Despite the obvious enthusiasm for the new radio calls, the simple fact is that the blanket imposition of this policy on all gliding operations is an overkill and a classic case of a solution looking for a problem.

I have no particular quarrel with CASA moving to change (again) the procedures for its powered aircraft clients for whom it is empowered and obligated to make as many rules and regulations as it can dream up.  That these may sometimes have to be revoked in cases where they don't turn out as expected is of no consequence, it keeps people in work.     

However it was precisely to keep gliding free from this kind of over regulation that the Gliding Federation was brought into being.  And I suppose for the past 50 or so years it has done a pretty good job.   But it was inevitable that eventually a group of people would come into power who would fail to keep the vision, and would in time come to embrace the idea that instead of operating by common sense and simplified procedures it would be better to regulate everything and write rules for every possible phase of a glider's operation.  With the enthusiastic adoption of these new rules - at least in the eyes of some contributors to this discussion - that time has come.      

Whilst there would appear to be little alternative for those gliding operations who share their airfield and airspace with operation of power aircraft and other variations on the aviation theme, there is no plausible defence for the inclusion of all gliding operations – especially those who operate only as a gliding only operation without the noisy aircraft – in the requirement to go CTAF.

The fact is that in forty years of gliding, I cannot recall one single collision between any two gliders in the landing part of the circuit area.  Nor can I recall a collision between a glider and a powered aircraft in the landing area of the circuit.  It's worth noting that this observation includes my attendance – sometimes in an operational capacity – at championships at state, national and world level.  Sometimes these operations have had up to 10 gliders crossing the finishing line in a given minute.  Astonishingly they all landed safely with bumping into each other, and usually with minimal radio consultation. 

Of course there have been collisions elsewhere between gliders including occasional tragic meeting with powered aircraft in past and recent history.  But these were almost invariably in other phases of the flight.   What I am saying is that despite the almost total lack of radio announcements about position and intention in the landing part of the circuit at gliding operations throughout Australia the safety record has been virtually unblemished.  It's pretty hard to improve on that record.  What are we trying fix here?

By contrast there have been collisions between powered aircraft who were using radio procedures as their prime vehicle for maintaining (imagined) separation and avoiding the worst.  Amongst the most tragic of these –from every aspect – was one where one aircraft descended onto another one at the time both were on finals to the same runway at Parafield.   Radio calls are not in themselves the complete answer to collision avoidance, and reliance on radio alone can catch you out.

Anyway – the rule is here – we must obey on penalty of consequences too gruesome to dwell upon.    OK we'll make the calls – all the way around the circuit, prior to launch, probably upon release (not prescribed, but you can't be too careful can you), joining circuit, turning base, turning final – the whole lot -  along with every other aircraft in the circuit area of every Aerodrome in radio range.

You see making the calls is easy.  I enjoy using radio – it is one of my hobbies after all.   But making the calls is only half of the equation.  The other problem which a few have alluded to is that we all have to listen to them to, and process (filter) them out to ascertain which ones are of immediate interest.  

Why in the name of all that reasonable could not gliding operations from Aerodromes from which only gliders operate remain on their current gliding frequency (most typically 122.7Mhz or 122.5MHz) and make these lifesaving broadcasts there?  There already exists the protocol and common knowledge about which sites are using these gliding frequencies.  You don't believe me?  In my listening on the various aviation frequencies in this area, I often hear the controller advise aircraft who are intending to transit airspace allocated to the gliding operations at Gawler to call “Gawler” on 122.5Mhz    I've also lost count of the number of times that I've heard training aircraft using my home field at Balaklava for a bit of circuit practice make their calls (inbound, joining circuit, base, final – the complete catalogue) on 122.7MHz.  The system is established and it works.  Why are we changing?

And so gentle reader, I look forward in the future to listening to calls on CTAF from not only other gliders in my own club, but from Stonefield, ASC (assuming they come over from 122.5 to join the party) and then the powered fraternity groping their way around Kadina, Maitland, Farell Flat, probably Minlaton and Port Pirie too.  Great stuff.   How much of this information is relevant to me as I concentrate on my first weak little thermal at 800 feet in the Whitwarta circuit with a fly crawling around under my glasses?   You know the answer.   Too much irrelevant information has caused pilots to take their mind off the job in the past.    Can it happen again?   We'll find out won't we.

One of things which characterized gliding operations and administration in the past under the GFA regime was that (usually) every procedure and policy was dictated by common sense and necessitated by a clearly defined benefit in terms of operational safety.  There was usually a due process of consultancy and discussion to make sure that anything new would meet both this criteria and pass the wider scrutiny of the Club – State Association – GFA communication linkage.     There have been some notable failures in this policy; the system was not perfect.  The ultimate safeguard where something too preposterous was proposed or legislated, was for individual members (or clubs in some cases) fell back on the “get stuffed” option.  This has  happened too on occasions.   I suggest that it has served us well.

Not that I used the past tense. All the indications are that GFA is losing interest in keeping control of it's own operational regime (and a few other things too).  Accordingly we will find ourselves increasingly being asked to do things which haven't been thought through, and our blanket inclusion in this new radio requirement is one of them.

It will be interesting to see just how many of us will go the whole hog and broadcast generously as required because we know that if we do that no-one is going to run into us, and just how many will go back to the “get stuffed” alternative and continue to operate on 122.x as in the past.   Not to many I expect.   Our compliance as meek little sheep - obeying without question or reason - will be complete.   

Of course it opens a whole new discussion as to whether we now need or will ever use the former “gliding” frequencies, and whether previous gliding chatter (useful or not) will be on the CTAF, but for the moment the technicalities of CDMA take understandable precedence.

The founding fathers would be disappointed at the way things have turned out.  But then they would recall that one of them once said that “In time we come to resemble that which we oppose …”   It's happened.

Looking forward to hearing you all on 126.7 MHz as I almost certainly will …

Terry    

 

  

_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Reply via email to