Jump to content

CASA discussion paper for low level frequency use in class G airspace


Recommended Posts

I think its important to remember below 5000 in class G, radio is not mandatory, so use your eyes as primary threat detection

 

Also when in doubt and when higher broadcast on area, as anyone unaware of an ALA will be on Area

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I hope the adjudicators do combine this with my original post. Hint Hint.As I stated in my post I am now in favour of using area. Reason being that Multicoms apply to several strips within reception of my home base, plus there is YGLA with a discreet frequency.

If I am using and listening to area I will not hear all those other irrelevant strip broadcasts, but I will hear anyone who broadcasts at my home strip, plus they will hear me. The only inconvenience of using area is that sometimes the frequency is too busy for me to broadcast, but then I just use see and avoid.

 

What really pisses me of is that there are a lot of pilots who will not use area and insist on using 126.7. That in my opinion is sheer stupidity and will land them in trouble if there is an incident and CASA investigate. It is also bad airmanship to completely disregard the requirements of CASA and consider they are above needing to comply.

 

If the discussion results in CASA saying we should use multicom or any other frequency I will happily comply, but I have only contempt for those who think they can make it up as they go along.

When I used area freq, air services tole me off and that I was on the wrong frequency.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
.It has been suggested to me that crashes of planes like my Jabiru are to the benefit of CASA in that they get more power and money if there are more crashes.

Being a cynic myself, I also believe police need criminals and doctors need patients (sick people).

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes scre, one day I heard a guy flying one of our planes giving position reports on the area frequency until he was told to shut up. Personally, I use the frequency to listen on and would only broadcast in an emergency.

 

I don't think the guy told to shut up was over 5000 ft, but even if he was, I don't think they wanted to hear from him.

 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes scre, one day I heard a guy flying one of our planes giving position reports on the area frequency until he was told to shut up. Personally, I use the frequency to listen on and would only broadcast in an emergency.I don't think the guy told to shut up was over 5000 ft, but even if he was, I don't think they wanted to hear from him.

Was he at an unmarked airfield?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

He was flying cross country from SE South Australia towards western Victoria. He was on the frequency written on the VNC chart for that area, the same one I had on just to listen to the important planes and in case I had an emergency.

 

I was flying from Gawler to Edenhope at the time, but he was a good 50km from where I was. The Melbourne center guy ignored him for a time, while he gave a position report every 10 mins or so, then he told him to stop.

 

The frequency was not overloaded at the time, but it could have been if everybody gave position reports every 10 mins.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
He was flying cross country from SE South Australia towards western Victoria. He was on the frequency written on the VNC chart for that area, the same one I had on just to listen to the important planes and in case I had an emergency.I was flying from Gawler to Edenhope at the time, but he was a good 50km from where I was. The Melbourne center guy ignored him for a time, while he gave a position report every 10 mins or so, then he told him to stop.

The frequency was not overloaded at the time, but it could have been if everybody gave position reports every 10 mins.

Why would he be making position reports on area frequency? Sounds like the same guy I heard making position reports on Adelaide centre over Hahndorf at 3,500 (1,000 ft inside class C). I reckon the ATC guys are pretty understanding and tolerate plenty of mistakes from us weekend warrior types but even they have their limits

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I make position reports on Area every 15-20 min or as I enter and exit a Frequency

 

I'm against overuse of the radio, but by the same token its there to help with situational awareness and they have no right to tell him to be quiet...

 

Very hard to be situationally aware if no one is communicating, and we can say all we like that you should be looking which is true....

 

But we also know that there are a lot of times your looking at a map, a list, doing a calculation... if someone is heading in my general, Id love to know so please don't shut up for my sake....

 

 

  • Caution 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
I make position reports on Area every 15-20 min or as I enter and exit a FrequencyI'm against overuse of the radio, but by the same token its there to help with situational awareness and they have no right to tell him to be quiet...

Very hard to be situationally aware if no one is communicating, and we can say all we like that you should be looking which is true....

 

But we also know that there are a lot of times your looking at a map, a list, doing a calculation... if someone is heading in my general, Id love to know so please don't shut up for my sake....

Imagine if every ultralight and GA in class G made position reports on area every 15 minutes....

 

 

  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Imagine if every ultralight and GA in class G made position reports on area every 15 minutes....

