ian00798

Statistically if there are more than 9999 recreational aircraft some regos would have to be reused. I'm not sure if it has happened yet. As a controller I'm much happier dealing with the small chance of two aircraft with the same rego been in the same area at the same time and dealing with that once in a career rather than manually coupling everything. ADSB is quite tricky to manually couple and slightly time consuming.

 

 

One of the issues that I had on my pre-solo check for navigation was about notifying of a diversion. We only simulated it, but I think I said something like this: "BN CTR, X-Ray X-Ray X-Ray, Flight Plan Amendment, Diverting 4 miles south of Kilcoy, direct to Dayboro, then Archerfield".

There isn't really a standard phraseology for this. I always remember that with a diversion you need to say who you are, where you are, where your going, and what level. So for your one above, I would do:

 

"Brisbane centre, X-ray X-ray X-ray Diversion details". This gives the controller a chance to tell you to standby if they are busy, or get ready to write down your details.

 

They will then reply with your callsign, at which point you can pass your details.

 

I would then say:

 

"X-ray X-ray X-ray currently 4 miles south of kilcoy, diverting direct dayboro then Archerfield, 2500, no change to sartime"

 

The first one you gave is just slightly ambiguous, are you already 4nm south of kilcoy, or are you tracking to 4nm south of kilcoy? It is important that your fairly accurate, remember if you spud in these are the details that will be used in the search for you.

 

 

Yeah mate, 126.8, 134.2, 122.6 and 120.3 all belong to the same sector. Sometimes I can have those frequencies and 127.1, 133.05, 125.75 and 124.8 all at once.

 

 

They would know you are climbing into class c from your flight plan, however I would request taxi and airways clearance. They won't climb you into class c without a clearance though.

 

 

119.5 and 125.7 both belong to a sector called sunshine, so that will always be the same controller. When they are really quiet the sector is occasionally combined up with the approach sectors too.

 

My airspace goes to just north of ballina, and also includes lismore and casino. One of the frequencies I own up there is 120.3.

 

 

The problem with Evans head is that it is a bombing range, so if you request a clearance through Brisbane centre, we then have to call Amberley ATC, and they have to then contact the range safety officer to find out what is happening and get a clearance. Being a restricted area when active it is equivalent to class C airspace, so any IFR aircraft in the area have to be separated from VFR, as well as keeping you safe from military aircraft with live weapons. If they do give a VFR aircraft a clearance, they are basically rendering the airspace unusable to them for the length of the transit, which in a light aircraft can take quite a long time.

 

In all honesty, most of the time if you request a clearance from us we will just tell you it's not available if we know there are any aircraft at all in the restricted area. Military ATC has become fairly good at releasing restricted airspace to civil ATC lately when they aren't using it, so we normally have a good idea of when you will be able to get clearance.

 

 

Considering that's in my airspace, I will tell you the general rule is you won't get a clearance. Realistically it's only medevac that will get through it most of the time. As for who to contact for a clearance through it, your best hope would be Brisbane centre on 120.3

 

Sometimes the airspace is released to Brisbane centre, in which case we can clear you through it, other than that we will just tell you clearance is not available. It's a bit of a painful piece of airspace for ATC as well, especially for Gold Coast arrivals.

 

 

Ben 87 is correct. In fact it's actually a bit annoying if you read back something like copied traffic is we give no reported IFR traffic. Just callsign is sufficient.

 

 

CSU is a very handy addition, not so sure about RETRAC anymore for GA speed aircraft. I think aircraft like the cirrus, RV etc are proving you can go fast with fixed undercarriage. Having the ability to tuck the gear away just gives you something else to forget that will be very expensive, especially if you aren't flying regularly. It does however make a lot of sense to have RETRAC on twins and anything that does over 200 knots.

 

 

I think the problem with the reg is it is so vaguely written that while most people understand the intent, ie don't fly an aircraft unless you are competent on it, nobody is really quite sure of the actual application of the rule because there are far too many interpretations out there.

 

I am of the understanding that any pilot with a multi engine class rating can do assymetric work, after all you can simulate an engine out without actually shutting it down, however whether or not that is wise or not is another discussion entirely.

 

 

I can see a really great loophole. It is up to the pilot to decide if they are competent or not, and if training is required then it is supposed to be from an instructor. However, there is nothing saying I can't go up for a flight with someone who is already competent, manipulate the controls etc and then deem myself competent. No training was involved, merely a case of carrying another pilot on board, so no requirement for an instructor to do anything.

