Jump to content

Lowering Class E between Melbourne and Cairns


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

The person responding doesn't know. They are just quoting existing rules and applying them down to 1500 feet.

 

As per their own proposal they say this

 

" Increase use of low powered non-TSO ADS-B transponders to maximise infrastructure investment"

 

That can only mean a SE2 as it is the only one approved by CASA.

 

 

No. Their proposal does not mention low powered devices. They fall back on existing regs

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 592
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

RF guy, RAA and other organisations HAVE to reject this proposal out of hand or otherwise they are conceding Airservices the right to make arbitrary decisions. We are then reduced to just being suppli

Dont fall into their trap. To consider any change before a complete justification statement can be proven true and correct gives them leverage. By suggesting other than the status quo at this time say

'Welcome to OneSky™ Australia, where we want everyone to be included.' To be included in 'OneSky'™ will cost you about ten thousand dollars per aircraft for initial installation, An annual f

Posted Images

My quote is directly copied from Airservices proposal so of course they mention it. Yes they always fall back on existing regulations as that's all they have. They will never say "Well we are going to change this or that" as they could be held liable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

My quote is directly copied from Airservices proposal so of course they mention it. Yes they always fall back on existing regulations as that's all they have. They will never say "Well we are going to change this or that" as they could be held liable.

Sorry KG - you are quite correct. I think I may have been carried away by the caring attitude exhibited by Airservices.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/01/2021 at 7:41 AM, horsefeathers said:

Class E LL5000, would be acceptable.

Not acceptable in areas where that is ground height or close to it. Plenty of terrain in VIC to NSW corridor puts us very close to or into the dirt at A050. There are some very strong responses being written for submission which speaks to how seriously disturbing the proposal is being viewed in the community.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/01/2021 at 4:33 PM, kgwilson said:

Well I've made my submission of 10 major points to RA-Aus & will wait a few days to make a full detailed submission to Airf***ing Services. I wonder when CASA are going to get in on the act. At present they will be keeping their heads down dodging the Flak.

I presume Airservices will put the proposal to CASA after the feedback phase. CASA is the authority that will need to make the changes. Hopefully RAAus, AOPA etc will already be lobbying them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked a question of asa still waiting for a response, hope they can respond before the 14th. I asked if low cost ads-b was suitable for vfr  without a transponder? I think I already know what the answer is. 

As mentioned AGL is too vague to be implemented especially in varying terrain. Imagine training for stalls at 1500' I believe that's asking for trouble. Instead of increasing safety it would actually be decreasing safety, imagine getting caught in rotor around the mountains because you had to fly low! Not to mention the rougher conditions down low, adding stress to both pilot and airframe. Please show us where it is proven to be unsafe in status quo? I can imagine all looking at their skyechoes or whatever to see traffic, but it is never going to be 100% reliable, I can see benefits but also shortcomings. Seems most midairs have happened in circuit area or close to aerodromes, use whatever to mitigate risk but don't forget to look outside and communicate. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also asked a question which is "Where are the high and medium density areas located and the boundaries that this proposed change affects". No response yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kgwilson said:

I also asked a question which is "Where are the high and medium density areas located and the boundaries that this proposed change affects". No response yet.

I did get a response to my question: we are working on it!
there is a very rough outline in one of their presentations, showing the “J-curve”, which is roughly where the lower limits would be applied.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted their J-curve map on here last THU. It is of sufficient quality that you can zoom in on it which is what I also attached (centred around the BNE area). You can then compare their blue outline with a VNC of the area in which you are interested and will discover that it encompasses all of the current 8500LL.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have blown this up to about 400% which even makes the blue line about 100km wide. This is just the general area and not the medium and high density traffic areas they state in their proposal which is why I have asked for the actual areas which I have yet to get a response about. They are probably frantically trying to work this out at present or maybe not.

 

When I get a response I will also want to know what they define as high and medium traffic density. They will be able to obtain RPT and GA & RA with transponders from the Flight data they have or even from FlightRadar 24 etc. Most of the traffic is likely to be RPT above 8500 feet anyway except when in climb or descent to major airports.

