This was never and will never be about safety and is not safe, or should I say any safer than what it was. It is totally about money/air traffic controllers (or lack of them) and an instrument air services will use in the near future to better their agreement.

:confused:

I can't see things changing much at Moorabbin. That NOTAM posted earlier for Bankstown is the norm at Moorabbin on the weekend (whether or not it's actually Notamed. It would seem that if 35 was in use, 35R gets used for circuits and 35L for those that come and go. Seemed to work ok until someone smashed into someone else.

IFR into and out of GAAP's (regardless of Met conditions) has been going on since Adam was a boy Walrus.

Don't confuse IMC with IFR. Once visual an IFR flight (including RPT) can and are, given instructions to sight, follow, avoid etc... These flights continue to retain their IFR status however untill such time as their sarwatch is cancelled automatically after landing.

I'm not sure what Walrus means by no IFR in VMC at GAAPs. I've done a few practice NDB approaches and practice circle to land at YMMB when the circuit wasn't busy. No probs at all with tower approval.. and as Krusty says, you're asked to just follow the traffic pattern as you would if you're flying VFR. I even recall a few years ago that YMMB had standard IFR departures in the DAPs.

As for how the new changes will affect IFR training at MB, that would be interesting. What happens during a practice NDB approach, when you call the tower after turning inbound, only to hear the circuit is full? Cancel IFR and track to a VFR approach point and join the queue?

Did anybody have trouble today at any of the GAAP aerodromes with the new procedure change??

You would also think that now that these changes have come into effect, CASA could change their website and all correspondence from stating Proposed changes, They still are even calling the changes draft :ugh:

What diference will class d make for VFR? I'm really confused, and i work class D everyday! The only change will be wx related.. No change for IFR either really. Until another IFR comes in the zone, then the vertical limits will get blown... So what's the big deal?
Seems to be CASA forcing ASA to get more controllers.

I'm all for it though, GAAP is scary, and yes, i have flown in it.

Training Wheels,

ENR1.1 24 makes it clear that IFR is allowed in GAAP, but have to operate visually and provide own separation if the conditions are VMC. You can plan IFR into and out of GAAP, but the tower will instruct you to track visually and you are responsible for separation, based on traffic information. Only if conditions are IMC will separation be provided.

Since my post, my contention that this will benefit RPT has crumbled somewhat: there is no separation between IFR and VFR in Class D either.

There goes that conclusion, which has served only to add more mud to the puddle. Why make a change that will change nothing?

Walrus

Well, that's exactly what I said in my post, Walrus. :) As I said, IFR flights can and have been operating in GAAPs in VMC.

And it appears IFR flights get better protection from VFR flights in GAAPs than in Class D. According to the AIP (effective 27 AUG 09) ENR 1.4-9, for GAAPs , in IMC IFR will be separated from IFR and VFR but in Class D, separation is only provided between IFR and IFR and IFR and Special VFR. :confused: Go figure.

....or how about getting rid of foreign non english speaking lazy students?:D
Hey Presto.........collision risk brought down to reasonable level again.

INCOMING !!!!(tin hat on!):E

Very windy at Moorabbin so not much traffic the last couple of days. Called inbound at GMH and was told #1 for 35R. Twice, after landing, requested clearance to exit 35R on to 31L. First time I thought I detected a surprised tone from the tower. Second time he said a lot more, not sure if that was meant to be a more general explanation of what to do in that situation or not - I meant to ring and ask, will do that.

So what did the tower say? Did they allow you to enter and taxi along 31L back to the apron?

Yes, called ground as usual after vacating 35R.

Training Wheels ... from reading the docs, this is how I see it:

GAAP in IMC

Everyone is separated from everyone (IFR/Special VFR) There are no VFR aircraft in IMC

GAAP in VMC

No one gets separated. All get traffic info.

Class D in IMC

Everyone is separated from everyone (IFR/Special VFR) There are no VFR aircraft in IMC

Class D in VMC

IFRs get separated from each other.
IFRs get traffic on VFRs
VFRs get traffic on everyone

Besides the requirement for a clearance, the only real difference is that IFRs are protected from each other in VMC.

Training Wheels, can I have some more time to consider the concept of VFR in IMC?

Peuce's summary is pretty much what I had arrived at after a lot of anlysis and crunching. There is no advantage to going D-class. So why do it?

Walrus

From what I've heard a move to Class D could kill parallel runway operations due to their close proximity. Maybe someone from ASA could back this up?

Unless today's GAAP aerodromes get some sort of concession, the airport owners will be very happy about the new real estate for sale.

Tamworth has been Class D for donkeys years and it has parallel runways.

I suspect the runways at TW are much further apart than the runways at any of the existing GAAPS, certainly MB or BK.

Walrus

Spot on Walrus, the GAAP airfields were not designed to Class D criteria and the implementation of Class D will cripple them.

Really uninspired thinking on behalf of CASA and ultimately the end of high dennsity VFR traffic at GAAP.

Well, Walrus, I quoted that directly from the AIP thus my use of :confused: emotion. But I'll give you time to grasp the concept of IFR operations in GAAPs, though.. that one seems to take a little while to sink in for you. :rolleyes:

Correct. The short distance between the runways at most GAAPs is the problem.