WACs get PRDs

[Garfly]

I enquired with ASA's Aero Charting about this news and they were kind enough to send me this sample image.

According to ASA:

"The PRD boundaries have been added to bring the WAC series closer to ICAO compliance for this chart type."

And  "We are hoping that with a planned change in software to create these charts we will be able to update them on a more regular basis in the future."

As I understand it, the printing of Aeronautical charts and other documents has now been outsourced to   https://www.aipshop.canprint.com.au/  where the new WACs can be bought.

On first impressions, I'm not all that impressed.  It seems like a lot of unnecessary clutter (given that we have VNCs and VTCs ... and EFBs to boot).

Anyway, these will be incorporated in OzRWYs in December. I've heard tell that some in the OzRWYs team are not thrilled by the innovation either.

 

 

CLICK TO EXPAND:

 

This is the feedback I sent to ASA Aero Charting, yesterday.

 

"On first look at this new WAC format, I wonder how it will be generally viewed by the flying community.

To me they look pretty cluttered and I would have thought that the beauty of WACs has been that they were unfussed by airspace detail and dealt mainly with ‘existential’ geography. Also, so much magenta might get a bit much when used with EFBs - which, of course, use magenta lines for other things.

I’d have thought that we already have all the airspace info we need in VTCs and VNCs as well as real time overlays (on any and every map)  of active PRD areas on EFBs. The boundaries of these, of course, can change on an hourly basis so the electronic real time display is very handy.

Anyway, I’d be interested in the thinking behind this move and any discussion within ASA.  I’m surprised to hear that WACs do have all that airspace info on them in other ICAO regimes.  In any case, at first glance, I'm thinking I might miss the old, uncluttered WACs. 

But maybe when I get used to them I will come to appreciate the upsides. 🙂 "

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 5, 2022 by Garfly

[Yenn]

If you fly where the VNC charts cover, why would you want to use a WAC?

[Garfly]

Well, yes, I guess that's the point. So you wonder, why would they have bothered.

In any case, if only PRDs are shown then the new style WACs are hardly of any use regarding all the other types of restricted airspace.

In practice it probably won't be much of a problem for anyone on their EFB charts but there are many places where the Hybrid VFR maps give over to the WACs from VNCs. And I think there may be a lot of PRD boundaries - at some level or another - extending out that far. I just hope it doesn't mean a lot of misleading and useless magenta lines cluttering up those areas.

 

[APenNameAndThatA]

I think it is a great idea. There is only going to be clutter where it would be better to use a VNC. Furthermore, around Alice Springs, there are areas of layer cake that are not on a VTC or VNC. Next, they need to add the boundaries for Class G and Class E frequencies. 

[old man emu]

Gadzooks! I'm agreeing with APenNameAndThaA.

 

I've got to buy an up-to-date WAC chart for the planning of my Event. Having that information will be essential to getting through one of the hoops CASA will no doubt put up for me to jump through to getting approval.

Where do I find the code book to decipher the RDP numbers?

[Garfly]

2 hours ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

I think it is a great idea. There is only going to be clutter where it would be better to use a VNC. Furthermore, around Alice Springs, there are areas of layer cake that are not on a VTC or VNC. Next, they need to add the boundaries for Class G and Class E frequencies. 

PenName, can you expand on this? What 'layer cake' do you mean? The 36 DME Class C step?

That won't be on the new WAC.  They're talking PRD areas only. So, presumably, Pine Gap will be there - as it is already on Visual Terminal Chart. 

And as to FIR frequencies, I'd have thought your OzRWYs/AvPlan plus the ERC Low chart had you well covered in that department.

If you want WACs to be all things to all people - especially nowadays - they will lose their particular usefulness. 

It doesn't take much magenta ink to cover useful detail at 1:1,000,000

[Tasmag]

Great idea, been wanting this for ages when outside vnc areas. 

[Garfly]

2 hours ago, old man emu said:

Gadzooks! I'm agreeing with APenNameAndThaA.

 

I've got to buy an up-to-date WAC chart for the planning of my Event. Having that information will be essential to getting through one of the hoops CASA will no doubt put up for me to jump through to getting approval.

Where do I find the code book to decipher the RDP numbers?

OME, I can see that if you want to have your contestants limited to WACs, say, for the navigation trial, then having the boundaries of your local Danger areas right on them would be a help.  So yes, these new charts might be handy for remote area PRDs ...  saves you drawing them in yourself on paper charts like the good old days  ;- )

[Garfly]

34 minutes ago, Tasmag said:

Great idea, been wanting this for ages when outside vnc areas. 

Yes, I suppose flying beyond the J-curve in WAC land (and out of range of real time layer updates) it'd be nice to have PRDs showing up on the chart - paper or tablet versions. I wonder how many such areas are out there, and how many are only activated by Notam.  

So it may be an improvement after all, especially given that where the clutter is the worst the need for WACs is the least (as Yenn was saying, above).