 

In the proposal they specify an "Assessed level of Risk" as a reason for lowering Class E. What evidence do they have to determine and support this assessment?

 

There is a multitude of issues and plenty of pilots pretty unhappy about this proposal & I encourage everyone to put in a submission. There are 13 days left to do so.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

That fuzzy blue line gives CASA and Airservices and the ADF plenty of scope to haggle over the proposed airspace changes.

 

The government has invested a massive amount of money to upgrade Australia’s military and civil communication, navigation and surveillance systems in these increasingly uncertain times.

 

At the core is the huge OneSKY Civil Military Air Traffic System that will integrate everything under the world’s largest single Flight Information Region. The expanding ADS-B network and Satellite Based Augmentation System will facilitate ADF manned and unmanned ops and civil RPT and all IFR ops no matter what the traffic density is for RNP, communications and surveillance.

 

Just think how many ADF bases sit under E Class airspace. We fly around a lot of Restricted Airspace along that J-curve from Cairns to Melbourne and onward to Adelaide. GA and RA is at the bottom of their list for consideration but represents a risk factor they are uncomfortable with.

 

The apparent concession over electronic conspicuity devices like Sky Echo means nothing because they are not compliant devices in E Class airspace under current rules.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

The feedback is not to CASA, it is to Airservices who are proposing this change. CASA will eventually have to approve the changes whatever they are and determine the lower levels for the areas presumably based on 1500 feet above the highest ground in each area.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

those new charts are insanity

WTF ?

The only way it can work is if they  push Class E to ground level

this 1500' AGL in the mountains is first class BS. someone needs their head examined.

 

Edited by RFguy
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, don't forget that one of the avowed aims is to align our airspace with American best practice.

However, Class E in the US does NOT require a transponder, or even 2 way radio.

Airservices is trying to sell us a pup 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst the responses to Airservices proposal are to be directed to them, the AVSEF Aviation State Engagement Forum website (equivalent to the old RAPAC), is provided by CASA to enable the Australian aviation industry, associations, and organisations including independents,  to consult on aviation matters, including airspace and procedures of a regional and/or national importance to improve overall outcomes.

 

The Secretariat function is managed by CASA’s Manager Industry Relations or their delegate. The role of the Secretariat is to maintain the website and act as a conduit of the proponent’s information rather than acting as a moderator or censor. The Secretariat and CASA takes no responsibility for the information provided by proponents or respondents. 

 

All this should really improve overall outcomes for us!

ADE8B562-9D96-4823-B1E1-62A776DFF229.thumb.jpeg.64c6aeb182f5198d0ac1b0d3b2d46c1b.jpeg

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes its a joke..from Brisbane the E airspace finished just east of Chinchilla and just west of Blackwater...and west of Millmerran....These guys obviously dont want anything except RPT flying

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Something more sensible would be class E > 3000 AGL (as to not to mess with non CTZ ADs)  and thus anything goes if you have at least an Mode A  transponder + EC device.   (modeA only because altitude from ModeC is redundant with ADSB being TX) - reduces upkeep.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I cannot fly out my home strip as I am surrounded by rugged terrain except in the direction of Rockhampton and will need a clearance through their controlled airspace to be able to fly out of the area.

IF Air Services pull off this crazy plan, I guess me as the PIC will have to do whatever it takes to fly as safely as possible expecting the required clearance to transit out of my home strip.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kyle Communications said:

Yes its a joke..from Brisbane the E airspace finished just east of Chinchilla and just west of Blackwater...and west of Millmerran....These guys obviously dont want anything except RPT flying

 

Mark, monuments have more brains than Air Services 🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites

In some places 1500AGL will be 6500AMSL but then this is the entire area not areas of medium and high density traffic which have yet to be defined. 6500 over the Gibraltar range on the way to Armidale from South Grafton is insane unless it is a clear calm day. At 6500 with a good South Westerly the down draft on the lee side will better than many aircraft can outclimb.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
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...