Katoomba Airport Battle Lost :-(

[Flightrite]

With so much corruption in this third world nation it’s any wonder few bother taking on the criminals in charge, the Govt and their stooges know that GA is a minority group, easy pickings!

Edited November 2, 2021 by Flightrite

[aro]

3 hours ago, turboplanner said:

It's interesting that each time I've taken the time to search US regulations for "things they are allowed to do in the land of the free" the search has shown it no longer applies and their current requirements are the same as ours.

Which "things" have you searched for? I am not aware of changes in the US regulations, but Australian regulations seem to be going backwards e.g. maintenance on Experimental aircraft.

[turboplanner]

Just now, aro said:

Which "things" have you searched for? I am not aware of changes in the US regulations, but Australian regulations seem to be going backwards e.g. maintenance on Experimental aircraft.

Probably a dozen different things over the past decade brought up on this site, where I posted the current/new US regulation.

Most of them were significant changes made to comply with ICAO standards, for which Australia had made the ICAO changes the people were bitching about.

 

[aro]

Can you be specific? You quoted

 

an EO to put a GoPro on a wing strut, whereas in the US it's a '337 

Canada has 'owner-maintenance' for a range of basic GA certified aircraft right up to 172 variants

Consider that you can go straight over the top of LAX, JFK or SFO in Class E in the US

 

were you referring to any of those? Or anything specific in the post you quoted?

[KRviator]

5 hours ago, turboplanner said:

You can bitch about a Go Pro mount needing to be engineered, but in BMX I went through a dozen or so where the camera found its own way down top the ground.

IT's not just a GoPro - that was but one example. The FAA has their NORSEE policy that allows you to install items such as a G5 or Dynon D100 without an STC so long as they weren't, or didn't replace, the primary instruments or equipment. Of course, the G5/D10/G3X/SkyView are all STC'd and you can install them in hundreds of GA aircraft - but previously you could only do that in FAA-Land. In Australia you might be able to fit it after spending thousands of dollars on an EO with a CAR21M Engineer.

 

Quote

 

It's interesting that each time I've taken the time to search US regulations for "things they are allowed to do in the land of the free" the search has shown it no longer applies and their current requirements are the same as ours. Not saying there aren't exceptions, but the grass always looks greener over the fence.

Things they are allowed to do (still):
VFR in E - straight over the top of a major international airport, no clearance required. Try that in Sydney, Melbourne or Brisbane - you can't. The Class C goes to FL180 then it's Class A. Hell you can't go over the top of a Class D tower at Tamworth or Coffs here as it's overlaid by C...
They have MOA's, which for all intents and purposes would replace, most of,  our R areas - except you can fly in them without a clearance, though at your own risk.
Low Flying - IIRC, so long as its' not over a built up area (ie sparse, unpopulated, etc) they can go as low as they want. Whether that is smart is another story, but AIUI, it is legal.

Minor Modifications - Get your A&P to file a Form 337 and you're good to go. In Oz it's an EO, thousands of dollars and you still might not get it through.

No NVFR Rating in the US - it's incorporated into your PPL
In Canada - They have the Owner Maintenance Certification - if you have a "basic" FW aircraft, you can apply to maintain it yourself. This includes aircraft upto and including the Grumman Tiger & 172A-H models as a size example.
 

[turboplanner]

29 minutes ago, KRviator said:

Things they are allowed to do (still):
VFR in E - straight over the top of a major international airport, no clearance required. Try that in Sydney, Melbourne or Brisbane - you can't.
 

USA - FAR Part 103

Section 103.15 "No person may operate an Ultralight vehicle over any congested area of a city, twon or settlement or over any open air assembly of persons.

[jackc]

5 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

USA - FAR Part 103

Section 103.15 "No person may operate an Ultralight vehicle over any congested area of a city, twon or settlement or over any open air assembly of persons.

That is for the no licence, no rego flyers…….

[turboplanner]

1 minute ago, jackc said:

That is for the no licence, no rego flyers…….

Ultralights/Recreational Aircraft

[jackc]

35 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

Ultralights/Recreational Aircraft

Looks like LSA and Sport Pilots don’t have restrictions flying over buildings, people etc.  Unless I have missed something?

