Liamksa From Australia, joined Oct 2001, 308 posts, RR: 0 Posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1025 times:
G'day
Here in OZ we are in the process of phasing in a new National Airspace System (NAS), with gradual changes at various time intervals. The net result will be to align our airspace with the North American system and the ICAO standard.
The other night I attended a seminar on the proposed changes to our airspace. American flight school operators John & Martha King were guest speakers to share some of their thoughts on our new NAS.
The major difference will be in the classes of airspace surrounding our major airports. At the moment international airports are (mostly) class C airspace which extend quite high, and are surrounded in class G. The plan is to cut the radius and height of the class C to say 4500' and surround it in class E. Transponders are required if you want to use class E, which will hugely limit the freedom of some aircraft, especially as once the NAS is implemented there will be 400,000 square km additional class E. I have no experience in class E - does it work? Safe? The speakers believed that despite traffic density being far less here compared to the US, the danger of a mid-air collision is greater.
Another implementation well be to US CTAF procedures - particularly standardising radio calls and joining 45 degrees to downwind. I have always joined x-wind overhead the threshold a believe it is the best method - any thoughts?
There were also several trivial changes such as the re-labeling of danger areas to alert areas. They also kept plugging the fact that the charts will be simpler, thus encouraging people to undergo flight training and get into aviation. I think it's safe to say that the major reason people who want to fly don't undergo flight training is due to the cost and not the scary looking charts.
I'd be interested to hear the thoughts of any Aussie or US aviators out there on our new airspace, or the advantages/disadvantages of any other airspace systems in the world.
Goboeing From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 2630 posts, RR: 12 Reply 1, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 957 times:
"The speakers believed that despite traffic density being far less here compared to the US, the danger of a mid-air collision is greater."
This is the only thing I don't understand from what you/they said. Most of the planes in class E aren't on flight following or IFR, they're just VFR flying around, seeing-and-avoiding. Having class E will only help the ones who are on flight following or IFR.
Jhooper From United States of America, joined Dec 2001, 6195 posts, RR: 13 Reply 2, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 935 times:
I don't know what your country's old system is, but our ICAO system works well for us in the U.S. It's best to have a worldwide standard so that international pilots aren't so confused from country to country, imo.
Last year 1,944 New Yorkers saw something and said something.
Woodreau From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 890 posts, RR: 7 Reply 3, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 922 times:
As the other two people have stated, there is no difference between class G and class E airspace when the weather is good. Only when weather drops below VFR does the class E have an effect.
The US changed from its airspace classification to conform to ICAO airspace classification in the early 90's. I imagine it caused quite a stir when it was first implemented, but now that all new pilots are being taught ICAO airspace since day one of flight training (and they haven't heard of the old terms TCA (class B), ARSA (class C), TRSA (no equivalent)) There doesn't seem to be too much gnashing of teeth.
Although I notice that Canada doesn't surround it's international airports with Class B airspace, but Class C instead.
Cheers
Woodreau / KMVL
Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from surviving bad judgement.
Jhooper From United States of America, joined Dec 2001, 6195 posts, RR: 13 Reply 4, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 906 times:
I happen to know what what TCA, PCA, ARSA, control zone, etc. are, but it's great to see those old airline captains who don't have a clue what Class B airspace is. While weather minimums are really the only difference between Class E and Class G for VFR aircraft, Class E requires an ATC clearance to operate IFR.
Last year 1,944 New Yorkers saw something and said something.
411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 9 Reply 5, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 896 times:
On the other hand JHooper, there are plenty of old airline Captains that DO know what Class B airspace is....and indeed they also know how to/have flown 707's, DC6's, L1649's, DC3's...well the list goes on and on.
A few can even remember/have flown four course LF radio ranges.
Jhooper From United States of America, joined Dec 2001, 6195 posts, RR: 13 Reply 6, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 883 times:
I'm 23 so I can't say I exactly have that resume, but I once had the opportunity to ride on a DC-3, and I loved every minute of it! By the way, was an LF radio range one of those navigational aids that used a dot-dash on one side of the course and a dash-dot on the other side so that you would hear a steady tone if you were on course? Those were the days, weren't they 411A ?
Regards.
P.S. I know my post above sounded kinda arrogant; sorry about that.
Last year 1,944 New Yorkers saw something and said something.
411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 9 Reply 7, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 875 times:
Jhooper,
Yep, that's the one, steady tone on course.
Worked OK, but of course VOR's were a lot better when they came along.
Nowadays, we have RNP10, RNP5, even RNP0.3 for really accurate navigation, thanks to GPS.
Recall when INS was introduced, 1/2 mile error was possible after a four hour flight. Nifty gear. Then along came VLF/Omega. On one flight I made from Iceland, the radial error was 1/4 mile after four hours. not bad at all.
Not to mention Loran 'A' (so-so), then Loran 'C' (much better).
One flight I completed in the B707 HNL-SFO, we had dual Doppler and a navigator, who used astro navigation, and he was exactly 2 miles off after 5 hours....oddly enough he was the same age as you, 23.
Sponsor Message: 
From Australia, joined Oct 2001, 308 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 2630 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
