John and Martha King

[CaptainMidnight]

The roadshow is being paid for by DoTRS not Airservices, and is said to cost around $200k.

[Captain Custard]

Lodown,

Nonsense. In Australia, FBO stands for F@cking Boring Operation, and adequately describes 99% of Australia's outback airports, where a US FBO wouldn't even bother to land to do a feasibility study!!

Australia=18 million and no FBOs, USA=300 million and many FBOs. GET IT DICK and JOHN? Cost benefit analysis, old chaps! Affordable Service (geez, I almost said Safety!), and all that!! Where's me chikkie babies with their boobs hanging on my spinner??!!

[Chief galah]

GA to boom

All the Aussie Airspace Tour lacks is Chuck Heston selling NAS from a NRA perspective.
John and Martha give an AMWAY style of presentation to an aging audience, who nod knowingly at all the right times.

If all goes well, we will be able to land at remote locations where happy and obliging staff will park, wash, refuel our planes, and feed us with friendly efficiency, 24/7.

And we can land at Melbourne Airport, or any other of the major airports, to pick up our friends, even tho' they've been delayed to allow you to land ahead of them.

CG out

[Lodown]

Hey CC!!! I was just responding to MH's question. I made no comment on the viability of an FBO in Australia. I think you have done a reasonably good job of that one.

For Mr Hat, if your question was legit, the FBOs in the US often provide fuel, parking facilities, rental/loan cars, hotel bookings, taxi arrangements, snacks, catering contacts, coffee, maintenance, flight planning facilities, pilot supplies, toilet facilities, crew rooms, etc and a sort of airport weather and rough traffic information service to arriving and departing aircraft through a staffed base radio, in addition to their flight operations. The radio airport information particularly is a very nice service if the traffic and customer levels justify the allocation of staff and other resources. Dick and the NAS group are focussing on the niceties of this radio service. And no two ways about it, it is nice if it can be provided. The fuel profits as a percentage make up a significant portion of an FBO's justification for providing the service. Some competing FBOs at airports have been known to send out 'Follow Me' cars to lure taxiing customers away from other bowsers. When the bizjets come in, the red carpets come out - literally.

You can figure out whether FBOs will be populating Australia like rabbits after the implementation of NAS. Capt. [Dis]Custard has expressed his opinion. I don't think he is far off the mark. I think there is also a lot to be said for the US charts and docs supporting operations with FBO servces. I don't know how viable this would be in Oz.

[Winstun]

FBOs will exist or not by the laws of the free market. Friggin duh.
However....this is no excuse for not having efficient ATC, easy access to airspace and airports for all, airline pilots that can think a little quicker ("on the whole their delivery is Gatling gun fast" ), and airline pilots that practise basic airmanship of maintaining a vigilant lookout the window. One would not think the Kings would be the obvious choice for re-education in Australia, but on reflection, it is evident from posts here that Aussie aviators need to go back to the ABCs..

[Mr. Hat]

Was a legit question and thank-you for you reply. Have always wondered what it stood for.

So they make their money off the fuel or do they have extra charges?

Cheers

[ferris]

Winstun

Thanks for making a few interesting points. I, too, have wondered why the U.S. doesn't have more efficient ATC (they have 20 times the number of controllers as oz). They have so many more mid-airs every year, too. I dunno, I just don't get it. Maybe they should adopt some world's best practice ?

Is this behind Dick's obsession? He can fly into Hicksville, USA and get his plane washed and 3 people arse-licking to fill it up, so he figures if he implants some of the features of their system in oz, the same thing will spring up? I can't believe the man is that stupid.

[Kaptin M]

"..airline pilots that practise basic airmanship of maintaining a vigilant lookout the window."ala Winstun.

Good one Winstun. You just stay strapped in seat 26A, clutching "Aero Modelers World" with one hand, and ing with the other, as you peer out the window looking for "traffic", and let US do our job of looking after YOU (and the rest of the "good travelling public").

[Manwell]

!!!!!!!! Well. Kaptin M. Excuse anyone with an opinion other than yours.

