not official & I've not aware that it's local practice. Just a suggestion by a member as a possible help to seperation. As long as you stay above the minimum and below the CLL, you can use any level you want.
As a newcomer to the BK area , I tend to make a number of calls during the lane transition. The freq hasn't been busy on the occasions I experienced and as there is a lot of traffic, I will continue to make calls.
I agree that a seperate freq like R405/Victor 1 would be of help.
Having experienced one aircraft on the reciprocal not making calls compared to others making calls, I know which is safer and to me more preferable (yes, I did see & avoid + make a call to advise the other pilot my intended action ( head on = turn to right), got a mumbled "Oh yeah" in reply).
Bk can be very, very busy. The lanes + GA reporting points all act as magnets for aircraft and the mix of types means see & avoid may not happen as we all hope (personally, hearing where and what an aircraft is up to works a lot better for my situational awareness).
Is the "2000' nth bound / 2500' sth bound" stuff promulgated officially, or just "local practice"?
As a newcomer to the BK area , I tend to make a number of calls during the lane transition. The freq hasn't been busy on the occasions I experienced and as there is a lot of traffic, I will continue to make calls.
I agree that a seperate freq like R405/Victor 1 would be of help.
Having experienced one aircraft on the reciprocal not making calls compared to others making calls, I know which is safer and to me more preferable (yes, I did see & avoid + make a call to advise the other pilot my intended action ( head on = turn to right), got a mumbled "Oh yeah" in reply).
Bk can be very, very busy. The lanes + GA reporting points all act as magnets for aircraft and the mix of types means see & avoid may not happen as we all hope (personally, hearing where and what an aircraft is up to works a lot better for my situational awareness).
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Three Tors
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oz's (both grade 3 and expat), the only problem that I could envisage with making the lane an MBZ would be for "non com" a/c (such as some ultralights etc) wishing to transit from the plethora of strips to the south and west of Sydney, to the central coast and beyond without having to tackle the tiger country behind Richmond. We have all seen how the use of radio can and does improve situational awareness, and in this situation with the proximity of the SY and RIC CTR's, a dedicated frq IS the answer .
What then? An MBZ would be nice I grant you that, but that only leaves a CTAF as the only other option. My feeling is that the LOE does deserve a frq of it's own purely due to the amount of traffic it handles. Can someone please remind our "Safety Authorities" that "Safety" is the primary flight concern of just about everybody?
Regards,
4/J
What then? An MBZ would be nice I grant you that, but that only leaves a CTAF as the only other option. My feeling is that the LOE does deserve a frq of it's own purely due to the amount of traffic it handles. Can someone please remind our "Safety Authorities" that "Safety" is the primary flight concern of just about everybody?
Regards,
4/J
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Camden, NSW, Australia
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A couple of nights ago I was flying south in the lane towards Prospect when a Chieftain broadcast that he was flying from Prospect north in the lane. We acknowledged and turned our landing lights on but could not see the other aircraft. Sydney Radar then advised us he was at our 12 o clock at 5 miles, then at 2 miles and eventually we saw him, with only his Nav. lights on. At our hight about a 1/2 mile away. This service would not be available if the lane was a MBZ. And "thanks Sydney Radar for helping out"
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Nulla
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I FLY, I think you will find that the PA31 was PROBABLY IFR OCTA otherwise, unless requested SY RAD wouldn't give a hoot, unless of course it was quiet and He/She just happened to notice the situation.
Saying that, I do agree re RAD helping re seperation but this will not occur when the area controller is flat out. Pilots are easily capable of providing their own seperation. See and avoid and of course proper radio use. That seems to me what you were doing anyway, as you said you saw him half a mile away. If he was on the recprical track then one of you were going down the wrong way, obviously.
One day CASA, ATSB and Airservices will see the light.
OZgrade 3 don't get upset re everyone opposing your opinion, it's only a discussion. From my experience with the BK/CN training areas, from many years ago, it was hell out there trying to look out, provide separation and devote your attention to your student appropriately. There surely must have been more near misses going unreported in the training area then any where in Oz.
I do agree that the NAV is easy up and down the lane however from your instructing experience you should have also noticed how difficult and daunting it is for a new pilot. What's so wrong about making it easier and therefore safer. It wouldn't cost much, apart from some of RIC' unused airspace and the standard brouchures and amendment changes etc, etc. The main points hear are the radio not the nav. However the excursions into controlled airspace need to be addressed.
By the way if the nav is so easy and OZ3 you believe needn't pose a problem, why is it that so many of the 'situations' are caused by BK new PPLers and students. Maybe the instruction is the problem. Just a thought, not an accusation....
