Jump to content
Admin

Changes to Port Phillip Bay VFR lane

Recommended Posts

The Office of Airspace Reform has provided advice of significant changes to the GLS approach runway 34 at Melbourne. These changes will impact aircraft transiting the northern portion of Port Phillip Bay.

 

Specific information has been provided in the following links to a RAPAC document, an AIC, and chart extract, and RAAus encourages all pilots, instructors and students operating in and around this area to carefully review the information and reduction in controlled airspace lower limits. This affects the VFR transit lane around Port Phillip Bay and will become effective 8 November 2018.

 

CFIs are requested to print and display this information for students, pilots and Instructors at the FTS. Members are requested to consider these changes when conducting flight planning in the area noted.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Office of Airspace Reform Regulation has provided advice of significant changes to the GLS approach runway 34 at Melbourne.

 

Fixed! (Ian, I know this is as copied from the RAAus email - but they should know better!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Westbound at 1500 feet? I hope everyone reads this document or I will be head on with someone who follows the VFR cruising altitude rules.

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Westbound at 1500 feet? I hope everyone reads this document or I will be head on with someone who follows the VFR cruising altitude rules.

 

or someone with the old VTC, where eastbound was 1500ft.

 

What was CASA thinking?

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't use CASA and thinking in the same sentence. Someone in their employ should proof read all this stuff and try to eliminate areas likely to cause more risk and confusion especially at the time of introduction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CASA: “The VTC aeronautical chart inset 1:150,000 scale has been updated with the new VFR lane procedures.

This is a recommended procedure only ...” only recommended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So some will be going one way and others the opposite way. Sounds like fun on a busy route where people are rubbernecking the view.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting the number of traffic alerts being given out for this area yesterday.  ATC must love it not.  Altona, Williamstown, BOM Tower featured regularly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AIP SUP H132/18 Issued today 27 NOV 2018 has reversed the wrong direction levels put in place by CASA in direct contravention of their own regulations. Effective immediately.

 

Beware though, you will still face oncoming traffic at the wrong levels (as per current VTC) who have not or will never see this AIP SUP.

 

Perhaps "Request (or Require) traffic advisory" to Melbin Senna whenever transiting those routes, and if you don't get it, you are entitled to lodge a safety report, which will trace directly back to the originators of this massive rooster-up.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 440032 said:

AIP SUP H132/18 Issued today 27 NOV 2018 has reversed the wrong direction levels put in place by CASA in direct contravention of their own regulations. Effective immediately.

 

Beware though, you will still face oncoming traffic at the wrong levels (as per current VTC) who have not or will never see this AIP SUP.

 

Perhaps "Request (or Require) traffic advisory" to Melbin Senna whenever transiting those routes, and if you don't get it, you are entitled to lodge a safety report, which will trace directly back to the originators of this massive rooster-up.

 

 

 

What an absolute cock-up! Who do we blame for this?  CASA? Airservices?  Who do we sue when there is a midair because of this bureaucratic cluster f#*k?

 

Disgraceful!

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Back to my post #5 why can't someone check it out before they promulgate it?. It's not funny actually.. You could/will get killed doing what they TELL you to do..  Nev

Edited by facthunter
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Email from Ozrunways. They have updated their maps. The advantages of electronic mapping hey?

Changes can be made and devices updated with in hours, making aviation safer.

CASA, you listening?....... Probably not....

Edited by Downunder
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but it only makes things safer for those using OzRunways (and perhaps AvData) if the only other aircraft using the lane are also using up-dated EFB maps..

Most likely there will be pilots with very old paper maps, pilots with relatively recent paper maps and pilots without any maps at all.

All of them using the lane and believing they know what to do!!

 

Question for CASA.

If an aviation company / training school / pilot made a stuff-up of this magnitude, what action would be taken against them?

 

Well that's what I reckon should happen here.

CASA banned and disbanded forthwith.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, normfox said:

Question for CASA.

If an aviation company / training school / pilot made a stuff-up of this magnitude, what action would be taken against them?

 

Well that's what I reckon should happen here.

CASA banned and disbanded forthwith.

 

 

hate to ruin a good story .. but methinks it was airservices not CASA that made the change .. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my contact at RAPAC: “..... The bigger issue is that CASA changed the direction of travel after the RAPAC presentation and other consultation. There was no consultation whatsoever about the change of flight direction at 1500 ft. The first RAPAC knew about it is when we saw the new charts along with everyone else. It also appears as if CASA sidestepped the OAR as well. ....” CASA did it all by themselves.

  • Informative 1

Share this post


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

×