It is surprising how powerful you consider me to be. Thanks for the respect.
|
Originally Posted by Capn Bloggs
(Post 10700453)
Oh well, another Prune thread dies at the hands of Lead Balloon. Well done.
|
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
(Post 10700436)
Care to post a link to the inquiry into airspace arrangements to which I can make or could have made a submission, Cap’n?
|
The Pilbara is the Capn’s part of the Galapagos. I’m sure he’ll make a substantial contribution to the review.
|
Pictures of the aviators killed in this incident are starting to hit the various forms of media. There's a gofundme to get Ido's body home, no doubt to get the Asian students body home as well.
Those of you talking about cost, I've no doubt you won't contribute, after all, nobody wants to pay, who's gunna pay? Take a good look at the photo's of these people, have a think about their families, their partners and children. What's that about cost again? All for the cost of E to 1200, the cost of an airspace promulgation, some maps, in line with an update, and maybe an extra ATC or two? Sorry guys, Jason gave a bunch of ATC's redundancy in the midst of a staffing crisis. World's Second Best ATC: Disclaimer, this statement does not attach any discredit to any serving current or former line controlling ATC. It is a remark placed squarely at the feet of your sub standard management. |
Dang. It's a public holiday tomorrow. Kindergarten won't be open until Tuesday. What arrangements did your carers make for you? Get much play dough time in? |
Hoosten, That is disgusting.
Originally Posted by Ledd Balon
The Pilbara is the Capn’s part of the Galapagos. I’m sure he’ll make a substantial contribution to the review.
|
Ido’s fundraiser has now completed. Many thanks to those that have contributed.
|
Hoosten, That is disgusting. If you're talking about the post above, I can only suggest that you're hyper-sensitive? A snowflake? Or you're creating garbage outrage to my emotive post? Grow up. |
OCTA Aus , I’m sure you’d like this thread closed.
But you never really addressed the issue did you ? Are non-controlled CTAFs safe or fail dangerous ? What is your confidence that the probability of a major disaster involving an RPT jet are remote ? |
Crap, I am way out on my thought process. Why didn't the outbound stay on the ground till inbound was visual or reported passing the aid? Sorry OCTA, there is absolutely zip any service would make a difference here. Waiting a couple of minutes on the ground would nave made all the difference. I am totally wrong on this argument.
|
Operations in a CTAF/Class G
These comments do not relate to the accident in question as we are not aware of what exactly the lead up to the event was and considering there were two experienced pilots involved it is hard to understand what may have occurred, and there is no doubt the possibility of many contributing factors.
As an experienced RPT/GA operator in both Class G and CTAFs and the former MBZs, I make some comment on something that has not been specifically discussed here to date. And that is the training of pilots in operating in that category of airspace within Oz. For a start, the last time I looked, the operation in a CTAF was NOT covered in any of the associated exams for any class of licence. If this is still the case, such teachings are therefore the responsibility of the flying school or operator, be it the individual instructor of someone under the guidance of the CFI/Chief Pilot. What this results in in my opinion is that the training in this area is not subject to any across the industry standardisation and the results show. For example, one operator may do it one way and another do some things differently eg: first call, listening watch prior to first call, use of two comms, separation assurance with known traffic etc etc. Some even believe that if you talk a lot it solves the problem, but that just jams the airwaves with stuff we should already know. As for what some flying schools teach that is yet another story. My experience with some CFI conferences hosted by CASA is that there is many different ideas on how one should participate in uncontrolled airspace and it seems that CASA believe the existing non standardisation is ok. I have put forward a number of times that these teachings should be subject to standardisation and subject to questions in related exam papers. One of the problems is that the folk in CASA responsible for this, don't seem to realise it is a problem and have varied views themselves! Even within this thread we see a variety of views/opinions on how it should be done. Why is it so? |
Well , there you have it.
|
There is absolutely no standardisation in any of the flight training that’s done in Australia, let alone training related to operating at non controlled aerodromes.
Even know the Part 61 MOS can be seen from the moon according to some of my ex colleagues in CASA Standards down in Canberra, a lot of the required learning outcomes in the MOS are so broad to the extent that it allows for a lot of potential misinterpretation with regards to exactly what the required standards must be to issue a licence or rating to a pilot under training. A little of the topic however it’s relevant to the last couple of posts. |
Originally Posted by Hoosten
(Post 10701044)
Pictures of the aviators killed in this incident are starting to hit the various forms of media. There's a gofundme to get Ido's body home, no doubt to get the Asian students body home as well.
Those of you talking about cost, I've no doubt you won't contribute, after all, nobody wants to pay, who's gunna pay? Take a good look at the photo's of these people, have a think about their families, their partners and children. What's that about cost again? All for the cost of E to 1200, the cost of an airspace promulgation, some maps, in line with an update, and maybe an extra ATC or two? Sorry guys, Jason gave a bunch of ATC's redundancy in the midst of a staffing crisis. World's Second Best ATC: Disclaimer, this statement does not attach any discredit to any serving current or former line controlling ATC. It is a remark placed squarely at the feet of your sub standard management. For an editorial on your comment, no operational ATC staff were able to get a redundancy in that last round, it was all back room staff. The biggest issue as far as staffing goes comes from the lead in time to train an ATC up to operational level, and at the moment I don't believe we are able to hire anyone from overseas to help. |
Originally Posted by George Glass
(Post 10701155)
OCTA Aus , I’m sure you’d like this thread closed.
But you never really addressed the issue did you ? Are non-controlled CTAFs safe or fail dangerous ? What is your confidence that the probability of a major disaster involving an RPT jet are remote ? My confidence that a disaster with an RPT jet being remote is not as good as I wish it was. Statistically Australia has had a pretty lucky run but at some point the numbers are going to catch us. Do I think the cause is going to be an RPT jet hitting a light aircraft at an uncontrolled aerodrome? No, I think the airlines are more than capable of finding some other way of doing it with all their cost cutting. |
use of two comms |
”a pretty lucky run ”
Is that it ? A defence of the system ? Good grief. And no , its not the airlines fault. The operator I work for spends simulator time mitigating the risk. Good grief. |
George, you're pretty vocal on this, particularly as someone who actually (if I read this thread right) operated in a High Cap cockpit in this environment.
What is your solution? |
THAT is the issue. Airy Fairy USA CTAF "dimensions" that are too close in, requiring the use of two radios simultaneously. Triadic, IMO that was/is always a very unwise idea and doesn't happen in my cockpit. We had it right before. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 22:00. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.