nathan_c

Timely thread revival as I love Fraser and I was only thinking about this airstrip the other day. With my pending conversion to GA aircraft and starting my navs in the process of converting to an RPL, this is a strip that I would like to visit once I complete my conversion. For people that have landed there before, would aircraft like C172/tomahawk/generic GA aircraft get in and out with much problem, or is the strip a bit short/boggy with grass/sand etc? I'm going to check it out because Ill be up there in my 4wd in a few months anyway, but figured I would ask the question.

+1 to Ian's reply. KR, you certainly can hang on to it for as long as surveillance coverage exists, right up until the circuit area. For e.g if you were ADSB equipped flying into Roma, I would be able to continue providing the flight following right up until you landed as we receive ADSB on the ground there. As for preferred time, I guess thats really up to you. At the end of the day, if we need to cancel it due to reasons like workload, the fact you have left surveillance then we will do that and we will tell you. Up until that point if you havnt been told its cancelled, and you want to keep it then feel free.

I havnt looked up any statistics, so this is all my own opinion and I am not going to argue any points after this post, but I would personally be sceptical that we are so much more unsafe to fly in then other countries. Personally I think if you believe the other countries are magically better/safer etc due to poor radio discipline I think you are dreaming. As for Australia requiring standard phraseology and insisting on correct read backs and instructions, I am extremely glad we do. I have lost track of the amount of times there has been callsign confusion/ incorrect readbacks/ pilots misunderstanding instructions etc etc, and thats with our 'strict' policies. If we did not enforce this, I shudder to think what we wouldnt catch and what could go wrong/what would be misunderstood, and I think allowing R/T like displayed in that video is honestly a little dangerous.

I only watched from about halfway and did skip a bit of it, but if I had to name one thing different to us was the radio transmissions. We use standard phraseology and readbacks a lot more then they seem to. There was a lot of readbacks without callsigns/ reading back of only roger to headings/levels etc where as we require all of that read back to us. We also wouldnt say approved to a heading req, we would read that back to the pilot as an instruction too.

Thats pretty sector/area/controller dependant. I cant speak for Amberley (though I assume they would have a fairly good idea of whats under their airspace, and being a smaller piece of airspace they are likely to know the smaller towns or hotspots that aircraft track via), however if you were to call me up for example, I control an area that is at times pretty much from Goondoowindi up to north of Mornington Island, out to Birdsville and so forth, so thats a pretty huge area and I dont know every small little town that is likely to be out there. If you were to give us a location off an aerodrome we are much more likely to know where that is, or it is at least easier for us to look up as have a database we can search. Some of the other guys have smaller airspaces so they may be able to comment on whether they would know more of the little ones. By all means though if you don't have any other point of reference we will do our best to find whatever town you are referencing, but it could take us a lot longer if we dont have a listing for it

Unfortunately while in 95% cases I would agree that the climbing aircraft would outclimb, its the other 5% of the time that stops that being an acceptable standard. As has been said, we need to provide 'seperation assurance', which at its most basic level is if we were to all of a sudden drop dead (clearly the rarest worst case scenario!), or we had a system failure, then our further inaction would not cause an breakdown of seperation, as we have assigned stop gap levels/differing routes etc. Obviously it is a bit more complex in some scenarios but thats the basic premise. That 5% can include a pilot just deciding to take his time after being issued climb (I've seen jets obviously assume I couldn't tell/ want to flaunt the rules and climb at less than 100ft per minute just because they can. I watched to see how long a learjet was going to take on their climb one day as it was quiet, and half an hour later I had to issue a requirement to get them to hurry up as they still had not reached their cruising level and were going to conflict with an aircraft that on 'profile' they should never have been an issue with), right through to if an aircraft is climbing out of somewhere and has an engine failure/other emergency situation and can not continue the climb, all of a sudden they are now no longer going to clear the inbounds on profile. Thats just some example of why we cant just let aircraft climb on profile assuming they will be fine.

Re flight following: Its not uncommon, but its not every day either. In the last month or two I have probably provided a SIS (surveillance information service aka. flight following) maybe a handful of times. Its pretty much a workload thing, if the controller is flat out then you are unlikely to get the service, if not then you will get it if you ask for it. It does make it easier for us to pass traffic on you because we know who you are and what you will be doing. Its easier for us to get it going if you have a flight plan already lodged, however if you dont (and again, subject to ATC workload), we can make one up with the details you provide us, it will just take a bit longer to start providing you the service thats all. Would I encourage it? Sure, its there to be used, but try not to be disappointed if you call up on a clearly busy frequency and get denied. Also worth noting, if you are flying outside the J-Curve (east coast) then you will need ADS-B to receive a service.

+1 to what Ian said. If you are ADS-B equipped you can also request flight following outside of the J-Curve (radar coverage), and provided you are flying a route and level that is likely to stay within ADS-B coverage you can get flight following pretty much anywhere.

