|
Originally Posted by junior.VH-LFA
(Post 10613821)
No; I'm suggesting that if the weather prevents doing that you declare a pan and make the controllers work for you. That's how it works when you're in danger.
There is always scope to talk about airspace change. This is a perfect forum for that. Make a thread about it and stop hijacking accident threads to push your agenda. Sadly there are many relatively low time pilots prepared to risk encounters with terrain or weather rather than incur the wrath of CASA or ATC, this has been the case for far too long and needs to stop. |
Originally Posted by Dick Smith
(Post 10613766)
ACMS. The Moony pilot planned at 6500’ Why would he expect to be totally denied a clearance at that or a similar level? Its not as if it was JFK. |
It's often difficult to figure out what is possible and what isn't as a pilot. The Sydney controllers seem to be able to handle VFR traffic on the Harbour Scenic when the airspace appears to be completely saturated, absolute kudos to them. Then Williamtown can't give you a transit when it seems like nothing is moving in their airspace...
I thought we had it rough in the UK with being denied the occasional transit, but here in Australia I have experienced numerous delays and denials at tin pot airfields. |
At post #186 in the "Bell ditching off Newcastle" thread Maggie Island said:
Don't you worry, the [Willytown] Romeo's are activated with or without justification! (Mine or otherwise) |
L'aviateur, I agree with you about Williamtown. The most anal controllers I've ever dealt with. |
I was under the impression that air traffic controllers could suppress signals from planes squawking 1200 to avoid clutter on their screen.
As a private pilot, I have had my transmission swamped by another plane transmitting on the same frequency at the same time. I'm told commercial planes have stronger transmitters. Yes, I have been refused clearance through controlled airspace. I have no problem with this. If it is an emergency, say so, or act accordingly regardless of permission. If you look to the left, I was taught, "See and avoid." the pilot reported that he was operating in clear conditions, |
Originally Posted by Dick Smith
(Post 10613766)
ACMS. The Moony pilot planned at 6500’ Why would he expect to be totally denied a clearance at that or a similar level? Its not as if it was JFK. Were the controllers working this aircraft pilots? I doubt it. Had they ever experienced this scenario? Could they appreciate what the outcome could be? Did they help the pilot? |
Originally Posted by Dick Smith
(Post 10614308)
Now some important facts are coming out. Thanks Prune! Bob Hawke gave you the job as Chairman of CASA. What did you do to reign in regulation in your days back in the ‘90’s? It appears the old days of a great welcoming Australian flying community has long gone. The likes of GOANNA and other outback tours are long gone. I still have my fixed and rotary wing Aussie licences from decades ago but you regulators are the big issue when it comes to winter in Australia. The days of self fly hire for European and American pilots are long gone. |
Originally Posted by havick
(Post 10614334)
even LGA and JFK lets VFR traffic through, hear it all the time.
Originally Posted by deja vu
(Post 10614325)
Yeah, it sounds simple, "declare a pan and make the controllers work for you" I always thought they were there to work for you anyway, pan or no pan. Apparently not.
Pilots should use the use the system correctly, if enough people declare a PAN the ATSB will require a change.
Originally Posted by Mike Flynn
(Post 10614890)
Were the controllers working this aircraft pilots? I doubt it. Had they ever experienced this scenario? No requirement for controllers to be pilots unlike some other countries that require controllers to be at least PPL holders. |
Deja Vu: Sadly there are many relatively low time pilots prepared to risk encounters with terrain or weather rather than incur the wrath of CASA or ATC, this has been the case for far too long and needs to stop. However the penalty is potentially the acquisition of a criminal record, becoming a felon, no reputation, no house, no family, no super, no flying, no firearms, no employment, no air travel and no overseas travel. Like most rational adults, I regard CASA and ATC as more capricious and vindictive than weather and terrain and in the unlikely event I was caught out I suggest it’s not a simple choice to bust controlled airspace at all, despite what you may think. So, sadly, it isn’t going to stop until the law and unjust culture changes. |
It ALL boils down to who ultimately is in charge of flight? PICommand! |
While I cant speak of this incident as I dont know any more than the ATSB report - I have had several situation in GA where a clearance was required and ATC weren't keen... until i told them what was happening. A phrase as simple as "due weather, request clearance direct ..." was enough to get a clearance organised - not necissarilly immediately (due IFR traffic or similar) however actually talking to the controller and telling them what you need can make all the difference. Now that I work in an IFR RPT capacity, i do not know a single pilot that I work with that wouldn't mind burning an extra 5-10 minutes of fuel to allow a VFR aircraft through/infront in marginal weather if we're in the way. We can fly through it... they can't.