 

https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aviation-interests/~/media/371132a085ce4204ba93c2b4a6ee0902.ashx

[aro]

28 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

Ultralights/Recreational Aircraft

FAR part 103 is totally different to anything we have here. It is for single occupant, <254 pounds empty, <5 gal fuel capacity, 55 knots max speed and 24 knots stall speed. As I understand it, no license or training is required.

 

It is probably closest to the pre-AUF ultralights in Australia. Not really what anyone is talking about.

[F10]

Local “government” seems more of a problem from recent experience. Town councils or Shires seem to always have some officious obstructionist on the council who has some chip about aviation. I’ve heard lots of complaints about obstructionist councils, although I’m hearing only one side. But for example, very few councils seem to want to listen to, or ask for advice or suggestions from their town airfield users. We’ve had a very smart security fence put around our “terminal building” (more of a shack really). Walk two yards past the dance on the access road, and you can climb through a three strand barbed wire fence, no code required. Not complaining about the fence….but it certainly wasn’t a big priority…surely a cement hardstand at the nice new re-fueling bowser be a higher priority? Or instead of a promise to tar the car park, how about the dispersal area, cars have a nice grass lawn. Organising new hangar plots, instead of first waiting for interest to be shown? 

[turboplanner]

21 hours ago, KRviator said:

@turboplannerAnd let's not mention the rest of the airspace abomination that is Australia. Consider that you can go straight over the top of LAX, JFK or SFO in Class E in the US yet here you're stuck low level over tiger country or coastal because you can't get a decent clearance though an unoccupied Class D! 

This is a Recreational Aviation site.

 

FAR Part 103 Pilot and Aircraft

We’ve established that FAR Part 103 aircraft can’t fly over LAX.

 

US SP/LSA Pilot and Aircraft

Can fly in Class E & G Airspace

Can Fly in Classes B, C, D with appropriate training

Prohibited from Class A

 

International Airports (e.g. LAX) use Class B which goes up to Class E, Class E goes up from there to Class A

 

LAX Class B includes VFR “transition routes”

One of these, the Mini Route goes directly above the numbers of both LAX runways.

You can fly through these transition routes.

 

AUS RA Pilot and Aircraft

Can fly in Controlled Airspace subject to training and aircraft equipment.

 

International Airports use Class C which goes all the way up to Class A

 

In Australia, we have Light Aircraft Lanes within Controlled Airspace

You can transit these lanes through Class B (e.g. Melbourne Airport)

 

These lanes are designed to get you through congested airports without having to obtain an Airways clearance. e.g. If flying from Moorabbin Airport to Ballarat you transit via the LAL with just a general call to alert other VFR flights you have entered the LAL.

 

The intention is that you use the Transition Routes in the US, LAL in Australia to speed up your trip because these are not controlled airspace. So, in Australia you don’t have to make a prior call requesting Airways Clearance, and you won’t be subject to 15 to 30 minute delays.

 

That’s a very brief outline for recreational pilots who qualify for controlled airspace.

 

 

GA Pilot and Aircraft

I’m not going to cover GA/PPL because I finished up with about 20 pages of ICAO/US/AUS comparison, and its better argued out on GA sites.

 

You could sum it up by saying that the diagramme below of US Airspace classes indicates that you could, as KR says fly over the top of LAX in Class E, whereas you can’t in Australia, HOWEVER, Class E is Controlled Airspace, as is Australia’s Class C, so by my reading a PPL could request an Airways Clearance to fly over the top of Melbourne Airport on the same basis as a US pilot would fly over the top of LAX, but you wouldn’t bother because the VFR lanes are easier and faster.

 

Class D is not a direct comparison with an International Airport.

 

[turboplanner]

"Any RA pilots notice anything about the aerial photo of Katoomba I put up a few posts ago?"

I put this question up on Monday, and while the thread has spun off into a general spit about governments and Australian flying in general, no one has commented.

 

Facthunter has often made the statement that you should never fly over something you can't land on.

The Katoomba Airfield has no field. There's nothing you can land on other than the runways without an almost certain fatal result.

The question really should be "Why worry about its closure?"

For an RA aircraft with a placard on the panel telling you that an engine failure is more likely than in a GA aircraft, there's no solution for a short EFATO, you're going to die, and for much of the circuit a turn back is likely to produce a similar result. Same goes for the flight in and the fight out.