If you want to know the information about some traffic then it is indeed a request, so feel free to give us a call with "centre skyranger xxxx request" or something like that. I'm not sure what's in there as far as vfr traffic is concerned but you can always have a look at the AIP for official phraseologies. Its also easier for us if you contact us like that first and not just launch straight into lots of info because that way we can be ready to copy down info. As for whether it makes a difference on how you announce yourself, its probably best just to assume that we cant see you. If you are going to give us a call let us know your position (e.g aircraft type, 20 miles south of emerald, estimating 'position' at 'time', maintaining 5500 ft. Request traffic details on callsign x) It helps if you give us a more known location rather than a random dirt strip or town as we will be able to identify your location quicker (Our location knowledge is generally pretty good, but we dont know every little obscure place out there). Even if we cant see you, we can give you an exact report of the other identified aircrafts location, or worst case pass on there reported position as you said. If after all that it turns out we can see you on radar, well that's just icing on the cake and allows us to give even more accurate position information. Never be afraid to give us a yell and ask us about something, we don't bite and if we hear you we will help you out whatever way we can. Especially if we are giving your position as traffic to other aircraft, its way better for us to know who you are and what your intentions are because we can make a much better assessment of if you will be in conflict, rather than having no idea what way you will track or what level you may change too. Also don't be too concerned about messing up a call or not using exact phraseologies etc, while obviously we prefer it and it makes it more efficient, I cant think of a controller that will bite your head off just because you messed up a call. I mean you should hear some of the IFR guys ramble on sometimes, and for that matter ATC's too ;) Hope that makes sense.

Usually its only quite close in to major cities that have approach services (think BN, SY, CS, ML etc) that have a primary radar so I cant speak for them, but if I see a 1200 paint (or any transponder paint for that matter) that is about to bust a RA (for me this can either be R639 west of Amberley or R737 west of Townsville), I will be making broadcasts to the aircraft to try and alert them. Its pretty rare but it does happen and it doesnt matter if they are receiving flight following or not, its still a requirement for me to try and stop it happening if we see the radar paint. If I cant contact the aircraft and it continues towards the RA, thats when I have to be calling up AMB or TL and informing them about the lighty thats about to mix it with the fighter jets and thats not much fun! As for the comments about listening on area, its always appreciated on our end when we can contact and confirm the vfr paints have the traffic, because it can be uncomfortable when no one responds and they are heading straight at another aircraft. We also give traffic info on other vfr paints in the area if you are getting close to them and are listening out, which usually just results in confirmation that everyone is already aware of each other, but its nice to know for sure!

I concede my post may not have been worded as intended, but that was kind of the point I was trying to make with what I wrote after your quoted sentence. I can't stop you from using another time outside CTA, but it is definitely a safety issue.

We do not have time zones (or state boundaries) overlayed on our ATC screens, and when you have airspaces that can have 3 or more states (therefore potentially timezones) there is no way ATC will be able to tell you the local time and be confident they are 100% accurate. (Without wasting a lot of time we usually don't have looking it up) You are welcome to use whatever time you want outside CTA, but consider a GA flight that is doing a long flight, and may have well left a timezone where the time is a GMT+9.5/10.5 time zone, and arriving in your GMT+9 (just for example). You may have to talk to them about your intended arrival times at an aerodrome, and if you are using local and they are on Zulu, you could potentially be arriving at the same time but you could be reporting to him a time thats half an hour out which is a safety issue.

Thats because when we read it out to you we are just decoding it as we read it, because its quicker and more useful to everyone than reading out the phonetics exactly as they are coded in the Taf. Having a standard format allows it to be the same every time and therefore everyone has an expectation of how its going to come out. If it wasn't coded in a certain way, the Met guy could write whatever the hell he wanted in whatever order he wanted, and I guarentee you that would end up more confusing especially if you were trying to compare two TAF's side by side to see the changes (just as an example.) As for "IMHO the less things we have to 'interpret' the safer we will be", I actually completely disagree. As shags said it will take a person a couple of days to start getting stuff down pat (for the common stuff at least. Hell sometimes even I have to look up certain decodes before I give them to a pilot just because its not common), but once you know how to read/interpret them you are going to have a far greater understanding, and appreciation of what its trying to tell you and I actually believe the more knowledge you are armed with, the safer overall you will actually be as a pilot, not the inverse as you are suggesting. My 2c anyway, cheers.

Shags, While not completely the same, for me flying a single seat glider for the first time was much the same as said above. Be confident on something similar, know as much as humanly possible before the flight and then just go do it. Fun times.