In some situations, even the old "we have this issue, we are doing this" was enough to make things happen, the paperwork can be dealt with later - and if you have a good enough reason to do your own thing to stay safe... then you're good. |
Sunfish if you can find me a genuine example of someone who was REQUIRED to breach airspace due to weather or an emergency, who articulated that was the case and was subsequently punished in the way you've described, I'll never question you again.
Good luck. |
ATC as more capricious and vindictive than weather and terrain and in the unlikely event I was caught out I suggest it’s not a simple choice to bust controlled airspace at all, despite what you may think. So, sadly, it isn’t going to stop until the law and unjust culture changes. A phrase as simple as "due weather, request clearance direct ..." was enough to get a clearance organised - not necissarilly immediately (due IFR traffic or similar) however actually talking to the controller and telling them what you need can make all the difference. [snip] In some situations, even the old "we have this issue, we are doing this" was enough to make things happen, the paperwork can be dealt with later - and if you have a good enough reason to do your own thing to stay safe... then you're good. It sounds to me like this is the sort of thing pilots like Sunfish might find valuable. A bit of mutual understanding goes a long way! |
The airspace configuration is clearly wrong. C above D with no terminal radar is likely to be a “ giant roadblock in the sky” to quote others. It now looks as if it has contributed to a fatal accident. |
Please stop it. You have done well for yourself and are held in high regard, and applaud your push for safety when it’s appropriate. But you’re ruining it with your routine conduct in these particular threads. |
Originally Posted by Track Shortener
(Post 10615060)
I suspect a good way to begin the culture change Sunfish refers to here
Last he stated he's had no interaction with CASA at all, and probably only very limited time even communicating with ATC, let alone had any strife with them. And yes, he for one would benefit from a visit, |
Jabber. Why don’t you explain the reason for the upside down airspace? It could have a link to this accident. If it had remained class E the pilot would not have been forced to a lower altitude. |
I simply don’t think it is all that complicated. If you know these areas are there, you plan according and communicate with the control zones and you generally have no issues at all. Use some respect when you talk to the person at the other end of the radio, it’s amazing what liberties that can afford you. Have some knowledge of the process and show them you have tried and you will get a lot more out of the communication. Plan and accept that sometimes it will not happen straight away and you have to be flexible to get what you want. Don’t fly in to **** situations. Having been flying on the fires just west the day this aircraft went in, it was not an ideal flying environment. It was hard work, in a helicopter, flying low level. And I’m a somewhat experienced “professional” (I use that term lightly). And the very similar incident involving the helicopter in to Williamtown. A colleague of mine was the last person to see them alive. They landed and refilled themselves at Coffs Harbour where I had been parking my machine each night. They filled their aircraft up from fuel stored in a drum and a plastic agricultural tank they had onboard the aircraft. Initial reports from the ATSB show the pilot was not even night rated. Yet took off with no possibility at all of finishing the next leg during daylight hours. Unfortunately these two situations were both tragic. But they were both realistically avoidable and to blame the airspace for what at best seems like poor airmanship is a massively long bow to draw and simply not fair to the people in the ATC zones doing their jobs as best they can. I think education towards the industry to realise stopping and not trying to continue at all costs might be more beneficial than changing some airspace’s that are, at present, completely manageable. |
Jabber. So why is the airspace upside down? No other country that I know of has reversed airspace like this. Its clearly not the ATCs fault. If the pilot had not been forced to a lower level he well may of continued the flight safely above the cloud. Don’t you understand this? |
What is so hard about flying through Class C or D airspace? It may not have been an instant passage but it would no doubt have eventuated in to one. Or why could they not come in and land and have a breather and get their ducks lined up again? I’d hazard a guess (seems to be a lot of them being thrown around in here already), that they were not confident in dealing with the airspace. Whether that was training, exposure or currency related who knows but perhaps there lies the answer. Is the airspace perfect? Probably not. But it is not an impossible space to pass through. They did not have to continue. |
So how far past CTA did the accident occur?
|
Originally Posted by Piston_Broke
(Post 10615093)
Don't take Sunfish's view as representative of the real situation.
Last he stated he's had no interaction with CASA at all, and probably only very limited time even communicating with ATC, let alone had any strife with them. And yes, he for one would benefit from a visit, |
Originally Posted by Dick Smith
(Post 10613759)
Its clear that C requires a terminal radar system to operate correctly. That’s the reason for the Ministers directive. |
Originally Posted by Dick Smith
(Post 10615137)
Jabber. So why is the airspace upside down? No other country that I know of has reversed airspace like this. Its clearly not the ATCs fault. If the pilot had not been forced to a lower level he well may of continued the flight safely above the cloud. Don’t you understand this? I work airspace where I deny clearances to VFR all the time. Its just not possible to get aircraft in and out of my airport with VFR in certain spots. I tell them an expected delay, or they can go around. If I know the weather is marginal, I'd be confirming that is a safe course of action.. but I have absolutely no idea what conditions they are flying through unless they tell me... and I have weather cameras a few miles away and a tower giving me weather updates. I'm not going to delay mutliple IFR planes for a VFR to have a jolly or cut a few minutes off their journey... UNLESS they REQUIRE to go through my airspace. As it has been pointed out in this thread, and many other threads... if that pilot says "I'm coming in anyway" or "I require it due weather"... then I make it work. I stop departures, I hold arrivals, and I put delays on the IFR guys to make sure everyone is safe. "However, at 0724, the pilot advised the tower controller that he was operating in clear conditions at 4,100 ft AMSL" at this point my level of concern for a VFR is ZERO. If you tell me you are fine, I have no choice to believe you. If at any point the pilot said they were concerned about staying visual or required a clearance they would have got it... don't you understand this? This sounds like it is about pilot education... they need to stop being scared about talking to us, or saying no... there are no repercussions to doing this... and its not worth your life to save the embarassment of talking to ATC. |
So does anyone know how far past the cta boundary the accident occurred?
|
Originally Posted by ausatc123
(Post 10615648)
Dick... if the airspace was class E, then yes the VFR would be able to do whatever he wanted. But you'd also have VFR and IFR traffic mixing it in the middle of approachs that most of the time wouldn't be talking. Seperation not required, but if I told a jet he was in direct conflict with someone and cleared them for the approach he'd want to hold until clear. You now have a roadblock the other way around, if you have good radar coverage you might be able to tell them they are about to hit someone, or you might just hope TCAS picked them up or the VFR is keeping a good eye out.
I work airspace where I deny clearances to VFR all the time. Its just not possible to get aircraft in and out of my airport with VFR in certain spots. I tell them an expected delay, or they can go around. If I know the weather is marginal, I'd be confirming that is a safe course of action.. but I have absolutely no idea what conditions they are flying through unless they tell me... and I have weather cameras a few miles away and a tower giving me weather updates. I'm not going to delay mutliple IFR planes for a VFR to have a jolly or cut a few minutes off their journey... UNLESS they REQUIRE to go through my airspace. As it has been pointed out in this thread, and many other threads... if that pilot says "I'm coming in anyway" or "I require it due weather"... then I make it work. I stop departures, I hold arrivals, and I put delays on the IFR guys to make sure everyone is safe. "However, at 0724, the pilot advised the tower controller that he was operating in clear conditions at 4,100 ft AMSL" at this point my level of concern for a VFR is ZERO. If you tell me you are fine, I have no choice to believe you. If at any point the pilot said they were concerned about staying visual or required a clearance they would have got it... don't you understand this? This sounds like it is about pilot education... they need to stop being scared about talking to us, or saying no... there are no repercussions to doing this... and its not worth your life to save the embarassment of talking to ATC. Just because you’re trained/conditioned to find VFR aircraft a hindrance by your own admission unless they require a clearance operationally, doesn’t make it normal practice worldwide. I’m not suggesting clearance/no clearance or the pilots hesitation had any bearing on this accident, simply highlighting your attitude to service delivery is not what is the norm worldwide. |
Originally Posted by ausatc123
(Post 10615648)
If at any point the pilot said they were concerned about staying visual or required a clearance they would have got it... don't you understand this? This sounds like it is about pilot education... they need to stop being scared about talking to us, or saying no... there are no repercussions to doing this... and its not worth your life to save the embarassment of talking to ATC.
