You can add a .doc file as I did.
PeterS
On 4/04/2017 12:15 PM, Alan Wilson wrote:
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]
<mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[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
