NAS E+ and AV
 

Hey people! This NAS issue isn't over yet! E+ at AV!

Granted, there is far more surveillance in place to help detect and identify VFR flying around the patch. Broadcast situation still needs looking at. How can you have a "Broadcast" if it is directed at the TWR? Who is responsible if VFR enters E+ without a broadcast? Is a VFR pilot legally bound to follow instructions from ATC in E+?It may say under CAR100 but what part of CAR100 refers to VFR and E+?

Anyone had problems transitting AV using E+?

AV Class E changes

Says follow instructions...but what if you do not. You do not need a clearance to be there. Like G, ATC can only advise..so how can you be legally bound to follow an ATC instruction in effectively G airspace.

So- CAR 100.1
So that means everywhere..not just controlled airspace? After coping the abuse of VFR being free to do whatever they like in E and seeing the issues with Launy and MCY..it would have been easier for ATC to say to VFR on frequency..YYY Maintain current altitude until clear of XXX...would have been so much easier...however, is it in the spirit of VFR in E

CAR100.1 has serious implications then for all operations in E not just E+...does an ATC have the authority to direct a VFR in E or E+?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

Get over it! Move on! Please.

DB

Not your problem up there on the Gold Coast...not yet, anyway DB. It's catching people out down here!

Dangly bits,
So you agree with this hotch potch, legally dubious and confusing setup over Avalon?

Bloggsy,

Airservices had 12 months to get staff and training, however they chose to bury their heads and now we have to pay for it? Adapt, Overcome and Thrive.

I call bullsh@@.

Dangly Bits

Do try to keep up :hmm: ...... its about the E (that is not) airspace change (that replaced class C) on the 3rd of June, which I might add, is nothing to do with Airservices, nor the staff, nor the training. :=

Howbout' you .... adapt, overcome, and thrive by .... paying attention, understanding, and doing something about it before it is rolled out by CASA at a collision point near you. :suspect:

Fixa wins!

So let me get this straight. There is E over D for what, 2000 feet or so? Then into C? If you are a jet jockey then you would certainly have your work cut out for you but then you do have 2 in the cockpit.

CASA made a mandatory call and txpdr for VFR which goes against ICAO? Why would we need to go against ICAO?

Actually why do we need E over D anyway?

Interesting re "Broadcast" A question to ATC. If I forget to broadcast approaching E+ and I enter that airspace..do I get a VCA notice?

That my friend is what GAAP was!

I still can't work out why Australia NEEDS to be different to the rest of the world? :ugh:

Interesting point re-ATC instructions in E+...if I do not follow an instruction in E+..will I be the recipient of an ESIR?

OK...a general warning wrt class E+ around AV...DO NOT PROCEED WITHOUT CONTACTING AND RECEIVING ACKNOWLEDGMENT FROM TOWER...it would appear that this so called free airspace for VFR has a very serious sting.

Smelling more like a higher class of controlled airspace.

This is not a problem as long as everyone is clear about the issue. Getting a VCA for very grey procedure is not a very nice way of educating operators. Answers from the OAR would be a start.

It would appear this is not the case. If it is NOT a clearance, how can you get a VCA?

From AIP SUP H30/10

Where does it say you will be breached for not complying. Where does it say you CANNOT PROCEED without making contact. One thing to declare a temporary broadcast zone...but an entire another situation if there is a serious legal issue..especially if you do not need a clearance and yet you do?

Serious issue needs clarification...pilots are getting breached!

I understand your outrage Oz, but in my reading of Air Law (correct if I am wrong), 'must' means a legal requirement so if you don't broadcast or follow instructions you are breaking a law. Am I misreading?

Agree mcgrath50. The airspace is still the same...it is the broadcast issue that appears to attract the VCA...it can only be under CAR100. Thats what it says in the SUP.

The bulletin states that the tower will acknowledge but nothing about not proceeding if you do not receive same. A broadcast is a broadcast...you do not expect a reply....unless...it isn't really a broadcast but a request for authorization to continue...:ugh:

Must, Should, may, can, will, won't, one day the lawyers WILL sort it all out..... Bwaaaaaahhaaaaaa! :}

The original NAS alphabet airspace was sold as international airspace that was standardized so anyone from anywhere knew what rules were being applied in that particular piece of airspace.

CASA have screwed up the AV airpace so much that no-one has any idea about what is required by anyone who uses it.

By decreeing "... must comply with ATC instructions in accordance with CAR 100 if such instructions are issued", CASA is changing E airspace into D airspace. This is contrary to the basis of E where VFR are not operating on clearances. I would put it that VFR have no legal requirement to comply with any ATC instructions in E airspace. There cannot be any legal basis for applying CAR 100 in the AV case.

No controller in his right mind should be issuing direct instructions to VFR aircraft in E airspace most especially in the unsurveilled portions of AV.

It is criminal that radar is not being used by ML Centre (where coverage is down to below 500') in the most critical areas that IFR flights go through.

Whoever signed off the AV airspace design should feel very uneasy about the absolute cock up and unnecessary confusion that they have perpetrated on the regular users of this area.

Chief Galah:ok: Amen, Amen!