Check your PM's

That is 'the way to go'....

Careful Dick....I'm agreeing wif ya....


Cheers

One isolated occurrence in Tasmania does not mean an impending national disaster.

The problem in Tasmania would not have occurred had CASA done what they have always done everywhere else for fly-ins and airshows i.e. by NOTAM either declaring a temporary CTAF or specifying a frequency to be used in the vicinity of the ALA.

If what we read here is correct, CASA apparently refused to take such measures, despite having been warned of the possibility of congestion on the FIA, and due to their lack of action, the congestion did indeed occur.

And had the ALA been one published on the charts without a discrete CTAF, the same congestion problem would have occurred on 126.7 potentially causing disruption to other ALAs and users on that frequency.

Captain, unfortunately it is not just one incident. The real problem lies not in the granting of a temporary frequency, rather the absurdly long time it takes to get an airstrip marked on a map.

It should take around 6 months (the time between an AIP MAP data cut-off date and the release's effective date). Example: the cut-off date for AIP MAP effective at the end of this year would be early June.

WACs aren't published as frequently though, but publication in AIP MAP is sufficient.

My last experience was it was simply a matter of providing details of the ALA (lat/long., owner & contact details, charts affected) to the Airservices Aeronautical Information Management people. They had a standard form to complete.

Who are you going through (don't say CASA....)?

See the links under "Changes to aeronautical charts and documents" here:

Contact us | Airservices

Really?

I am not the applicant. Thanks for the link but I am well aware of the correct process, as are the applicants (note plural). The application in Tasmania is not the only one I am aware of. There are several stretching across Australia. This is not an isolated case or a simple matter of filling out a form and getting instant results. There is a process that takes time and nothing is done in the interim to fix the problem which is not nearly as minor as you allude.

Yes, it's due to the lead times with printing, distribution etc.

The way it was explained once @ RAPAC was, working back from the maps effective date:

• maps and documents are supposed to be received by pilots and other users at least 28 days in advance of their effective date, so for maps effective on 10 Nov. 2016 that would be receipt around mid October;
• 3 weeks is allowed for national postage and distribution to meet that receipt around mid October, so that process would start around late Sept.
• two weeks is allowed for the mailing house to receive all the maps and documents, collate and send for distribution;
• so the documents would be sent by the printers to the mailing house around mid September;
• the printers have a week or so to do their bit, so that means they receive the data late August;
• Airservices charting people have 4 weeks to process all the changes to the charts, produce drafts for checking then validate and finalse the electronic data for sending to the printers, so that process starts around the end of July;
• mid June is the cut-off for author areas internal and external to Airservices to file changes with their AIS people, which allows for late filing, checking and validation of the data and creating the change documentation covering the whole AIP suite including maps.

Changes e.g. addition of a strip could be done by NOTAM if the level of traffic justifies it, but then the regulator gets involved to assess the safety implications of doing something by NOTAM (and the risk of some pilots not checking NOTAM) vs.. leaving the change till a map release.

Captain, the "really was in response to your rather optimistic 6 months. Realistically, from my experience, you are looking at 12 months minimum and probably 18 months to 2 years. Things progress at snails pace in the public service.

For changes on WACs yes, because they are only printed every few years.

However I've never had a problem with having something published or corrected on the next AIP MAP release if the change RQ is filed with AIS by their cut-off date.

As I said, I don't know who the parties are talking to but if it is CASA instead of AIS Airservices (the aeronautical data managers and publishers), I can understand why a delay or no action.

Any questions an email to that docs_amend address and the ladies have been only too happy to assist.

Captain Midnight: it would be worth having a read of the new CASR Part 175 and updating yourself on what the requirements are now for Aeronautical Data Originators in Subpart 175.D. It's not like it used to be. The privacy of individual aerodrome owners, and their right to not be published (for any number of reasons), also needs to be respected.

For those interested in this thread's headline topic of CASA's constraint on the MULTICOM: there's more info now at RAPACs .