After talking recently with CASA's manager of radio congestion (not sure of exact title) but hes an old friend from childhood, That's why the charts change so often... CASA monitors radio congestion very closely and the idea is they want us to use the radio for situational awareness (Im not suggesting overuse or rambling on when you do make a call) , but they are quite prepared to split frequencies further if and when congestion does arise... according to their manager of that section that is one of the main reasons charts have such a short life...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Imagine if every ultralight and GA in class G made position reports on area every 15 minutes....

I have no doubt that anyone doing that in my local area would attract "advice" from local operators without considering area controllers.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not referring to aircraft in CTAF or ALA circuits etc, only transmitting aircraft, so it shouldn't get annoying for long given most aircraft flying at 100kt and above do not remain in most area frequencies for too long. Sure some remote areas that might be the case but in the eastern seaboard areas, making 15 minute calls its likely you're going to only make two calls per area, which is hardly excessive or annoying, especially when your only basically giving a location heading and altitude..

 

Got to be careful with comments like this guys as this is not what the safety gurus are telling us, they are telling us we need to be moving towards alerted see and avoid... and they want us to use the radio to do so...

 

According to CASA

 

3.4.1.1 Area VHF safety benefits Alerted see-and-avoid In order to gain the maximum safety benefits of alerted see-and-avoid, pilots must be monitoring and, when necessary, broadcasting on the same frequency. CASA publishes guidance on the safety benefits of alerted see-and-avoid in CAAP 166-2(1). In order to be monitoring the same frequency, the details of those frequencies must be clearly understood and interpreted by all pilots and published in the AIP and on aeronautical charts. Currently the appropriate frequency to use in Class G airspace is Area VHF4 , except where an aerodrome symbol, CTAF frequency label or Broadcast Area is published on an aeronautical chart. Alerted see-and-avoid is also dependent on pilots being aware of the potential existence and approximate location of other traffic in their immediate vicinity

In order for the radio to have good safety benefit as an alerted see and avoid or for situational awareness one must broadcast and one must listen and it must occur often enough to actually be alerted, so you can see and avoid in time to avoid a collision. Many aircraft in class G fly at 100kt to 120kt with a head on approach speed of 200-240kt. In 15 minutes two RAA aircraft or GA can approach by 50nm+ to a collision point... its not so excessive when you view it that way...

 

From CAAP 166-2(1)

 

Alerted see-and avoid

5.1 As aviation developed, increasing performance, traffic density and flight in non-visual conditions caused limitations of see-and-avoid to surface. The need to enhance a pilot’s situational awareness has led to the principle of ‘alerted see-and-avoid’.

 

5.2 The primary tool of alerted see-and-avoid that is common across aviation—from sport and recreational to air transport—is radio communication. Radio allows for the communication of information (in this instance traffic information) to the pilot from the ground (e.g. air traffic control) or from other aircraft.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So DrZoos, the Melbourne center guy was wrong and should only have told him to use fewer and shorter calls?

 

It is very uncommon for me to hear any rec aircraft on this area frequency. Unlike Nick's guy, this one was flying in legal airspace.

 

Here's a couple of other reasons why I stay quiet... Firstly, using their services is a sure way of attracting "user-pays" fees in time and, secondly, the chances of an en-route midair are very small, less than one in many millions, even without looking out the window or flying the right altitude for your heading. This is in comparison to one in a hundred from all causes or down 1 in 25 if you become inactive on account of being grounded for safety reasons.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's one view you hold that I don't accept, Bruce. The sky isn't so big you don't need everything going for you, and the more people us GNSS and accurate tracking the more likely an event will happen to you. Nev

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, throwing the cat amongst the pidgeons here. (And note, I have not thought this through)

 

Would it be be better to make "area" above 10 000 and hand out a few more discrete ctaf frequencys for the busier 126.7 areas?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really just can't accept that a bunch of bug smasher RA Aus pilots with no CTA training going out and making position reports on area frequencies is a good idea. There is a sense of organisation when talking to ATC that doesn't exist on one way broadcast channels. The only time a position report on area would make any sense is when you are beyond 10nm from an airport or ALA on the chart and also arguably when not in radar range. Keeping in mind that you're also travelling at a correct vfr altitude, are looking outside regularly and are listening to area, I really can't see the point in thousands of aircraft among these new types of calls. Keeping in mind the fact that pretty much no one does or has ever done this and there hasn't been a collision like this in the past, I'd say it's overkill.