I happen to agree with him. And I may have taught you. Pity you still don't understand the need to lookout the window...
Can you at least use the rudders?

Kind Regards....

Manwell

[Kaptin M]

Conversely Manwell, it may have been me who taught YOU!
Oh and I do use the rudders although it does seem to be something many of the younger guys DON'T do.
Unfortunately I don't qualify for the latter any more.

Pity some of you PPL'ers don't fully comprehend "rate of closure" vs the lack of depth/distance perception at altitude, even at night and excluding the daytime glare factor.

Even when advised by ATC of the position and distance of a converging aircraft, AND with the benefit of TCAS (assuming you know what TCAS is), 7 times out of 10 neither of the 2 pilots will locate it, and in the instances when they do, it's usually within 10 miles (at a closure rate of 900kts+).
As is often also the case, 1 pilot will be able to sight the aircraft, but the other cannot, due to the above mentioned factors.
"Clear Left - Clear right."

[Captain Custard]

Winstun,

Great to have your whining back. I thought you must have gone walkabout to do a thesis on the complete FAILURE of Lookout to be an adequate mitigator against no-radio twits buzzing around looking at their GPSs (or perhaps for the chickee babes on the tarmac in the Follow Me van).

Manwell, given that professional crews can't even see each other go past with TCAS and DTI, how do you reckon Joe Jet in his powered wing thing is going to go picking up a 737 that's running him down??!! When are you jokers going to get the message?? Unalerted See and Avoid is downright stupid, quite apart from being bloody dangerous!

I can tell you one thing: WHEN a lighty and RPT jet gets taken out, all the BASI reports and correspondence on See and Avoid will come floating to the top, and the lawyers will have a field day, and rightly so. Hopefully, the perpetrators of this ridiculous airspace will end up in jail.

[Sheepdog]

Why do again we need Americans to advise us? To me the Sepos are passion fingered i.e. everything they touch they f....! It is the good old USA thats need advise from people such as us.

I am sure we are smart enough and have the infastructure to sort out the problem. Why do we treat ourselves as dumb colonials? With the damage the Sepos have done through out the world and still are doing it would be very smart to give them a miss!

Kaptin , I totally agree , I have flown with USA trained pilots here in Europe and Africa. They are the most undisplined , unprofessional pilots I have ever met. The average Australian trained pilot is miles ahead Im proud to say.

End of Whinge.. " Yes.. what....coming warden!

Kaptin M, totally agree on the see and be seen. Those who have operated TCAS would know. I have had aircraft within 5 nm , 1000' below on TCAS with a rate of closure of 600 nm both of us looking and not seen a thing. Especially in Africa where conditions are the same as Aust, with heat haze, dust etc.

[druglord]

Sheepdog and Ferris I think your aussie nationalism is clouding your rational. Firstly ferris I've flown in both countries and the system in the US is 100% more efficient than in oz. That's why they can do 1700-2000 movements a day at certain airports. I'm not sure what sydney moves but I doubt you've every been number 40 for departure there.
Sheepdog I think you think because the ATPL over there is tougher that somehow they have a superior system over there. Not true, testing is different in all countries not better or worse. Americans do things different from aussies not better not worse. I'd get out of the self-aggrandisement soap box if I were you and give us aussies a better name than the arrogant obnoxious one your giving them now.

[Sheepdog]

Druglord if you put me in that category then you better put most other people around the world in the same. Its the Americans are the only one who think that they and their system is the best.
Its not being obnoxious it just facing the facts. I will admit to being one eye Australian and Im proud of it . We need to be more confident of our abilities.

[Sheep Guts]

Guys guys guys

These two systems are very different and we realise that they will never be the same. But that doesnt stop productive debate and consultation. Maybe Martha and John will be snowed under with questions and asked why they have come. But I disagree with sheepdog that they are here to support change the system.

Ive flown in both systems and honestly they differ heaps. With good reason.

In the US in CTR ATC only gives separation to IFR with IFR, VFR have to fend for themselves. Of course when IFR cancel and go VFR they have to fend for themselves ( ie. respeed schedule in with the other VFR traffic)

US has a system based on supreme Radar coverage, Australia has not. When there is a RADAR departure for YAGGA YAGGA in Northern W.A. Thats when I belive both systems will be comparable. But when that happens . Your guess as good as mine.