 

 

I can see your point there, for example someone with Cherokee series time and a csu and retrac endorsement shouldn't really have to be deemed competent to fly an Arrow, it's just a Cherokee with a few extra controls to sort out. However, C172 to C210 is an astronomical leap in complexity. However I suspect somebody that can fly a yak 50 can probably fly a c210. I don't think it works in reverse though.

 

 

It doesn't actually. Just says that if training is done then it can only be done by an instructor and logged accordingly. It suggests that the instructor might like to provide a certificate of completion. It finishes with the statement that the pilot is responsible.

Not quite the way I interpret the intent of the material, however I can see how you do come to that conclusion and I don't think it's unreasonable either.

 

Agreed DR, casa won't release legislation until they have at least 10 other documents of equal authority that directly contradict each other.

 

Despite the legislation and interpretations, you have to ask yourself, if something goes wrong on this flight how is it going to look in a court of law? An instructor can easily determine if your competent, not always the pilot. I would like to think I'm competent to fly the space shuttle, but that doesn't mean it's really the case.

 

 

https://www.casa.gov.au/file/131276/download?token=kzbe519K

 

The information in this document would seem to contradict that, it specifies that only an instructor can deem someone competent

 

 

Roundsounds is totally correct, you need to be deemed competent by an instructor to fly a different type. For example, I'm now multi engine rated, so the licence allows me to fly all multi engine aeroplanes not subject to a type rating or requiring multi crew. However I'm only deemed competent in the partenavia and the chieftain, so I can't go and fly a B200 king air even though I hold a CSU, RU and GTE endorsement without been deemed competent by an instructor first.

 

 

Yes.In reality your licence allows you to fly Cessna's and Pipers, but best to do a check ride on one as they are faster and will handle differently.

Still subject to the general competency rule. If you have never flown a particular aircraft before, and the first time you do you take it up solo and crash, you are going to struggle to justify that one. Also common sense should prevail, for example if you have only flown a c172, I would suggest jumping straight into a C210 would be borderline suicidal unless you got some training in it.

 

 

Dr,

 

There is a bit of a radar blackspot in the area bounded by Mudgee quirindi scone, we will get you at a085 but it will be very intermittent. You should have come back on radar approaching Mudgee. RADAR coverage can change a bit too, for example today I'm getting people on radar at 2500ft at moree, normally you won't get people until 10000ft out there.

 

The relevant radars for that area are located at the round mountain (near coffs) and Mount Boyce (near katoomba), so there is a pretty significant mountain range in the way down near scone.

 

 

Ben, a departure call is quite involved, so I generally prefer a warning call. It just gives me a chance to tell you to standby, controllers have to also talk to other controllers, so even though the frequency may be silent we can be busy. Also it gives us a chance to select the correct aircraft, and we can mentally prepare for what information is about to come.

 

Kiwi,

 

What SDQDI said is pretty much the perfect call. For a tower, they use a different strip for if your actually inbound compared to overflying, that's why I normally prefix with inbound details or transit details. It gives them the chance to grab the appropriate strip, get a pen and get ready for what is about to come. Of course, if you have a flight plan already in you are making their life really easy.

 

 

I would normally open with Tamworth Tower ABC Inbound Details, or Transit Details. Just gives them a chance to grab a strip and get ready for the information. If you just blurt everything out and they are on a coord line or something your just going to have to say it all again anyway

 

 

Looks like I won't successfully fill the seats at the moment. I'm taking IYF, the air Queensland partenavia. Should be fun showing up in a twin at least.

 

 

Cool :) that's one at least. Since your the first to reply how about you do most of the flying ;)

 

 

Sorry I should add that the flight will be departing from YRED

 

 

Hi all,

 

I'm looking for another 3 people who would be interested in flying to the watts bridge airshow on 27 Aug. I'm hoping to take the partenavia, and it would make much more sense to fill it up if possible.

 

 

People would be perfectly willing to be honest with them if we trusted their decision making process. Unfortunately they have proved time and again they don't make smart decisions, and pilots are worried that if they admit the nose bleed they had when they were 6yo then they won't get a medical.

 

 

I didn't realise they had access to that much information. Next thing we know they will be able to check with people's local bottle-o and learn that not every pilot in Australia is a non smoker, non drinker who exercises at least an hour every day.