Controlled Airspace

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Jake, a bit of judicious googling will give you the answers you seek now, not tomorrow...... talking to people is so yesterday...

 

try this http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/rules/miscinst/2009/casaex96.pdf it contains all that you want and doesn't allow someones memory to screw it up in the retelling

 

Andy

 

 

[Guest Jake.f]

.

 

 

[coljones]

OK Col - you're being very picky - and fair enough - its so hard having an 'animated ' interactive discussion in a forum!

hi Doc, we have CTAs and CTAs. The first pass position that I am considering is a review of CTAs where they impact on RA activities. I don't presume that there should be an auto right of RA (with endos) into otherwise occupied CTAs but it would appear arguable that the time of operation of CTAs and lanes of entry across CTAs should be reviewed.

 

This review could, perhaps, be conducted in the same way as the 3 tier Restricted space access where some are operated on a "plan it but maybe not", "well yes but not just now basis" and some are operated on a "don't even think about it".

 

From this thread it appears that there are busy aerodromes and not so busy aerodromes, some have towers and some don't and the logic of resource and CTA allocation and operation isn't clear or, prima facie, logical. This is a conversation we need to have with CASA and Airservices and the Minister and the best solution may be a midway point that doesn't provide free (with endo) access to CTAs but some rationalisation of CTA operations and provision of "lanes of entry" away from active heavy and highspeed routes. I want absolute safety when I fly (or travel by greyhound) but I think "them" should justify some of their decisions about CTAs

 

I want to fly up and down the McDonnell ranges out of Alice Springs and so I am doing the PPL stuff to do that. Last time I was in Alice there was a 20kt Xwind at Bonds Springs (RaA) - sigh!!

 

Cheers

 

Col

 

 

[turboplanner]

Jake, a bit of judicious googling will give you the answers you seek now, not tomorrow...... talking to people is so yesterday...

.......and it could also be construed as idle chat....

 

 

[winsor68]

From this thread it appears that there are busy aerodromes and not so busy aerodromes, some have towers and some don't and the logic of resource and CTA allocation and operation isn't clear or, prima facie, logical. This is a conversation we need to have with CASA and Airservices and the Minister and the best solution may be a midway point that doesn't provide free (with endo) access to CTAs but some rationalisation of CTA operations and provision of "lanes of entry" away from active heavy and highspeed routes. I want absolute safety when I fly (or travel by greyhound) but I think "them" should justify some of their decisions about CTAs.

Col

I am with Col on this one... I guess we need another poll asking "Do you think Ra-Aus should an Endorsement and access" or something...

 

I don't want or need access but its my opinion that" they" need to clean up the mess and allow us to fly around their RPT ops safely... it ain't happening as effectively as it could right now.

 

 

[djpacro]

So, is anyone developing a case for their specific location(s) and talking to their friendly RAPAC representative to get it on the agenda?

 

 

[shags_j]

The biggest problem Darky that I see is that a lot of us need to drive an hour to get to an airfield that isn't CTA.

 

 

[frank marriott]

If you want to use CTA be prepared to pay for it. I know many here already do but for those who are not aware of some of the costs - I currently pay:

 

$250.00 per year medical Class 1 [i am not sure of price for aClass 2,and it is every 2 years so a bit cheaper]

 

$200.00 per year for amendment package and this is East Coast only

 

$75.00 per year ASIC ($150 each 2 years and is is cheaper through RAA then CASA)

 

$50.00 ($100.00 every 2 years for the RAD 43 on instruments)

 

There is $575.00 and I haven't gone flying - Rember a CASA approved BFR.

 

I am not winging as I use CTA and pay the price but for those without experience in the GA costs it is worth considering "are you willing to pay around $500 per year for the privilege?"

 

Worth considering, in my opinion, as I cannot see CASA lowering standards should they grant an endorsement to the RAA licence.

 

Frank M

 

PS I drive 30 minutes to a non CTA airfield for fun flying also - useing CTA is achievalbe but not the same as unrestriced fun flying OCTA

 

 

[ahlocks]

.......and it could also be construed as idle chat....

What???.... I can't hear you over the rotoraxe screaming it's tits 'nice smile' off.

 

 

[coljones]

I wouldn't mind betting that the CTAs are being provisioned on the basis of an 8hr 21min full time day on the basis that if you NEED a CTA for only an hour a day but you still have to pay all the staff so you may as well keep it going for the whole shift.

 

While I respect the rights of RA pilots to CTA privileges I think we do need to question the scoping of the various CTAs and possibilities for varying their application to the benefit of all pilots, including those GA pilots locked out because they did all their training outside the CTAs and thus don't have the right endos either.

 

cheers

 

Col

 

 

[Mazda]

Blackrod, you say transponders should be required in Class D, can you tell me in which countries this is a requirement? Maybe somewhere busy like the USA? No, sorry, transponders are note required in D in the USA, what is the point when it is non radar airpace? They don't require transponders in E either, and their mid air collision stats are better than ours.

