Communication

[skippydiesel]

Hi Walrus,

 

I stand to be corrected; I understood and practise that a 10Nm inbound, altitude (intentions & time) /overflying/passing of ALL airfields, call is required.

Further - may not be required, I do a second call  - overhead/abeam(direction & distance/any change of altitude)

Further  - If not landing, I do not enter the airfields airspace, I overfly above the minimum and or pass to one side, well outside any possible circuit activity.

 

I  (& the majority of private pilots in AU) am flying at surface to 10,000ft a AMSL - not 40,000ft. Depending on windspeed, direction & terrain clearance I could easily be approaching an airfield at close 500ft above circuit height.

 

There is no suggestion that RAA class aircraft or GA, using The Oaks airspace/in the vicinity, should not communicate with each other - they should when/where appropriate.

 

When in The Oaks airspace - communicate on 126.7

 

As for Camden communication - this only applies to aircraft entering, within their airspace. There is nothing to be gained by The Oaks aircraft having conversations with Camden Tower😈

[BurnieM]

x

 

Edited Sunday at 07:39 AM by BurnieM

[BurnieM]

41 minutes ago, walrus said:

Skippy: "Unfortunatly no one (including myself) seem to have a solution for the lack of good airmanship exhibited by so many Camden GA pilots."

 

With respect NO!

 

Either explicitly or implicitly, there is a mental hierarchy in communications in that communication rules are governed by the airspace class. Camden traffic would expect the Oaks users to inform them of their activity, on the applicable Camden frequency, not the other way around.

 

Do you expect every inbound A380 to announce its arrival on the Penliegh or Riddells ck frequency?

 

Where does it say that RA traffic cannot communicate with GA traffic?

 

The issue is that departures from The Oaks 36 or 18 do not fly over Camdens circuit area but upwind departures from Camden 24 fly almost directly over The Oaks.

 

[skippydiesel]

1 hour ago, BurnieM said:

 

The issue is that departures from The Oaks 36 or 18 do not fly over Camdens circuit area but upwind departures from Camden 24 fly almost directly over The Oaks.

 

AND aircraft arriving from the West overfly, all too often at or below our 2500ft, on occasion as low as circuit height 1900 ft.

 

Very few make any sort of Inbound call let alone the usual 10Nm one or even an overhead call, When hailed appear not to be on/monitoring 126.7 (our CTAF frequency).

 

My perception is, the arriving aircarft tend to be the worst offenders.😈

[aro]

1 hour ago, walrus said:

Either explicitly or implicitly, there is a mental hierarchy in communications in that communication rules are governed by the airspace class. Camden traffic would expect the Oaks users to inform them of their activity, on the applicable Camden frequency, not the other way around.

That is not true. Camden is a towered airfield, so the Camden frequency is for communication with ATC, not between pilots. Camden tower do not want The Oaks users on their frequency.

 

Aircraft in the vicinity of The Oaks are well outside Camden airspace, they should be monitoring The Oaks frequency if they could be in conflict with circuit traffic.

2 hours ago, walrus said:

Do you expect every inbound A380 to announce its arrival on the Penliegh or Riddells ck frequency?

Melbourne ATC also does not want Penfield & Riddells Ck traffic transmitting on their frequency, unless they are transiting CTA. In the unlikely event that an A380 was OCTA and passing through the Riddells Ck circuit, yes they should announce it on the Riddells Ck frequency.

[walrus]

ARO of course you are correct. What i am talking about is the implicit hierarchy of things requiring a pilots attention - hence my flippant example of an A380 technically infringing Penfield. If that ever happened I suggest that the very last thing on the Airbus pilots mind would be calling on 126.7.

 

Skippydiesel hints at this when he suggests arriving aircraft are the worst offenders.

 

Skippy I never called ALL airfields because that is impractical - too many, most rarely used. Just the ones I new to be populated.

[aro]

5 hours ago, walrus said:

the implicit hierarchy of things requiring a pilots attention

The airspace you're flying through now requires more attention than the airspace you're planning to fly through in 2 minutes. Pilots tend to worry more about ATC but that is a mistake. Aviate, Navigate, Communicate - ATC comes last in that list.

 

But I think really, if The Oaks has more than very occasional traffic it is unsuitable as an approach point. Maybe when it was originally designated it was very quiet, but if traffic patterns change, airspace and procedures need to change.

[BurnieM]

The height of Camden traffic overflying The Oaks it a significant part of this problem (as Skippy points out).

Camden being 649 ft below The Oaks makes this more likely to happen.

 

Surely nobody is saying 'dont bother calling' if you are at or just above circuit height ?

A good way to find out if an airfield is populated is to listen on their CTAF.