Saying that, I do agree re RAD helping re seperation but this will not occur when the area controller is flat out. Pilots are easily capable of providing their own seperation. See and avoid and of course proper radio use. That seems to me what you were doing anyway, as you said you saw him half a mile away. If he was on the recprical track then one of you were going down the wrong way, obviously.
One day CASA, ATSB and Airservices will see the light.
OZgrade 3 don't get upset re everyone opposing your opinion, it's only a discussion. From my experience with the BK/CN training areas, from many years ago, it was hell out there trying to look out, provide separation and devote your attention to your student appropriately. There surely must have been more near misses going unreported in the training area then any where in Oz.
I do agree that the NAV is easy up and down the lane however from your instructing experience you should have also noticed how difficult and daunting it is for a new pilot. What's so wrong about making it easier and therefore safer. It wouldn't cost much, apart from some of RIC' unused airspace and the standard brouchures and amendment changes etc, etc. The main points hear are the radio not the nav. However the excursions into controlled airspace need to be addressed.
By the way if the nav is so easy and OZ3 you believe needn't pose a problem, why is it that so many of the 'situations' are caused by BK new PPLers and students. Maybe the instruction is the problem. Just a thought, not an accusation....
PPRuNeaholic
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Cairns FNQ
Posts: 3,255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Navigating in the LoE isn't always quite as easy as has been suggested. Many times I had the entertaining experience of traversing it, one way or the other, in pretty marginal weather conditions. Some of the prominent navigation features weren't quite so prominent, though I confess that most of those problems evaporated when strobe lighting was installed at various points.
But, when the weather is at VFR minimums, there's a very real chance that you'll be in the same general vicinity as another aircraft. I found that I was seldom the only one using the LoE. It's a lot harder to see another aircraft when you're paddling around in minimum weather conditions.
However, even on a good day, as has been mentioned, it is sometimes very difficult to see another aircraft at or close to your altitude when there's so much background suburban clutter. I think there's a very real reason to use the radio to broadcast entry to the LoE. Perhaps more especially because of the many ultralights that use the same airspace.
So, CJ, at the risk of upsetting the ultralight community, I must ask why they think they're impervious to a near miss, or worse? There can be a LOT of traffic in the LoE at any given time and my past experience tells me that its well nigh impossible to spot all of them.
of traversing it, one way or the other, in pretty marginal weather conditions. Some of the prominent navigation features weren't quite so prominent, though I confess that most of those problems evaporated when strobe lighting was installed at various points.But, when the weather is at VFR minimums, there's a very real chance that you'll be in the same general vicinity as another aircraft. I found that I was seldom the only one using the LoE. It's a lot harder to see another aircraft when you're paddling around in minimum weather conditions.
However, even on a good day, as has been mentioned, it is sometimes very difficult to see another aircraft at or close to your altitude when there's so much background suburban clutter. I think there's a very real reason to use the radio to broadcast entry to the LoE. Perhaps more especially because of the many ultralights that use the same airspace.
So, CJ, at the risk of upsetting the ultralight community, I must ask why they think they're impervious to a near miss, or worse? There can be a LOT of traffic in the LoE at any given time and my past experience tells me that its well nigh impossible to spot all of them.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Three Tors
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last question first. Exactly, especially with the visual textures of suburbia in which to camoflage an aeroplane. The only problem I see with making it an MBZ is that some of the a/c using it (OK, it was me who picked the ultralight scenario, yet not to pick on them mind you), is that the very fact that they do not possess a radion within some of their a/c is enough to exclude them (the ones with no radios), from using the lane. SY radar obviously does a magnificent job, as in the past I have also recieved traffic advisories from him/her. I honestly feel that the "pointy end" of RIC CTR is a waste of airspace as it is not often frequented by MIL a/c. I would suggest shaving at least another 3-5 nm OFF of it to perhaps give the a/c flying from other places (ie; HOX, CN etc) a bit more space to manouvre in without the current situation of funnelling and bottleneck.
A CTAF is from what I can see the best alternative and that way one can draw a better situational awareness picture without having to listen to all of those seaplanes that Mr Smith seems to have a problem with......
SY radar to stay, though...... He's worth his wieght in gold!
A CTAF is from what I can see the best alternative and that way one can draw a better situational awareness picture without having to listen to all of those seaplanes that Mr Smith seems to have a problem with......
SY radar to stay, though...... He's worth his wieght in gold!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My 2c!
Radio calls are very prudent provided they're not overdone to the point of frequency congestion. Doesn't anyone here find the Inbound calls to the tower useful in determining your position relative to others entering the Bankstown area? Knowing someone is at 2RN while you're at Prospect is invaluable... as is hearing someone transmit a few seconds before you - you know where to look if you haven't seen them already my maintaining a good lookout.
Lancer
Lancer