I tried to input my views to this CASA survey but I did not like the limited answers available to agree to.
I wanted to say that in SE Australia on a summers day there could be 200 gliders airborne, VFR, probably monitoring/using 122.7, although many could monitor two frequencies at the one time. Gliders don’t particularly want to be below 2,000’ but it happens. And I suspect that general glider discussion would effectively jam any mandated frequency viz., 126.7. But I could not tick such a box, or even add the above comment to the box seeking comment, it would not accept typing. Oh! On these summer days there may be half a dozen IFR flights [even movements] to G airfields, so hopefully they will go low to avoid gliders. So that was to be among my comments. Alan Wilson Canberra PPL but would prefer to be gliding. Sent from Pavillion From: Aus-soaring [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Borgelt Sent: Tuesday, 4 April 2017 9:36 AM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Reminder: CASA : input on radio frequency in Class G airspace Our NAS was introduced in 2003 and lasted for one year before being replaced by our current hybrid abortion. I'm still not sure who got paid and who got and gave the bribes, political favours etc. It was disgraceful. Some people couldn't get their minds around the being NO AREA FREQUENCY for VFR in G. The US may have extensive radar coverage but most of it is SSR which requires transponders but below 10,000 feet in E you don't need a transponder unless within 30nm of major airports so you are invisible to most radar and also airliner TCAS. In Australia you need a transponder in E with some exceptions so in both G (with transponder) and E airliner TCAS can see you. If you want lots of E under current rules in Oz with ADSB you'll need ADSB out fitted (still expensive). A solution searching for a problem. Dick Smith was of the opinion that traffic densities in Australia were mostly so low that SSR, Mode C and TCAS were perfectly adequate. Unfortunately aviation authorities in Australia (including GFA and RAAus) never saw a way of making aviation more expensive and difficult, that they didn't like. Mike At 09:34 AM 3/04/2017, Mark Newton wrote: It’s not quite the same, though. Over almost all of the United States, class G airspace has a 1200' AGL ceiling (700’ AGL near some untowered airports). The bit between 1200’ AGL and 18,000’ AMSL is class E. When the new NAS was introduced in 2005-2007, the regional airlines cohort fought against that outcome in Australia, on the grounds that they didn’t want their IFR Saab turboprops mixing it up with VFR in places where radar coverage was low-to-nonexistent. In my observation, most VFR pilots treat class E as equivalent to class G anyway, so I think it was a bit of a pyrrhic victory by the airlines: They still have VFR traffic in their class-E approach lanes to major regional airports. Hooray for victory. In the USA, it’s completely mundane for transponder-equipped aircraft to call up center and get a squawk code and flight following after takeoff, which gets them identified and enables ATC to deconflict them from IFR traffic in class E. That’s never worked properly in Australia because our ATC surveillance radar coverage has been awful, almost entirely focussed on capital cities. Now that virtually all of Australia has ADS-B coverage (literally all of it, once the satellites are airborne), maybe it’s time to start revisiting that, and replacing large chunks of class G with class E, and more strongly encouraging the use of flight following services. Seems to work okay in North America, yes? - mark On 3 Apr 2017, at 3:17 AM, Jim Staniforth <[email protected] > wrote: CASA claimed they would copy the FAA airspace system. Below is the text from the only page in the FAA Aeronautical Information Manual on Class G Airspace. The key words are "see and avoid". The link is to the current FAA AIM, a good reference. My copy/paste is page 159 of the pdf. Jim https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/media/aim.pdf AIM 12/10/15 Class G Airspace Section 3. Class G Airspace 1. General Class G airspace (uncontrolled) is that portion of airspace that has not been designated as Class A, Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E airspace. 2. VFR Requirements Rules governing VFR flight have been adopted to assist the pilot in meeting the responsibility to see and avoid other aircraft. Minimum flight visibility and distance from clouds required for VFR flight are contained in 14 CFR Section 91.155. (See TBL 3-3-1) 3. IFR Requirements a. Title 14 CFR specifies the pilot and aircraft equipment requirements for IFR flight. Pilots are reminded that in addition to altitude or flight level requirements, 14 CFR Section 91.177 includes a requirement to remain at least 1,000 feet (2,000 feet in designated mountainous terrain) above the highest obstacle within a horizontal distance of 4 nautical miles from the course to be flown. b. IFR Altitudes. (See TBL 3-3-1) TBL 3-3-1 IFR Altitudes Class G Airspace If your magnetic course (ground track) is: And you are below 18,000 feet MSL, fly: 0 to 179 Odd thousands MSL, (3,000; 5,000; 7,000, etc.) 180 to 359 Even thousands MSL, (2,000; 4,000; 6,000, etc.) Class G Airspace 3-3-1 _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring
_______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring
