Are there really any aircraft flying IFR today that don't have 2 radios? Even if it wasn't E to 8500' and you had only 1 radio you're back in the same position you would be today - only able to swap to the CTAF 'late' to arrange separation.

Spurious at best....

Regards
Richard

No other airspace system in the world I know of is designed where two radios on different frequencies at the same time must be used to ensure safety.

Before I introduced the AMATS changes only one radio at a time was required.

This “two radio” farce could have contributed to the cause of the Mangalore 4 fatalities.

Dick, I might be mis-reading your post but you seem to be accepting that the crash at Mangalore was directly related to change you made, is this correct?

I won’t know until the ATSB report comes out. Before the changes there were no CTAFs so aircraft remained on the FS area frequency.

I would have never believed at the time that thirty years later only half the changes would be completed.

If the 1992 AMATS changes had been completed the two aircraft would have been separated by ATC.

Less chance of a mid air I would think!

The proposed December 2 intro date is now not achievable - wonder why ASA are silent on this??

Surely you cannot be serious??

IFR under ATC control until 700ft AGL and at the same time talking to VFRs on the CTAF. Classic Class E!!!!

And so it should. Any blind Freddy in the 21st century knows that mixing IFR and VFR with no protection is madness. Why are some still living in the dark ages of follow-me vehicles and friendly FBOs.

I suppose you're still towing the line of VFR not on the radio, with no transponder, swanning around in terminal jet airspace, Leddie?

Where's that head-banging emoji...

And stop calling me 'Shirley'..........

xx

Where does the IFR approach begin? 15 miles out?

So at some point > 15 miles ATC clear you for the approach. You don't need to talk to them again until you are in the missed approach or landed. You have 15 miles to talk to the CTAF traffic without worrying about ATC.

Bloggs. Why are you and Qantas operating into airports now without a transponder mandate if it is “madness” ?

Wow, I dream of those days with very pleasant memories. Controlled, Uncontrolled, FSU's, face to face briefings, good days.

Bloggsie,
Attempted putdown --- fail!! You know. as well as I do, that I have never advocated any such thing --- based, of course, on standard definitions of such things as "terminal airspace", let alone something called "terminal jet airspace"???

As you well know, for as long as I have known you and your mates, I have advocated the US/FAA system because it works, and works well and efficiently at far higher traffic densities than ever encountered in Australia, and unlikely to be here encountered in your or my lifetime.

And just to remind the general readership, ICAO airspace classification is, in reality, the long established US system , published in a suitably UN bureaucratic form, as agreed to by ALL UN member states.

Finally, before "E" in the US, what is now E was ALWAYS controlled airspace, with the addendum " VFR Exempt" --- there is a clue there.

And, don't forget, Qantas and other VH IFR aircraft have long happily operated in Class E in US airspace, and other parts of the world where E is used, without the crews shaking in their boots.

Tootle pip!!

Examples of where Qantas operated in overseas Class E to 700ft/1200ft/1500ft/5500ft into a CTAF please.

Qantas passengers flying on to Steamboat Springs and similar US non tower airports will fly in the low level non radar terminal E airspace.

Clearly Qantas would warn their passengers if they believed there was any measurable risk

No Dick, I want Ledslead to tell us what QF aircraft fly into low level class E then a CTAF in the USA, just like you are trying to make us do.

Surely you can’t be so ill informed

No Qantas aircraft flies in low level class E in the USA as they only fly into Class B airports

Lead did not say or suggest that Qantas flies in low level E in the USA.

But amazingly Qantas flies in lots of low level G in Australia.When in IMC no separation standard applies!

How about you let leddie speak for himself, Dick.

Yes, it is amazing, isn't it. If you don't want it to fly in G, you tell us how much it's going to cost to provide a half-efficient ATC approach service in the bush in E. Actually, don't worry. I've asked you a hundred times but you refuse to answer.

And it's F we fly in, not G.

You have clearly ignored the statement by our longest serving aviation minister John Anderson

“ Safety is something that has the highest priority- it is not a question of cost”

I hardly think John Anderson has any credibility on the topic of airspace when he came out with that nonsense about Class C requiring a radar. A ministerial direction, no less! :eek: Sake chum, is there any hope for us all...