Guest Marius Grobler Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Hi fellow aviators I'm preparing for General Flying Progress Test...please help! 1. Where can I get a copy of the AIP? 2. How close may two pilots fly from each other (both are non-endorsed for formation flying)? Thanks:help:
Matt Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Hi Marius, 1. AIP is available online at the Airservices website http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/publications/aip.asp?pg=10 2. From memory, there is actually no defined distance regarding aircraft proximity. There are references to "not so close as to cause danger to another aircraft" or similar, but no specific distance defined. Will go investigate to see if my memory is correct. Found it, as per CAR 1988 - 163 Operating near other aircraft (1) The pilot in command of an aircraft must not fly the aircraft so close to another aircraft as to create a collision hazard. Penalty: 50 penalty units. (2) The pilot in command of an aircraft must not operate the aircraft on the ground in such a manner as to create a hazard to itself or to another aircraft. Penalty: 50 penalty units. (3) An offence against subregulation (1) or (2) is an offence of strict liability. Cheers, Matt.
Guest Marius Grobler Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Hi Matt I think you are right. However, it appears that there was new AIP issued a month ago and in ER 55.1.1 it states a vertical distance (and I assume that the same goes for horizontal) of 1,000 ft. Please let me know if I got it wrong... Thanks
Guest airsick Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Hi fellow aviatorsI'm preparing for General Flying Progress Test...please help! 1. Where can I get a copy of the AIP? 2. How close may two pilots fly from each other (both are non-endorsed for formation flying)? Thanks:help: First, the easy one. You can get a copy of the AIPs online at http://www.airservicesaustralia.com.au/publications/aip.asp?pg=10 With respect to how close you can fly, this is not explicitly defined anywhere. CAR 163 states "the pilot in command of an aircraft must not fly the aircraft so close to another aircraft as to create a collision hazard". As far as I am aware there is no strict definition in terms of distance as to how close this might be. CAR 163AA discusses formation flying: For the purposes of this regulation, 2 or more aircraft are flown in formation if: (a) they are flown in close proximity to each other; and (b) they operate as a single aircraft with regard to navigation, position reporting and control. Again, close proximity is not defined in explicit terms. The second part is easier to define as it is quite explicit. Vertical separation is a different matter though. Depending on the flight rules you are under and the magnetic heading you are maintaining there are prescribed cruising levels that should be followed. CAR 173 deals with these in detail but at this sta=ge you will only be flying under VFR so if: 1. your heading is 0 through 179 you will maintain odd + 500 ft levels. Eg. 5500, 7500, etc. 2. your heading is 180 through 359 it will be even + 500. Eg. 6500, 8500, etc. These levels are mandatory above 5000ft and, contrary to popular belief, also below wherever practicable. Given you haven't started your nav's yet you may not be required to know these cruising altitudes. Not part of your question but it is also worth taking a look at separation minima for aircraft taking off and landing. Take off can be found in the AIPs. Good exercise for you to look them up and figure out what the go is! :)
Guest airsick Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 First, Matt beat me. Bugger. Hi MattI think you are right. However, it appears that there was new AIP issued a month ago and in ER 55.1.1 it states a vertical distance (and I assume that the same goes for horizontal) of 1,000 ft. Please let me know if I got it wrong... Thanks This only applies to aircraft operating FL290 and FL410. Can't see a 150 getting up there. :)
Matt Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Hi Marius, ER 55.1.1 relates operations in controlled airspace (Vertical Separation in the Australian FIR) for aircraft operating between FL290 and FL410. Beyond that I don't believe there are any separation / proximity requirements other than in the circuit area for landing, takeoff etc. Reference AirSick's post about vertical separation, the hemisperical altitudes are prescribed to minimise aircraft heading in opposite directions running into each other. Nothing to say you can't fly at the same altitude as someone else heading in exactly the same direction. And before anyone gets in about formation, a formation flight is defined as "more than one aircraft operating as a single aircraft for navigation and communication purposes"...or something similar. Doing similar but navigating and communicating independantly is known as "in company"...or "same day, same way" ;) Cheers, Matt.
Yenn Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 I read recently somewhere that formation flying was flying together at 100 feet or less. I will have to see if I can find the reference as it seems very close and if true would allow flying at 101' If I can find it I will follow this up. It may have been from Callide Dawson Flying Club.
Guest airsick Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 See my post above re formation flying. Matt pretty much nailed it.