 

 

Edited Sunday at 09:33 PM by BurnieM

[kiwiaviator]

On 27/03/2025 at 2:57 PM, kgwilson said:

This is an issue that is there due to the rules around RA where RA pilots do not have access to CTR. If they did then Camden CTR could include the Oaks & everyone would be on the same frequency.

 

A similar situation is at Blenheim in NZ where the main RPT (& also a minor military presence) Airport (Woodbourne) & the recreational, gliding & sport pilot aerodrome (Omaka) are only 5km apart & at the same altitude. On arrival you contact the tower & they clear you to enter the circuit & report back when on the ground. You must get a clearance for takeoff & departure from ATC. I've flown in there a number of times & it works well & there is a lot of activity as well. I think it is still the same. The difference is that all RA aircraft are on the same register & RA pilots must have a CTR endorsement & I assume a transponder. If RA finally gets access to CTR (30 years later than the rest of the world) then this problem would go away.

 

Woodbourne/Omaka is pretty much as you have described it KG however they have added a transit lane to the east and south so you don't need a clearance. Comms are still all on the same frequency and it works well.

[skippydiesel]

9 hours ago, walrus said:

Skippy I never called ALL airfields because that is impractical - too many, most rarely used. Just the ones I new to be populated.

How do you know they aren't "populated"? You can not have the information to make such a observation.

 

I call for the following reasons:

• It costs me nothing - I see it as a basic courtesy that may have safety implications for me/other aircraft.
• I don't know who may be listening/will benefit from my call. This applies to the airfields and aircraft in the vicinity.
• Should I face a problem/incident a little later - someone may have heard/recorded my call and be able to assist with last known position.
• I still make "all station" calls when I change frequency,  following the above  logic.

In my humble opinion we have swung too far, to the silent side of the communication pendulum. Pilots are relying way too much, on the "mark one eyeball",  OzRunways (& other EFB's) to tell them their is another aircraft in their vicinity and the assumption that if they hear nothing there is no point in making a call.

 

The Camden pilots who fly over The Oaks without making that all important call , are putting pilots at unnecessary risk, should be counseled and if continue to offend, some  face some form of disciplinary action .😈

 

[facthunter]

The PIC has a legal responsibility to Operate in the safest possible way. Think about that, because IF the $#1t hits the FAN that's how you will be measured.  Nev

[walrus]

Skippy, there are literally hundreds of private fields we all overfly every day. Nobody makes any calls.  Anyway its academic for me, I'm out of it and don't miss the mountains of BS , all of it, required to fly in Australia.

 You want examples? Watch British private flight youtube videos and then remember that those guys are flying through or around all that controlled airspace with self declared medicals that make ours look like strait jackets. Then watch American or NZ videos and see what flying freedom looks like.

 

If there are a few fields where airspace intersects, then they had better have a CTAF.

[spacesailor]

Like the " OAKS ". Overflying by Camden planes .

They should charge for their airspace Incursions. 

spacesailor

[skippydiesel]

3 hours ago, walrus said:

Skippy, there are literally hundreds of private fields we all overfly every day. Nobody makes any calls.  Anyway its academic for me, I'm out of it and don't miss the mountains of BS , all of it, required to fly in Australia.

 You want examples? Watch British private flight youtube videos and then remember that those guys are flying through or around all that controlled airspace with self declared medicals that make ours look like strait jackets. Then watch American or NZ videos and see what flying freedom looks like.

 

If there are a few fields where airspace intersects, then they had better have a CTAF.

As PIC you make the decision. Back when I trained for my PPL the communication rules were fairly proscribed. Things have changed, as they always will, and now we have virtually no communication system at all - its all up to the PIC to decide when & what to communicate (I amy be ovestating this a little, to make a point).

 

I friend of mine died just a month or so back, when two very experienced pilots did not to communicate (they also died). Perhaps if they monitored The Oaks frequency and or made a call or two, no one would have died that day.

 

I don't fly over hundreds of airfields, if I did I may be a little less enthusiastic about making the calls I do, who knows? For now I feel I am doing my bit to try and keep myself safe and those other pilots out there, who may not have made a call (cause they don't have to).

 

Here is an excellent example of what should happen, from this Forum, Landing Fees, KRviator;

 

"............................ when I went to Broken Hill.
"Dubbo Traffic Rex 6866 a Saab Taxiing for Broken Hill runway 05"
"Rex 6866 and Dubbo Traffic Alpha Bravo Charlie an RV 30 miles west maintaining 9,500 overhead time 20"
"Alpha Bravo Charlie, Rex 6866 we'll maintain 8,000 until we've confirmed we're past you"
"Rex 6866 much appreciated sir"

Shortly afterwards
"Alpha Bravo Charlie, Rex 6866 visual, your 11 o'clock low, 1 mile and we'll start our climb to the flight levels soon as we're past"
"Rex 6866, Alpha Bravo Charlie, copy sir, thank you"

😈