Avalon ILS Approach
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: S37.54 E145.11
Posts: 639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Avalon ILS Approach
Can anyone comment on the rationale for making such dramatic changes to the AV ILS approach (removal of RPY and the changed holding pattern)?
What was wrong with the old approach?
What was wrong with the old approach?
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pay more and get less
As it is, you get to pay a tidy sum to fly an ILS into a CTAF with Heavy Jet RPT.
Not to mention the (atleast in the last 2 or 3 months) almost constant unavilibilty of the EN ILS, forcing every man and his seminole down the beam at AV
Im as yet unware of the new ILS plate. (better make some changes in the old jeppy folders) at a guess though.. the electricty bill would be my bet!
Not to mention the (atleast in the last 2 or 3 months) almost constant unavilibilty of the EN ILS, forcing every man and his seminole down the beam at AV
Im as yet unware of the new ILS plate. (better make some changes in the old jeppy folders) at a guess though.. the electricty bill would be my bet!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queenland, Australia
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QSK, Airservices seem to have implemented star arrival to facilitate this new ILS approach, ie, RNAV approach (JAYBI ONE ARRIVAL)via BEKKA for FMS equipped aircraft.....in the end it wasn't broke so the change really wasn't required!!
Well done Airservices
Well done Airservices
No fault of Airservices I believe.
From RAPAC minutes in 2006 I understand they had to react to the airport owner's decision to close down some of the navaids they decided their customers didn't require. RPY, the OM and AV NDB I think are the ones involved, and all to be decommissioned in the near future.
From RAPAC minutes in 2006 I understand they had to react to the airport owner's decision to close down some of the navaids they decided their customers didn't require. RPY, the OM and AV NDB I think are the ones involved, and all to be decommissioned in the near future.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: UAE
Age: 48
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It also aids STAR tracking when the NAVAIDS are U/S. The old YMML STARS that used the PLE LOC and the EN LLZ now use RNAV positions (MONTY and SHEED I think). This is becuase when either of them are U/S ATC don't have to say 'track via RNAV from PLE to SHEED' - it is now part of the STAR. Maybe that could be partly why this has happened?
Cheers,
NFR.
Edit: It also means you don't have to pump out NOTAMs to cover the ammended tracking requirements for STARs when the LOC fails.
Cheers,
NFR.
Edit: It also means you don't have to pump out NOTAMs to cover the ammended tracking requirements for STARs when the LOC fails.
Last edited by No Further Requirements; 17th Jun 2007 at 09:51.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Av Ndb, Om & Rpy?
I thought Air-No-Service Australia owned, ran and maintained nav aids?
If so, why would the owners of AV, or any airport give a rats a** what aids where or weren't there?
Also given that these aids "are not required" does that mean the fee for an ILS and/or landing at AV will be discounted? by a 3/5ths perhaps? Given out of the ILS/VOR/NDBx2 and Markers only the ILS and VOR will remain.
If so, why would the owners of AV, or any airport give a rats a** what aids where or weren't there?
Also given that these aids "are not required" does that mean the fee for an ILS and/or landing at AV will be discounted? by a 3/5ths perhaps? Given out of the ILS/VOR/NDBx2 and Markers only the ILS and VOR will remain.
I thought Air-No-Service Australia owned, ran and maintained nav aids?
If so, why would the owners of AV, or any airport give a rats a** what aids where or weren't there?
Further re Avalon, from the 2 NOV 2006 VIC RAPAC Minutes:
6.3. Decommissioning of Ripley NDB and Outer Marker beacon
Discussion:
Bill Beggs, Avalon Airport, advised members the navigation aids in question are owned by Avalon however the land they are located on is leased by Airservices. The lease on this land is due to expire and Airservices will not be renewing it for another term. Avalon Airport’s General Manager Tim Anderson has advised Airservices that they will not be taking over the lease as they no longer require the Ripley NDB and outer marker beacon in their infrastructure.
Bill explained Avalon Airport has consulted with local users who advise they have no issue with decommissioning the aids. In addition the Avalon NDB and middle marker beacon will be decommissioned along with Ripley NDB and the outer marker.
It is proposed to decommission these aids in March 2007 when new DAP plates are available for pilots to fly a DME arc if their aircraft is not RNAV equipped. Ripley will also be replaced with a waypoint.
Conclusions:
RAPAC made no objection to the decommissioning of all the NAVAIDs mentioned throughout the discussion.
Agenda Item: Closed
Discussion:
Bill Beggs, Avalon Airport, advised members the navigation aids in question are owned by Avalon however the land they are located on is leased by Airservices. The lease on this land is due to expire and Airservices will not be renewing it for another term. Avalon Airport’s General Manager Tim Anderson has advised Airservices that they will not be taking over the lease as they no longer require the Ripley NDB and outer marker beacon in their infrastructure.
Bill explained Avalon Airport has consulted with local users who advise they have no issue with decommissioning the aids. In addition the Avalon NDB and middle marker beacon will be decommissioned along with Ripley NDB and the outer marker.
It is proposed to decommission these aids in March 2007 when new DAP plates are available for pilots to fly a DME arc if their aircraft is not RNAV equipped. Ripley will also be replaced with a waypoint.
Conclusions:
RAPAC made no objection to the decommissioning of all the NAVAIDs mentioned throughout the discussion.
Agenda Item: Closed