 

To throw a bigger cat amongst the pidgeons, cost issues aside, the obvious solution is ads-b in and out in every aircraft. I know the pundits argue that relying on technology means eyes in the cockpit which is counter productive, but I'd take it any day over any of these radio based solutions. Sure in the busy terminal area you're better off using your eyes and ears but out in the middle of nowhere you'd probably only have 3-4 other aircraft within 100 miles of you so keeping track of them on a screen wouldn't take too much of your attention away from other things

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The requirement is to use area at airstrips which are not on the charts, so if someone is doing a cross country it only applies to them at the ends of their trip. They may hear someone, near their track giving info and surely that is good.

 

I do most of my flying from unmarked strips and I only use area frequency if I think there will be traffic at a strip that ought to be aware of my presence. I will use it if for example I am on downwind and a plane on the ground is moving towards the strip, or if I have seen a plane in the area and I am taxying or about to take off.

 

The only time I speak on area is if I hear ATC saying there is unidentified traffic where I am. I would then call up and say I was that traffic and possibly intentions, It usuall brings a response and possibly request for ident.

 

Nick doesn't seem to have a very high opinion of RAAus pilot capabilities, but there are some very good and a few pretty poor, with the majotity trying to be sensible and do the right thing.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't a dig at anyone it's a simple fact. I never one spoke on area during my Ra Aus training. I'm sure that's not uncommon. I'm also not saying anything about anyone's capabilities as a pilot, that would be absurd. I'm also a big supporter of ra Aus getting access to cta. It was a simple observation that I don't think it's going to go down well with a lot of stakeholders if ra Aus pilots all start going out and making position reports and part of my reasoning is that it's not something that they've done in the past so how can they go out and do it without any training.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not forget, VFR pilot Area Frequency reports are advisable (incl. RA-Aus) when crossing the Bass Strait doing "skeds" at specific intervals.

 

As well, I do brief Area Frequency reports when using the VFR coastal & inland routes by Melbourne, again a recommended procedure. I've even had ATC advise me of oncoming radar paints through the Kilmore gap VFR track.... thanks guys!

 

As for Area Frequency position reports elsewhere, I think that's excessive.

 

However, I've certainly spoken up when I hear ATC reporting my radar "paint" as a potential conflict to IFR traffic. It gives peace of mind to ATC & the IFR pilot that I'm listening & watching, and advising of my track & intentions.

 

I'm also a fan of ADS-Pi boxes supplying traffic info into my iPad (along with OzRunways traffic, (but sadly not AvPlan too)).

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

When I hear someone using what I consider overuse of any freq. OCTA I give them 1000ft vertical or a couple of miles horizontally so I guess they are achieving their aim anyway.

 

I just don't want to be there.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How many en-route mid-airs do we have in an average year? The answer is approximately none.

 

I don't want to do ADSB for my Jabiru because it will be priced out of all reason.

 

In my glider I have a flarm which does the same thing for much cheaper. I don't think it has saved me from a midair but it sure frightens me a lot with the warning lights indicating the positions of other flarm gliders.

 

But gliders have a midair risk which power planes don't have because gliders need the same small bits of rising air.

 

Our species is very bad at processing risk and we are so afraid of heights that we act irrationally when it comes to aviation . Blame our arboreal ancestors.

 

We could save heaps of lives by spending CASA money on over-50's exercise incentives, but our brains are wired up to not understand that.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for the record Bruce, my ADS-Pi is an ADSB-in device I built 2 years ago from electronic bits for about $95 and it shows up on my iPad.... not that expensive IMHO....

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

wow dsam, it would be great if your thing were to be legal once they mandated this stuff. I imagine them specifying certified things at thousands of dollars with yearly renewals by licensed guys at about 1000 a go.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
wow dsam, it would be great if your thing were to be legal once they mandated this stuff. I imagine them specifying certified things at thousands of dollars with yearly renewals by licensed guys at about 1000 a go.

That's the problem - none of the mandated stuff will be cheap home-made stuff. There will be a requirement for the certified device and it won't be just ads-b in it will be out as well.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...