 

 

 

 

Edited October 5, 2022 by Garfly

[KRviator]

Fast forward 12 months and HO Notams are going to be filled with the following:
 

Quote

WAC(PERTH) PRD R165 (Pearce) amended as follows:
YMMM/R165 PEARCE CONDITIONAL STATUS: RA2 MILITARY FLYING/NON-FLYING LATERAL LIMITS: 315246S 1152456E - 314830S 1144746E then along the clockwise arc of a circle radius 60.00NM centre 315642S 1155734E (PH/DME) - 310608S 1151935E then along the clockwise arc of a circle radius 60.00NM centre 315642S 1155734E (PH/DME) - 310405S 1152336E then along 2NM LAN & PARL TO COT - 314543S 1154602E 315246S 1152456E

WAC (Katherine) PRD R225C (Tindal) amended as follows:
YBBB/R225C TINDAL CONDITIONAL STATUS: RA2 MILITARY FLYING LATERAL LIMITS: 140000S 1301941E - 140000S 1310000E, 153359S 1310000E - 153210S 1304753E then along THE VICTORIA RIVER 1 - 153712S 1304005E then along THE VICTORIA RIVER 2 - 153513S 1303151E then along THE VICTORIA RIVER 3 - 153545S 1302927E then along the counter clockwise arc of a circle radius 3.00NM centre 153714S 1302644E (YTBR/ALA) - 153615S 1302348E then along THE VICTORIA RIVER 5 5 - 153136S 1302222E then along THE VICTORIA RIVER 4 - 152159S 1301609E then along THE VICTORIA RIVER 5 - 152224S 1301445E then along THE VICTORIA RIVER 6 - 152326S 1301423E then along THE VICTORIA RIVER 7 - 152416S 1300511E then along THE VICTORIA RIVER 15 - 152600S 1295820E then along the clockwise arc of a circle radius 150.00NM centre 143116S 1322240E (YPTN/AD) - 151520S 1295433E 150544S 1295421E - 140000S 1301941E

WAC (Gold Coast) PRD R638D Amended as follows: YBBB/R638D EVANS HEAD CONDITIONAL STATUS: RA2 MILITARY FLYING/NON-FLYING LATERAL LIMITS: 285621S 1533128E - 285213S 1534939E then along the clockwise arc of a circle radius 30.00NM centre 291151S 1532344E - 294139S 1531907E then along THE COAST 52 - 293441S 1532005E then along THE COAST 50 - 293146S 1532132E then along THE COAST 48 - 292628S 1532212E then along THE COAST 3001 - 291829S 1532028E then along THE COAST 3000 - 290741S 1532653E then along THE COAST 47 - 290655S 1532611E then along THE COAST 45 - 285621S 1533128E

Pilots are reminded to it is an offence of strict liability to have out-of-date or unamended copies of WAC, VTC or VNC, punishable by being hanged in the town common at high noon, or being forced to work for CAsA for a period of not less than 10 years, whichever is worse.

 

[APenNameAndThatA]

On 5/10/2022 at 5:48 PM, Garfly said:

PenName, can you expand on this? What 'layer cake' do you mean? The 36 DME Class C step?

That won't be on the new WAC.  They're talking PRD areas only. So, presumably, Pine Gap will be there - as it is already on Visual Terminal Chart. 

And as to FIR frequencies, I'd have thought your OzRWYs/AvPlan plus the ERC Low chart had you well covered in that department.

If you want WACs to be all things to all people - especially nowadays - they will lose their particular usefulness. 

It doesn't take much magenta ink to cover useful detail at 1:1,000,000

Good point about class c steps

[Yenn]

Ah KR that takes me back. We used to do that regularly with WACs before the VNCs came in. As we also did with sea navigation charts.

[pmccarthy]

WACs get PRDs. Female American soldiers get periods.

 

Aren't acronyms wonderful.

[Garfly]

Well, with today's AIRAC 2212 Updates for OzRwys (and AvPlan?) we now have - for better and for worse - PRDs marked on our EFB WACs.

 

I'd say it's worse for the busier regions because all that magenta just adds clutter, obscures detail and gets your course line lost in a magenta jungle. 

Sure, for the most part, you'd be using VNCs and VTCs anyway, so it doesn't matter that much.  But I've found that having at least one aeronautical chart devoted entirely to geographical realities has been a good thing. (Given that other charts, just a click away, have all the airspace info anyway. And, for that matter, the EFB can be set up to display active PRDs as a layer onto any chart. (With the catch that you need to be in internet range to get those real time updates.)

 

But, yes, it's a lot better for remote areas because, as pointed out above, in the absence of the large scale charts, the marked PRD borders are not redundant but necessary.

 

These new WACs in their paper form, will, I gather, be printed kind of on-demand, because they will now be going out of date with as much regularity as all the other airspace documentation.  Therefore, to be legal, remote paper-chart users will have to keep a close eye on all PRD updates.  (And I presume that pencilling in the changes won't cut it anymore.  ;- )

 

 

 

CLICK IMAGES FOR HIGHER REZ. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 1, 2022 by Garfly

[Student Pilot]

I use normal Apple maps (less clutter) with ozrunways, most of my flying is away from zones. If I'm going through or close to airspace I use a VTC.

[Garfly]

 

 

1 hour ago, Student Pilot said:

I use normal Apple maps (less clutter) with ozrunways, most of my flying is away from zones. If I'm going through or close to airspace I use a VTC.

Fair enough, SP, but just taking a look at the new WACs, I can see there are remote parts (e.g 50nm NE of Alice, just beyond the YBAS VTC) where wee Romeos might pop up out of nowhere (ones the feds might be serious about ;- ).  So,  in such cases and places, one'd probably do well to use the new WACs. They're pretty uncluttered out there anyway.  

 

If you're on paper only, though, and you haven't planned with such unlikely no-go's in mind (or you're on a diversion, due whatever) the new WACs will warn you off but won't tell you much more than the PRDs name and boundaries.  They won't say, for example, if it's only NOTAM activated or to what flight levels it applies - in the way that VNCs and VTCs do.  (There should be a quick look-up-by-number function so that all PRD details can be gotten on the spot - when Capt. Google is out of the cockpit.)

 

Anyway, if you do a long-press on any spot on your OzRwys map-screen you will bring up a list of all airspaces overlying that position. In this case we can at least discover that R235, in fact, applies from SFC to FL070.  (I'm assuming that this list is drawn from the app's database downloaded to the device and thus available anywhere.) 

 

 

 

 

CLICK ON IMAGES FOR HIGHER REZ.

Edited December 1, 2022 by Garfly