The experience I've found with Alice Springs, Tamworth, Coffs and Maroochydore, they make it hard for VFR traffic, even with no inbound IFR traffic. Most VFR pilots I talk to have the same experience, they try to avoid ATC even at their own peril it seems. |
Whenever a CTA clearance was simply for convenience (i.e. most direct route, trying to get a bit higher into C steps) I've found that more often than not ATC don't really want to deal with it.
The only time I have absolutely required a CTA clearance to reach the destination safely due weather (short of turning around and going back home) I found ATC to be incredibly willing and able to help, once I communicated the situation. "Cleared direct to the field not above 4500, track as required" |
Dick... if the airspace was class E, then yes the VFR would be able to do whatever he wanted. But you'd also have VFR and IFR traffic mixing it in the middle of approachs that most of the time wouldn't be talking. They wouldn't need to talk, the IFR aircraft has you, the ATC, to tell them when they are clear of the aircraft. More often than not they have TCAS to help them and that's if they didn't spot the aircraft visually prior. Seperation not required, but if I told a jet he was in direct conflict with someone and cleared them for the approach he'd want to hold until clear Don't forget, this airspace works in the most saturated airspace in the world. Aluminium (and composite!) does not rain down from the skies as a consequence. BUT and it's a big BUT, the airspace I talk of has surveillance, and plenty of it, and low level. Australia is a pathetic, backward, under resourced aviation backwater. That's unless of course you want to buy your wardrobe or a coffee or a gourmet pie from a city airport terminal. Then you'll find the best of the best. It's only when you get the opportunity to fly in another countries airspace system you say to yourself WTF?? |
Originally Posted by ausatc123
(Post 10615648)
Dick... if the airspace was class E, then yes the VFR would be able to do whatever he wanted. But you'd also have VFR and IFR traffic mixing it in the middle of approachs that most of the time wouldn't be talking. Seperation not required, but if I told a jet he was in direct conflict with someone and cleared them for the approach he'd want to hold until clear. You now have a roadblock the other way around, if you have good radar coverage you might be able to tell them they are about to hit someone, or you might just hope TCAS picked them up or the VFR is keeping a good eye out.
I work airspace where I deny clearances to VFR all the time. Its just not possible to get aircraft in and out of my airport with VFR in certain spots. I tell them an expected delay, or they can go around. If I know the weather is marginal, I'd be confirming that is a safe course of action.. but I have absolutely no idea what conditions they are flying through unless they tell me... and I have weather cameras a few miles away and a tower giving me weather updates. I'm not going to delay mutliple IFR planes for a VFR to have a jolly or cut a few minutes off their journey... UNLESS they REQUIRE to go through my airspace. As it has been pointed out in this thread, and many other threads... if that pilot says "I'm coming in anyway" or "I require it due weather"... then I make it work. I stop departures, I hold arrivals, and I put delays on the IFR guys to make sure everyone is safe. "However, at 0724, the pilot advised the tower controller that he was operating in clear conditions at 4,100 ft AMSL" at this point my level of concern for a VFR is ZERO. If you tell me you are fine, I have no choice to believe you. If at any point the pilot said they were concerned about staying visual or required a clearance they would have got it... don't you understand this? This sounds like it is about pilot education... they need to stop being scared about talking to us, or saying no... there are no repercussions to doing this... and its not worth your life to save the embarassment of talking to ATC. Get out out of here... |
A good few points have been raised above. Thinking more about this... CASA like to ram information down our throats to help us learn, however I don’t seem to get much from AirServices. Am I missing something, like an email update I’m not subscribed to or are they just the big bad boogie-man that our instructors warn us about? |
No, they are not the boogie men, they are 'educated' by their employer that they have the best airspace system in the world when they don't. Their employer will NOT spend money where it is required. They will spend it on their big customers, not on the little guy. Their big customers tell ASA where the money is to be spent.