Matt Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 We need something better to do on a Thursday night AirSick
Guest brentc Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Ian - you are correct, but that is for RA-Aus flying. GA is slightly different and no specific limits apply as noted above. Marius - are you RA licenced yet? If so, I wondered why you are doing your GFPT?
Matt Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Brent - where's the current reference for distance for RA-Aus? I knew there used to be one years back under AUF but can't find any reference to it in the Ops manual.
Steve L Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 hi Yenn I read the formation flying limit was up to 100ft somewhere recently too, buggared if I can find it now though steve
Guest Marius Grobler Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Ian - you are correct, but that is for RA-Aus flying. GA is slightly different and no specific limits apply as noted above.Marius - are you RA licenced yet? If so, I wondered why you are doing your GFPT? Sorry if I mislead you...totally due to ignorance, I assure you. No, I don't have my PPL yet. My words are quoted directly from the manual. So, if GFPT is applicable to GA then it must be some other test equivalent for RA.
Guest Marius Grobler Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 hi Yenn I read the formation flying limit was up to 100ft somewhere recently too, buggared if I can find it now thoughsteve Funny you should mention that: one of the answers in the "try" test is 100 ft
Guest Marius Grobler Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 First, the easy one. You can get a copy of the AIPs online at http://www.airservicesaustralia.com.au/publications/aip.asp?pg=10<snip> CAR 163AA discusses formation flying:<snip> I obviously have a lot to learn: what is CAR?
Steve L Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 CAR = Civil Aviation Regulations. am I right guys? now heres one for you Marius where do I find a try exam Steve
Guest Marius Grobler Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 CAR = Civil Aviation Regulations. am I right guys? now heres one for you Marius where do I find a try exam Steve There are a few of them around. Here's one http://www.basair.com.au/pplexamquestions.shtml
Guest Marius Grobler Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 http://www.casa.gov.au/fcl/exams/ppl_q.htm http://www.pplmania.com/ppltrainer/airquiz/index.htm
Guest airsick Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 I obviously have a lot to learn: what is CAR? CARs are the Civil Aviation Regulations. CAOs are the Civil Aviation Orders CASRs are the Civial Aviation Safety Regulations AIPs are the Aeronautical Information Package which incorporates the ERSA (Enroute Supplement Australia) If you are just doing your RA stuff don't worry too much about what each one contains but it wouldn't hurt to be familiar with them anyway.
Chird65 Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 The 100 feet was mentioned in: http://www.auf.asn.au/students/advanced.html#endorsements or Ops manual Section 2.01 - 2 "Close proximity Flying" Hint: to search all PDFs open Adobe Reader, click on search, tick the option to Search "All PDF Documents in"
Guest Marius Grobler Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 The 100 feet was mentioned in:http://www.auf.asn.au/students/advanced.html#endorsements or Ops manual Section 2.01 - 2 "Close proximity Flying" Hint: to search all PDFs open Adobe Reader, click on search, tick the option to Search "All PDF Documents in" Fantastic! Thanks
Guest brentc Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 If you're talking about RA-Aus, then 100 ft applies, so your test exam is indeed correct. If it's GA, then the other situation applies. I'm still a little consfused as to whether you are doing your RA-Aus BAK or your GFPT for GA, but that's just me having a slow morning. That being said though, 100ft is pretty damn close! I guess the GA rules are sensible. If you want to fly up next to your mate and take a photo or whatever, then great, you can, but once you start doing formation flying, take off's and landings, that's when you need an endorsement. Ultimately people are going to fly close now and then and this doesn't necessarily mean they are going to crash into each other.
Matt Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 100ft, roughly 30m, call it 3 wingspans. Now, where does that 100ft start and end? Centre of fuselage? Wingtip to Wingtip? I'm with Brent, the CASA rule makes a lot more sense.
Guest brentc Posted August 1, 2008 Posted August 1, 2008 I would have assumed wingtip to wingtip. An optimist like yourself might assume fuse to fuse ;) Good luck to he who tries to ping you for flying too close and quantifying his measurements.
Guest Andys@coffs Posted August 1, 2008 Posted August 1, 2008 Actually I would have thought a horizontal measurement was relatively easy, a photo will do it, you know the wingspan and therefore know the distance. Ive always wondered how on earth vertical distance would be measured in terms of quantifying a breach. A much more difficult scenario to prove I would have thought. Andy
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now