I agree with Druglord that the US system is very efficient, and can dispatch Aircraft with tremendous speed and ontime slotting.

Australia aint too bad, ever watched Sydney on a Friday arvo or Melbourne for that matter.


sheepguts

[Winstun]

7 times out of 10 neither of the 2 pilots will locate it

Try 10/10 if you got your head up your ass. I always see TCAS traffic.

Its not being obnoxious it just facing the facts

This continual Aussie aviator wet dream that they are the best is obnoxious. Not only gives us Aussies a bad name, but is downright embarissing. Luckily I have other nationalities at hand.

We need to be more confident of our abilities.

Like the ability to manufacture submarines (collins) and aircraft (nomad).

I am sure we are smart enough and have the infastructure to sort out the problem.

No, Australian aviation has failed to reach anywhere near its true potential from domestic incompetance and infighting. The problem has not been sorted out for decades . Time for progression.

[Pinky the pilot]

Question..... Has anyone actually been to one of these seminars to hear what is actually gone on?????

You only live twice. Once when
you're born. Once when
you've looked death in the face.

[Captain Custard]

Winstun,

We need more lerts like you. "Pick em up at 50 miles, just like my mate Chuck Yeager! I don't need a TCAS!".

Or perhaps you could donate some of your eye genes for transplanting into all aviatiors!

[druglord]

I think wagga needs a strip that won't flood after a half a mil of rain first if I remember correctly.

As for a better system sheep guts is right, when australia has complete radar coverage perhaps a comparison can be made...as for who has better pilots, well that's just alpha male breast beating that smells of inferiority complex... something that's rarely done by the proffesional pilots I work with.

whoops I meant yagga

[SM4 Pirate]

Winstun wrote
However....this is no excuse for not having efficient ATC, easy access to airspace and airports for all, airline pilots that can think a little quicker ("on the whole their delivery is Gatling gun fast" ), and airline pilots that practise basic airmanship of maintaining a vigilant lookout the window.

There is just no evidence that ATC is not already efficient; the ratio of Movements vs. ATCs is the best in the world in Australia. (According to Eurocontrol). But lets keep relying on a few anecdotal stories.

I have worked the same airspace now since 1997; (my last move) I have had two VFR aircraft call me from out of the blue in all that time looking for a clearance; there seems to be some myth that you can't just call because ATCs are a bunch of pricks and won't let you in; there may be times/locations when that happens but as an enroute ATC it almost never happens, so there is no need to knock anyone back.

The concept of getting into places like Sydney because you change the airspace category is ludicrous. You can do it now and nothing will change. If you do it in the RPT push (or certain LTOP modes) expect delays; come the end state NAS if you do it in the RPT push (or certain LTOP modes) expect delays; NAS does not equal better access to major aerodromes, if we roll out class B it may mean less access.

Australia's biggest problem with ‘aerodrome efficiency’ is political interference; with caps on movements and procedures to appease the noise lobby, mode sharing etc.

I currently control ‘E’ airspace; I've done all the training in the new procedures and not once have I had one request for IFR pick-up, VFR descent/climb or VFR on TOP. How cost effective and efficient is the training of 150 ATCs in new procedures (300 days training so far, with much more to come 2- 5 days each just for 2b changes) for ****** all requests? Can I remember the fandangled procedures 3 months later? No chance of doing them right because I've never seen it; I’ll look to the books and work it out when I get a request; is that efficient, safe or service orientated?

The majority of traffic that I'll have requesting any of this stuff, if it ever happens, I'll just give them heading if needed, which could be rare and get 5 miles and separate them, as the ATCs do in the USA. I'm so glad I've got radar coverage; then again I might actually have to watch someone of Winstun’s character do something stupid 'because I always see them'; then the aircraft coming the other way might ask me to intervene and offer some ATC protection (vector me away from that cowboy) because they don’t trust the someone of Winstun’s character.

Bottle of Rum