 

Be careful what you wish for. Transponders are expensive, and what will happen if we all need to upgrade to mode S?

 

 

[DarkSarcasm]

The biggest problem Darky that I see is that a lot of us need to drive an hour to get to an airfield that isn't CTA.

If you want cheap RA flying, that's just something you have to deal with. As I said before, you can't have the best of both worlds, you make sacrifices for the cheap fun RA flying.

 

I drive 40 mins to my field and would drive an hour if I needed to. The distance doesn't outweigh the joy I get from flying.

 

 

[Spin]

It would be interesting to see a real risk assessment done on RAA CTA access. Much of what I'm seeing as argument against, is short on facts and big on subjective statements.While I'm not pushing for it myself, I can understand the reasons put forward by some who have indicated a desire. None of those reasons included a need to carry more passengers or to engage in air-work, so I don't see any desire for competition with "the big end of the sky".

 

Nobody advocating for CTA access is suggesting it be compulsory for all RAA pilots. Indeed, that would be rather pointless if their aircraft were non-compliant or they had an aversion to the idea.

 

We've been around the loop before about general increases in costs... Costs associated with a CTA Endorsement, including a periodic medical and aircraft compliance can easily be applied only to those applying for the Endorsement. Indeed, as Motz pointed out, there are likely to be only a few FTFs able to offer the endorsement, so anyone wishing to gain it would likely also have the added cost of travel to a qualified FTF. I don't see any evidence of a big rush for the majority of RAA Pilots to apply for a CTA endorsement, should it eventually become available.

 

While most endorsements are permanent awards, CTA could be set up as having a two year expiry with a requirement for a satisfactory skill review as part of the BFR. As an example of special conditions for a specific endorsement, I'm currently training toward a Formation Endorsement. That is only being offered on the basis of an annual formation flying review plus a specified annual minimum number of flights in at least four-ship formations. An unsatisfactory review or failure to demonstrate the minimum annual participation will result in the endorsement being withdrawn. I think that is quite reasonable, given the inherent risks specific to formation flying. (These are not the only conditions, but provide an example of endorsement conditions that are specific to that endorsement... it is possible).

:thumb_up: Well said david10, unfortunately as so often happens here, the reasonable middle ground tends to get drowned out by the proverbial empty vessels who read the post or two immeditaely before their own and promptly air their prejudices. Having just embarked on the exercise of regaining my long dormant PPL, I'll add only the observation that having a PPL doesn't somehow magically confer superior skill on the holder. I have heard several pilots - who are apparently have PPL's and are studying toward CPL's, who were none too crash hot procedurally either. Same applies to Joe Blow from out west on his bi-annual visit to the big smoke.

 

I'm not even sure that I'd bother about the endorsement if it were available, although being able to transit Gold Coast airspace would certainly be safer than having to detour west over the bush and up against the mountains - only reason for the extra hassle of the PPL is needing more than 2 seats at this stage.

 

 

[dazza 38]

For those complaining about driving an hour.. I drove just under 2 hours (each way) to an airfield yesterday, its bearable, in fact its kind of relaxing to just have some quiet in the day, I cant see why some of you would be whinging, its not like a 3 day trek for a one hour drive. If you want a closer airport, There would be plenty of support on these forums for you to open one... or theres the other option of changing your lifestyle and moving next to one. Driving 2+ hours isnt even bad, if you are going to whinge about 1 hour, then maybe you should take a good hard look and think about how some people may be way worse off. CTA endorsement for Raaus is not the answer, You already can get a PPL with the opportunity, or the two options listed above (move or build).I dont think some of you realise what the CTA endorsement involves, its higher costs, medical standard would be the same as CASA, more regulation, more restrictions on aircraft, all to the extent where PPL would become the cheaper option of the two for controlled airspace flying. RAAus is NOT about controlled airspace, its fun and affordable ONLY. You cant have everything how you like it so it's far simpler to either get over it, or get a PPL. If you cant pass a Class 2 medical as it is, what makes you think you will be able to in RAAus.

 

Others have already covered most of this repeatedly.

Im with you Buddy, I drive a Hour 20 to Boonah, have for years.Cooly is just 30 minutes down the road.I fly part time for fun.I would rather drive to Boonah than pay the extra and fly at Cooly.

 

 

[DarkSarcasm]

To those who want to ask CASA for a CTA endo, all I can say is be careful how far you push them. As I understand it, RA operates because CASA have granted them exemptions. They can just as easily take those exemptions away if you push them too far.

 

RA does NOT need CTA. VFR lanes perhaps, I can see the logic behind those, but not full CTA. The purpose of RA is cheap fun flying. I honestly don't understand how you can even remotely think you have a chance of getting a CTA endo for RA - it hardly fits in with what RA was designed for. Either continue flying RA, with the sacrifices that involves, or go to GA. It's not difficult.

 

 

[coljones]

OK, let's try this again. Which CTAs and their hours are justified and on what basis?