A few pilots have decided to quite RA after seeing the results of the monthly fatals, but often those fatals are dues to bad habits than fate. You can make a major safety improvement by not developing the habits. In this case you could make a major improvement to your future by not going anywhere near Katoomba.

 

Rod Hay, well known in RA circles, apparently was actually teaching there, and he died there (story below).

 

That crash was possibly why the airstrip fell into disuse.

 

WX00168.pdf

Edited November 2, 2021 by turboplanner

[jackc]

So Turbs that is what you think some peoples comments are?  A ‘general spit about Govts and Australian flying in general’. ?
You must expect some ‘yaw’ in threads…….

There is a reason no one has spent a razoo on that airfield, it’s because it’s future was under a cloud, for want of a better description.   Yes it’s substandard but is upgradable and IF there was certain tenure that problem could be solved.

Aviators in general nurture their airfields and are proud of them but only IF they see a good future…… 

[skippydiesel]

58 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

" You can make a major safety improvement by not developing the habits. In this case you could make a major improvement to your future by not going anywhere near Katoomba.

 

 

 Its like this Turbs; The only way out of the Sydney Basin, that does not involve flying over very rugged/extensive urban development, is south, towards you. So no matter what aircraft you fly, getting out of the Basin, N, & W is going to involve additional risk. The challenge is to mitigate that risk (its unavoidable). For all my west & north west trips, exiting as high as I can go, CTA steps permitting, via Katoomba (the only potential emergency landing area actually in the mountains) is my usual plan.

[turboplanner]

22 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

 Its like this Turbs; The only way out of the Sydney Basin, that does not involve flying over very rugged/extensive urban development, is south, towards you. So no matter what aircraft you fly, getting out of the Basin, N, & W is going to involve additional risk. The challenge is to mitigate that risk (its unavoidable). For all my west & north west trips, exiting as high as I can go, CTA steps permitting, via Katoomba (the only potential emergency landing area actually in the mountains) is my usual plan.

You're looking for a runway; I'm looking for a survivable fotced landing. We've had hundreds of no-damage GA forced landings in Melbourne, most on golf courses. I'm not sure I could get a Jab to stop in the same time as a Warrior or 172, but now that Katoomba has gone, if you were going to lose an engine in that vicinity, within a few minutes I found, further out from Sydney  3.15 km - golf course, 4.9 km paddock, 6.6 km paddocks, 9.8 km paddocks, 15.62 km golf course.

 

Back towards Sydney, from Katoomba -5.2 km golf course, 6.3 km ovals, 25 km golf course, 34 km paddock.

 

A few years ago a few of us got together and looked for safe routes north from Melbourne without diverting too far west. A person wanted to attend a meeting in the mountains. It was amazing how far we were able to get him with safe forced landing spots.

[KRviator]

Quote

This is a Recreational Aviation site.

 

FAR Part 103 Pilot and Aircraft

We’ve established that FAR Part 103 aircraft can’t fly over LAX

So far you're the only person to bring up 103 fliers over LAX. They were two separate - and quite widely separated - points that I'd made about how aviation in Oz is being hamstrung by Government inaction.
 

Quote

HOWEVER, Class E is Controlled Airspace, as is Australia’s Class C

E is controlled airspace for IFR operations 'only'. For VFR you do not need a clearance. I've lost count of the number of times I've flown in E with an RAAus registered aircraft and only spoken to CTR when they've called me.

 

Quote

so by my reading a PPL could request an Airways Clearance to fly over the top of Melbourne Airport on the same basis as a US pilot would fly over the top of LAX, but you wouldn’t bother because the VFR lanes are easier and faster.

You're wrong. To fly over the top of LAX Class B, you're in Class E, and so long as you have a transponder (to comply with the Mode C veil over there) you don't have to talk to anybody. To do so in Melbourne you can request clearance and it can - and usually will be denied. Beyond Victor 1 and the Brisbane Stradbroke Is routes there are no routes "through" major Class C's in Australia that don't require clearance - and both of those will require carriage of lifejackets...