Simple answer is if I was controlling a sector close to the cities or anywhere a primary radar is installed (i.e anywhere that has an approach sector like Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne etc), yes I would be able to see you as a return on my screen. However the primary radars have limited range, and they give me zero information about you except for your location. I cant see your speed, altitude, whether you are VFR, IFR, Military, nothing. All I see is a small cross. Anywhere else, like my sector where I dont get primary radar coverage, you are invisible to me. If you dont have a transponder, or do not have it turned on, I get absolutely no indication that you are there at all, because secondary surveillance radar can not pick you up without it. If you do have a transponder than even squawking 1200 I can get your position, height, and an indication of your speed and can give a proper traffic statement on you. This is all obviously only valid in the J curve (basically east coast), anywhere else regardless of whether you have a transponder or not I wont see you without ADSB.

Personally I'm getting sick of reading all this 'ATC are uncooperative and are being unfair by denying me a clearance' rubbish. I couldnt give two damns what type of aircraft you are in, if you dont get a clearance its because I can not safely give it to you using the seperation standards that are available to me. If I can seperate you inside my controlled airspace, than I WILL give you a clearance, regardless of whether you are a C172 or a B747. Also keep in mind that if you file a VFR flight plan as opposed to IFR (which is obviously not relevant in this situation), your plan does not get sent automatically to my screen, and if you call me I will need to call the flight data coordinators and get your plan sent to me, which means if you do this on the boundary it will cause a delay for you. In the interests of disclosure, I do not operate Class C or D Airspace, only class A, E and G, however for my E airspace, and my fellow controllers that operate the Class C and etc, the rules are the same, and I know for a fact they operate as I have described above. I know most in this thread have not been posting with this view, but the thread has obviously stemmed from people observing people with this attitude, and its just getting a bit annoying.

They can release them in controlled airspace yes. They have a transponder on them so ATC can actually see it as long as there is radar coverage. The one that was up in Queensland a few weeks ago was planned to be released in controlled airspace just to the west of Brisbane, obviously with a lot of co ordination with the relevant ATC sector though. Unfortunately I wasnt at work at the time so I couldnt tell you how it all actually happened unfortunately.

Highly highly unlikely, ATC doesnt have the ability to recieve the MIL UHF (Well I can't and I'm 90% sure the tower can't either but I am not a tower controller) and if it was landing at Sydney just after curfew lifted then I'd doubt that it wouldn't be in contact with ATC assuming nil radio failures. Thats in todays world anyway, not disputing that planes like F111's used to operate like that because I have no knowledge there but it wouldn't surprise me. I dont know what aircraft this actually was however, nor the rules on lighting because which lights they have turned on mean zilch to me and my dot for them on the screen.

Apparently so :P

After a little bit of a break from flying due to costs, went up this morning and came back with a rating on the Cessna 162, and my pax endorsement signed off. Pretty stoked.

Also just purchased for iBooks

Pathfinder and Gofly are both very good (I only managed a few flights at Gofly before stopping with RA due to cost however, but thats not a reflection on their prices thats a reflection on my wallet in general). Pathfinder uses Jabirus which you will already be used to but fly out of a Class D towered aerodrome, and as far as I am aware now also offers conversions to a PPL in house. Gofly flies out of an uncontrolled aerodrome (though a busy one sometimes), and flies tecnams, texans, and another couple of aircraft are available for hire through them as well. Im sure you would be extremely happy with either one.

I was under the impresson that the J230 at parkinson was not Pathfinders.... unless they have changed j230's again since I flew there last as the registrations were different....

Remembered I had AIP on my computer, here is what is says. Reference is AIP GEN 3.4 20 and 21, paragraph starting 4.16. So you are fine to group your numbers. 4.16 Flight Number Call-signs -- Using Group Form 4.16.1 Within Australian airspace, “group form” is the preferred means of transmitting call-sign/flight number. Group form should also be used with military and other aircraft using a rootword call-sign with numeric suffix. 4.16.2 Group form is the grouping of numbers into pairs, or where a number ending in “00” is spoken in hundreds (refer para 4.17). For three digit numbers, the second and third numbers are grouped. Examples are as follows: QLINK 122 QLINK ONE TWENTY TWO QANTAS 1220 QANTAS TWELVE TWENTY CAR 21 CAR TWENTY ONE CLASSIC 12 CLASSIC TWELVE VIRGIN 702 VIRGIN SEVEN ZERO TWO BIRDOG 021 BIRDOG ZERO TWENTY ONE 4.16.3 Pilots and ATS should be aware that the preference to use “group form” does not invalidate any transmissions made in conventional formats. However, to retain the integrity in the communication between ATS and operators, the identification format used should be consistent. 4.16.4 A pilot not using “group form” in establishing communication, but subsequently addressed by ATS in this format, should adopt the use of “group form” for the remainder of the flight in Australian airspace. 4.16.5 There is no additional abbreviated form when using flight number call-signs. The airline designator and all digits of the call-sign, including leading zeros, must be pronounced

From memory, AIP states groupings are acceptable, I can find the reference when I get into work tomorrow if people wish, but seventy three fifty seven is fine I believe and is how I would say it talking to an aircraft. For example, if I was talking to QFA663, its said as Qantas six sixty-three.