|
Dick... if the airspace was class E, then yes the VFR would be able to do whatever he wanted. But you'd also have VFR and IFR traffic mixing it in the middle of approachs that most of the time wouldn't be talking. Seperation not required, but if I told a jet he was in direct conflict with someone and cleared them for the approach he'd want to hold until clear. You now have a roadblock the other way around, if you have good radar coverage you might be able to tell them they are about to hit someone, or you might just hope TCAS picked them up or the VFR is keeping a good eye out. I work airspace where I deny clearances to VFR all the time. Its just not possible to get aircraft in and out of my airport with VFR in certain spots. I tell them an expected delay, or they can go around. If I know the weather is marginal, I'd be confirming that is a safe course of action.. but I have absolutely no idea what conditions they are flying through unless they tell me... and I have weather cameras a few miles away and a tower giving me weather updates. I'm not going to delay mutliple IFR planes for a VFR to have a jolly or cut a few minutes off their journey... UNLESS they REQUIRE to go through my airspace. As it has been pointed out in this thread, and many other threads... if that pilot says "I'm coming in anyway" or "I require it due weather"... then I make it work. I stop departures, I hold arrivals, and I put delays on the IFR guys to make sure everyone is safe. "However, at 0724, the pilot advised the tower controller that he was operating in clear conditions at 4,100 ft AMSL" at this point my level of concern for a VFR is ZERO. If you tell me you are fine, I have no choice to believe you. If at any point the pilot said they were concerned about staying visual or required a clearance they would have got it... don't you understand this? This sounds like it is about pilot education... they need to stop being scared about talking to us, or saying no... there are no repercussions to doing this... and its not worth your life to save the embarassment of talking to ATC. 100% correct. |
Originally Posted by Atlas Shrugged
(Post 10615807)
ausatc123, without doubt, the most straight forward and logical reply to the otherwise usual gibberish... some people will just never get it. :ok:
100% correct. |
I think I've seen most......., but that's not the point.
|
Originally Posted by ausatc123
(Post 10615648)
I work airspace where I deny clearances to VFR all the time.
Lots of people being denied entry to airspace just because they are VFR. Airservices have no way of knowing whether theses are recreational pilots on a jolly, a doctor flying to a clinic, a farmer or a businessman trying to get to a meeting etc etc. if the “service” can’t handle the demand, expand the service. Oh wait, we’re in Australia, silly me. |
Originally Posted by Cloudee
(Post 10615817)
And that there sums up Airservices Australia “service” just perfectly. And some of you are applauding this. I shouldn’t have to explain my circumstances to suddenly find that a clearance is now available |
Originally Posted by Super Cecil
(Post 10615774)
Previous experience with ATC has made many VFR pilots wary. I'm sure I've mentioned before about an experience into Tamworth, there were 4 aircraft inbound including a Singapore Lear and a Dash 8. I was inbound VFR and was held and had to change levels, after a barrage of instructions the controller said time to knock off and sort yourselves out. Previous to that it was dangerous to have 4 aircraft inbound, after the controller shut down the aircraft inbound sorted it out and you'll be surprised to know there were no accidents.
The experience I've found with Alice Springs, Tamworth, Coffs and Maroochydore, they make it hard for VFR traffic, even with no inbound IFR traffic. Most VFR pilots I talk to have the same experience, they try to avoid ATC even at their own peril it seems. i called at Doncaster, no flight plan, and got a clearance straight away. Nice lady shepherded me to end of 08 because a C172 was close behind and the Auster is very slow with flaps deployed. I had explained I’m the same age as the aeroplane so she arranged for a safety vehicle to lead me back to the parking area :-) Departing again in late afternoon and guy in the tower said some nice things about TW machines. I asked for a clearance north via KAO and he asked me how high I wanted. I said 1500 would be plenty and that’s what he cleared me to. He called again when I got to the boundary and he wished me a pleasant run home. Absolutely top class treatment all the way. I’ve been into the Alice on a number of occasions, once with a dicky engine, and again they treated me royally. Ditto Moorabbin where they got me away Special VFR on one occasion when fog was hanging around. They’re human, helpful, and I find they respond positively to good manners. |
And that there sums up Airservices Australia “service” just perfectly.
Originally Posted by Cloudee
if the “service” can’t handle the demand, expand the service.
Originally Posted by Porter
Let's say the VFR aircraft was operating in VMC, overhead the field, doing whatever he wanted in Class E airspace. The IFR aircraft needing an approach to get down through the cloud would be in VMC at the same levels as the VFR. They would continue the approach in VMC, look out the window until they spotted the aircraft, then continue into IMC on the approach if it was safe to do so.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 23:28. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.