 

As an example - have a look at the Oakey Brisbane VTC and consider Oakey & Amberley PRD areas are active and unavailable for transit. Your only option to get past this area in cruising flight is a clearance through the BN Class C, or descending into D630A+B and flying below 4,500 with terrain that comes up to 3,000.

 

Quote

Class D is not a direct comparison with an International Airport.

Spot on but I wasn't referencing international airports but using LAX/SFO as a size comparison LAX is probably double the size of Sydney and you can fly over it without talking to anybody if you're above 10,000'. Or through the transition corridor at 3,500/4,500. However look at that image you provided. E over D in the US & E = available to RAAus/GA VFR traffic without a clearance. There's only a few places in Oz where there is E or G over D here, Camden being one & Karratha the only other I'm aware of. Every other Tower-controlled airport in Australia has A over C or C over D, requiring a clearance - no matter the traffic volume or physical airspace layout. Even Katoomba requires you to have clearance in the Sydney Class C if you want to be higher than 3,500AGL.

 

The point being, if you're in the cruise (for example, as -DJU was up at Coffs), you shouldn't have to descend to <1000' just to get past a Class D tower because its' overlaid by Class C. You should either be able to get (not just request - there's a flamin' huge difference) clearance, or be able to go up-and-over as you can sensibly do in the US - and that's just one example of how Government in Australia is knobbling GA in this country. There's probably dozens of other examples, but lack of airspace flexibility being but one.

You're right, they don't have to promote it, but neither do they have to hamstring it at every available opportunity.

Edited November 2, 2021 by KRviator

[turboplanner]

KR do you phone ML a couple of hours ahead to request an Airways  Clearance?

[Flightrite]

ML ATC guys from day one in ATC school learn the phrase.....“clearance not available, remain OCTA”!

 

[RossK]

Avalon is an example of how it can work

Class D Surface -2500

Class E 2500-4500

Class C 4500-12500

 

So VFR traffic has a 2000ft laneway right over the top of the Runway.

[jackc]

On 02/11/2021 at 8:39 AM, jackc said:

Don’t try fitting this to your aircraft, looks just like a Bomb 😞

https://levilaviation.com

 

I think might be allowable on 19 rego?

Yesterday I made the enquiry about it to RAAus Tech Dept…….

Get in part replay saying quote:

 

Thank you for your email, RAAus will be in contact with you within 10 business days.

RAAus business hours are Monday to Friday 9am to 5pm, however Tuesdays and Thursdays telephone support is only available from 12pm to 5pm Australian Eastern

Time.

Due to current circumstances surrounding Coronavirus, RAAus has implemented a callback system for all phone calls - RAAus will look to return calls to members as soon as possible during this time. Unquote……

 

The wheels turn slowly in the RAAus Tech Dept…….

 

 

 

Edited November 3, 2021 by jackc
paragraph add

[Flightrite]

21 minutes ago, jackc said:

Yesterday I made the enquiry about it to RAAus Tech Dept…….

Get in part replay saying quote:

 

Thank you for your email, RAAus will be in contact with you within 10 business days.

RAAus business hours are Monday to Friday 9am to 5pm, however Tuesdays and Thursdays telephone support is only available from 12pm to 5pm Australian Eastern

Time.

Due to current circumstances surrounding Coronavirus, RAAus has implemented a callback system for all phone calls - RAAus will look to return calls to members as soon as possible during this time. Unquote……

 

The wheels turn slowly in the RAAus Tech Dept…….

 

 

 

Reminds me of AVMED, 28 days for an upgrade to my medical! Australia, worlds best practice in 3rd world standards🙁

[jackc]

First thing I asked myself as a member  was……is it too much to expect a reply in a couple of days, even IF they had questions to ask me?  When you need to make a buying decision based on the requirement that must be met…..I thought it would be an easy thing to get a determination on?

I mean look at the realism about this…….I just fit the thing and be done with it 🙂. Am I going to get a ramp check on a property airstrip……CASA won’t bother, too busy in more closely populated areas.  IF I crash the aircraft for what ever reason  and die,

They can investigate all they like……no so sure the RAAus track record for investigation is intensive, never the less you can t prosecute a dead body 🙂

Personally, I would suspect many people have or would do these kinds of additions/mods anyway?   Not the it compromises safety or anything, it’s just that the regulators want the last word?  Correct me IF I am wrong……