Access to GAAP outside hours

[Foto_Flyer]

This may have been covered elsewhere, but I am looking for some opinions/advice about flying into a GAAP airfield like Archerfield in Brisbane as an RA pilot.

 

This is how I understand the current situation.

 

Between 7am and 5pm, Archerfield is a CTA GAAP airport. Outside of those hours, Archerfield reverts to a CTAF®, class G below 1500'

 

So, as long as I have a current and valid ASIC, stay below 1500', and am willing to pay the landing/parking fees, I should be able to fly to and land at Archerfield, as an RA pilot flying a radio equiped RA registered aircraft. Is this right? If my reasoning is correct, it opens a whole new set of possibilities!

 

My next question is, if this is the case, how will this be affected by the change to class D in April? Will it be class D 24hrs or will it still switch between D and G (CTAF ®)depending on the tower hours? The only information i could find said that the tower had to be maned (or womaned as is the case at YBAF) during daylight hours.

 

Anyone have any further details on this? Thanks!

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

You are correct. Help yourself to as much Archerfield as you want but it all stops in April or whenever Class D starts. It will be Class D for all daylight hours.

 

I know this because Launceston is in the same situation.

 

Cheers, Enjoy.

 

 

[Rick2]

It will be Class D for all daylight hours.

not quite so simple - the powers that be are still trying to sort out hours/coverage/staffing etc.

 

certainly won't be all daylight hours - 0430 start would be a bit over the top!

 

maybe 0600/1800, 0700/1700, 0700/1900, 0600/2000 or any similar combination!

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

I saw somwhere that Mc Cormic decreed that All GAAPs would be come Class D for daylight hours. These are very specific terms in aviation and unless there will be no children living in poverty by 1992, I'm guessing CTA from first light till last light.

 

I paid particular attention to this as I was aware of the issue that Foto raised and it has direct relavance to my operations.

 

 

[wags]

Staff shortages.

 

Qwerty... McCormick made it clear on Saturday night that Airservices had not only severe staff shortages but they are also short of time for training as they can't spare anyone to do the training. Catch 22 situation.

 

I would bet they make it initially something like Maroochydore 0800L to 1900L or similar.

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

I guess that the point that Foto was interested in was can he fly into a GAAP when it is a CTAF® and he can.

 

 

[Foto_Flyer]

Thanks for the replies. It seems I was right about the current arrangements.

 

With respect to class D, does that mean there may be a slim chance of access after April, in the early hours at least? Hope so!

 

Archerfield is closer to home and would be more convenient if wanting to make a early start on a longer Nav. (get extra shut-eye for same departure time)

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

Air Services has spent the last umteen years cutting budgetts and cutting services and now McCormic has made a decree they are going to take some time to get their crap together so I am guessing from what Wags has said that you will have some grace time. I wouldnt be surprised if they end up with some fixed hours of operation which leaves some daylight for you Foto. I suspect that what McCormic was after was complete removal of the "TWR HRS may change at short notice" entries in ERSA for the GAAPs. I was involved in a bit of an incident at Rockhampton last year and I may have inadvertantly caused a bit of a shake up of Air Services.

 

 

[Ultralights]

i dont thing it will be First Light till last light, ASA will have to provide controllers for these new Class D towers, and ASA, are Very short of controllers, and during summer months, there can be 15 or more hours of daylight, and 8 or less in winter, that means a lot of overtime cheques from ASA during summer. so im pretty sure it will be as it is now, 9 to 5. no need to pay shift penalties or overtime for those pesky expensive controllers on the radio.

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

It doesnt matter much wot we think, McCormic has told them they will be Class D for daylight hours and so far he has not resiled from that position.

 

 

[GraemeK]

It doesnt matter much wot we think, McCormic has told them they will be Class D for daylight hours and so far he has not resiled from that position.

But CASA is clearly backtracking, because AsA won't have the controllers. Expect implementation to be deferred .........

 

 

[Guest Cloudsuck]

So, as long as I have a current and valid ASIC, stay below 1500', and am willing to pay the landing/parking fees, I should be able to fly to and land at Archerfield, as an RA pilot flying a radio equiped RA registered aircraft. Is this right? If my reasoning is correct, it opens a whole new set of possibilities!

Yep, but I would still use the inbound approach points to stay clear of CTA and Greenbank and use 1500' inbound and 1000' out bound for safety sake.

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

I hate their stupid approach points. Why funnel all a/c through the same point at the same height? It sounds incredibly stupid to me. When Class D comes I hope that the approach points go. Infact I am going to write to CASA now and tell them what I think.

 

 

[Guest Cloudsuck]

I hate their stupid approach points. Why funnel all a/c through the same point at the same height? It sounds incredibly stupid to me. When Class D comes I hope that the approach points go. Infact I am going to write to CASA now and tell them what I think.

I agree, I'm never more aware than when I'm approaching a approach point. But at Archerfield, they serve a purpose to keep people out of Greenbank and Brisbane CTA. Even if they get rid of them, you will pretty much have to track inbound via those rough points.

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

I put my thoughts to CASA, I'll let you know what the response is.

 

There is a significant differance in risk between requiring all inbound a/c to fly to exactly the same point in the sky then make a call AT the point, and the situation where aircraft head along a corridor and make a call approaching the same point.

 

I was chatted by ATC this year for calling approaching the towers at Archerfield rather than calling "over head". It is definately a stupid procedure.

 

 

[Guest Cloudsuck]

I was chatted by ATC this year for calling approaching the towers at Archerfield rather than calling "over head". It is definately a stupid procedure.

Yeah they do get cranky about that. I got the same deal from ATC at Rocky earlier this year when I called "Approaching Pirate Point". ATC came back with, "Report at Pirate Point".

 

When approaching from Park Ridge, I always arrive at Park Ridge at 2,500 and call inbound. This gives me 1,000' clearance above the majority of people who arrive at 1,500. But because I'm flying an RA registered aircraft, and obvioulsy therefore an idiot, the tower sometimes comes back and says, "Tecnam 1234, entry to the zone is 1,500", to which I reply, "I will be at 1,500 prior to zone entry (Logan Motorway), Tecnam 1234".

 

Most pilots don't realise that you only have to be at the specified height upon entry to the GAAP zone, not at the reporting point. You can be at any height over the reporting point providing you are not entering the CTA step above.

 

 

[Ultralights]

When approaching a inbount point above or below 1500, all I do is say " bankstown tower, tecnam 9999 at 2RN 2500 descending to 1500 inbound received delta" I have never had a problem with that before.

 

 

[Guest Cloudsuck]

When approaching a inbount point above or below 1500, all I do is say " bankstown tower, tecnam 9999 at 2RN 2500 descending to 1500 inbound received delta" I have never had a problem with that before.

Good call, I'll give it a go.

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

Thanks guys, I'll give it a go.