|
Peter,
Just a few notes on my observations on the LAMP
proposals
+ It is not like the old AFIZ's at all, just a very
big CTAF which is being tested in the NT at the moment, eg 3 CTAF cover
about half the NT.
+CTAF and MBZ still exist, only the frequency is
the same as the DAF.
+ATZ will only be created where there is to many
aerodromes within a small area with only VFR traffic, they will be as few as
possible, the basic concept is to have all aircraft on the same
frequency.
I think the worst case scenario for us would be if
Caboolture was made an ATZ, however I think it is unlikely.
+Mandatory calls within CTAF and MBZ remain the
same as they are now.
+Another big issue for the gliding movement is the
proposal that all VFR aircraft flying in the DAF above 5000FT would
broadcast their position every half hour, GFA have already lodged a protest with
Airservices, I am hopeful that we will get exemption as we have in previous
years when similar ideas were floated. Airservices have already given us
exemption to not carry a transponder when flying in Class E
airspace.
In summary the main issue is the mandatory
reporting, if Caboolture was a ATZ it would not be the end of the world, just a
minor inconvenience, the head of the project told me that the only place where
they were considered was an area just south of Melbourne with about 6
aerodromes mainly with ultralight operations within a 30nm radius.
Jeremy Thompson
----- Original Message -----
|
- [aus-soaring] Airspace changes Peter Stephenson
- RE: [aus-soaring] Airspace changes Stuart & Kerri Ferguson
- Re: [aus-soaring] Airspace changes Peter Stephenson
- Re: [aus-soaring] Airspace changes thompson
- Re: [aus-soaring] Airspace changes Peter Stephenson
- Re: [aus-soaring] Airspace changes Derek Ruddock