 

Col

 

 

[Mazda]

Blackrod the issue is mandating. I would certainly encourage transponder carriage in all airspace but I'm not keen to mandate it when it is not ICAO or used in other countries because it makes us less competitive in a world market. People love flying in the US because it is cheaper and has more commonsense rules, but so many here want more and more rules and that means expense!

 

 

[Tomo]

The problem as I see it is:

 

 

 

1# - We have fast, high tech RAA registered aircraft that are fully capable of CTA operations - some even being kitted out with more equipment than your average GA aircraft. (In which case if you're flying out of a D aerodrome you 'don't' need a x-ponder, though it's desirable. But for military airspace - aka class C you need one.)

 

 

 

2# - We have the 'real' ultralight aircraft, LP, open cockpit, bug smashers, etc etc... that you just wouldn't really want to fly in CTA with, let alone try and fit transponders to for C transit.

 

 

 

CTA flying isn't hard. Just look at it like you're at your mates place, and you ask him permission to use something before you use it. It's the same here, you ask before you do something, and then do what you're directed to do. Understanding the protocol is important obviously. Hence the training. Personally I wanted CTA so I could transit military restricted areas which I live next too. The requirements for that are different to flying in/out of a D aerodrome, so what do you want CTA privileges for, for you? I'm not against CTA for RAA, but I really don't want to see other things lost because of it being pushed hard. I got my PPL and unrestricted CTA/CTR access so I could play in it.

 

 

 

I like the VFR lane thing.

 

 

 

[Guest Jake.f]

.

 

 

[Mazda]

Tomo, who in class D is going to see your transponder return?

 

 

[Tomo]

Tomo, who in class D is going to see your transponder return?

The ones with TCAS I suppose

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

I have to say that the Coffs CTA is more than justified, maybe with a little more limited hours. The types of traffic we have are?- RPT: about 8 movements a day QantasLink and 4 Virgin

- Training: 2 RAA aircraft as well as about 6 warriors around on most days

 

- Probably about 15 privately owned aircraft, a proportion of which could be out on any given day, one warrior runs scenics occasionally

 

- Helicopter ops on most good weather days

 

- Air Ambulance comes in at least every 2 days, sometimes more and usually takes right of way, they often will land with a 10kt tailwind for time purposes which disrupts the pattern a bit

 

- Privately owned single engines and twins coming in to refuel (Such as the shiny looking new Cirrus I saw on Friday)

 

- And on rare occasion a C-17 or C-130 will come and do a touch and go or practice some short field landings and takeoffs, on super rare occasion a fighter jet will come and do a touch and go or a low pass

 

It would be pretty intimidating if Coffs was only a CTAF at all hours!

And then there's Narromine or Temora for the RAA flyin, the aircraft are smaller but you need to add at least 1 possibly 2 zeros to each of the counts. Sure, they arent as fast as some of those things youve mentioned but at the end of the day the rule is dont hit anything, not just big things.

 

My experience (I flew GA out of Parafield for some time many years ago, it was also busy) is that anyone who can fly in to one of the RAA flyins isn't going to be overly stressed by Coffs levels of Traffic (BTW, the 1st and last QL flights of the day are done in Class G, due Tower being dark and unmanned). We have a Unicom at those flyins which doesnt have the same authority as a Class D tower, but all the same we do tend to follow instructions because, like the mnore controled areas they are for the collective good.

 

That said I still dont want or need CTA access

 

Andy

 

 

[Guest Howard Hughes]

I see no probem with access to class D for RAA. What is the difference between being at Coffs, or Tamworth, than being at Port Macquarie, Ballina, or even Taree? They all have multiple Jet/Turboprop movements each day.

 

As others have said outside (ever diminishing) tower hours you are free to come and go as you please anyway! To me this is an anomoly in the system!

 

 

[winsor68]

.As others have said outside (ever diminishing) tower hours you are free to come and go as you please anyway! To me this is an anomoly in the system!

The RPT don't stop just because the tower is shut... so what I don't get is this...

 

Wouldn't the tower overseeing things make it safer? So how can the argument be that flying in controlled airspace under tower control (what they are there for) is somehow more unsafe when its open for Ra-Aus who can do the same thing when its closed?

 

 

[Gibbo]

"There are heaps of inconsistencies like this. Coffs is Towered Class D, Ballina/Byron Gateway to the north and Port Macquarie to the South all take Airbus/Embraier/QL Dash 8's in about the same qty's per day and are without Tower in Class G. Tamworth on the otherhand from an RPT perspective has a smaller amount of traffic and only QL Dash 8's from memory but is towered as Coffs..."

 

Andy

 

P.S not to say that Tamworth traffic in total is less, the Company I work for, BAE Systems has a facility at Tamworth and has around 20 CT4's that fly 4-5 times a day with RAAF and singapore Airforce Ab initio training sorties, so in terms of raw moevements its not exactly a backwater...

 

I for one would not have anything to do with Tamworth. F18's etc have a interesting approach speed and a departure pattern called vertical and inverted. :)