Class 'D' airspace radio procedures
Mostlytossas,
I absolutely agree. Unfortunately, normally the "unnecessary" yap comes from those who don't know what the other party needs to hear (aka standard R/T)and therefore they yap unnecessarily, clogging up the airwaves to get the message across.
My point exactly. That is why there will be no Class D tower there, nor at many other busy smasher airfields. It's not necessary and probably wouldn't work. Then again you're unlikely to find a RPT jet there either.
Howabout,
Malletting commencing! Thump
thump thump
Jazzy,
Don't worry, if you learn bad habits from Dick et al, we'll soon set you right when you become a professional pilot! 
Less unnecessary yap the better.
This coming Sunday will be a good case in point at the Jamestown airshow and fly in.
Howabout,
Malletting commencing! Thump
thump thump Jazzy,
Looks like the old "Aviate, Navigate, Communicate" holds true eh?
Last edited by Capn Bloggs; 13th Oct 2009 at 10:50. Reason: Spelling!
What's a professional pilot pray tell????
Someone who fly's with a attitude to do everything right,or someone who does it for payment,or is it someone who sits up front of one of those big shiny thingys flying in almost entirely CTA where everything is planned and organised for them while they they winge about how the industry is stuffed and they are not respected anymore?
Someone who fly's with a attitude to do everything right,or someone who does it for payment,or is it someone who sits up front of one of those big shiny thingys flying in almost entirely CTA where everything is planned and organised for them while they they winge about how the industry is stuffed and they are not respected anymore?
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: various areas
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Smith,
ATC might well do, they might not also.
There are a few differences between the GAAP and a proper class D in Australia, and that of the FAA system.
1. The GAAP is generally a 3nm zone, a Class D is generally 5-8nm (think Visual range from the tower)
2. The GAAP does not have associated Climb and Descent airspace surrounds, a class D generally does (up to A045-A085)
3. The GAAP is a non-radar tower, so is the Australian Class D, FAA D towers are generally radar equipped
4. The GAAP do not have dedicated Approach and Departures radar, Australian Class D combine Tower, Approach and Departures, FAA D towers (up to 2,500ftAGL) have dedicated separate Approach and Departures TRACON, and in many cases separate Clearance Delivery services
Why the differences? in simplistic terms, funding and total traffic operations at each location. Australian class D handles large numbers of Regular Public Transport Aircraft (by comparison to the average US FAA class D), and generally less overall traffic. It therefore stands to reason that efficiencies in service application can be made in Australia, such as combined Tower and Approach services.
Cost difference of providing each?
From what I have observed, you take no time to understand nor accept the repeated explainations provided by Australian controllers of what they do and why. Pilots who operate regularly in those regional airspace areas seem to understand readily.
You are not qualified to make that statement Mr Smith. You do yourself no favours by making such silly comments.
mostlytossas
You last post was insightful. Is the pseudonym a hint to deliberate tomfoolery? or self reflecting?
Why ever would a VFR aircraft have to give a departure call- there is just a chance that ATC would actually see the aircraft depart!
There are a few differences between the GAAP and a proper class D in Australia, and that of the FAA system.
1. The GAAP is generally a 3nm zone, a Class D is generally 5-8nm (think Visual range from the tower)
2. The GAAP does not have associated Climb and Descent airspace surrounds, a class D generally does (up to A045-A085)
3. The GAAP is a non-radar tower, so is the Australian Class D, FAA D towers are generally radar equipped
4. The GAAP do not have dedicated Approach and Departures radar, Australian Class D combine Tower, Approach and Departures, FAA D towers (up to 2,500ftAGL) have dedicated separate Approach and Departures TRACON, and in many cases separate Clearance Delivery services
Why the differences? in simplistic terms, funding and total traffic operations at each location. Australian class D handles large numbers of Regular Public Transport Aircraft (by comparison to the average US FAA class D), and generally less overall traffic. It therefore stands to reason that efficiencies in service application can be made in Australia, such as combined Tower and Approach services.
Cost difference of providing each?
From what I have observed, you take no time to understand nor accept the repeated explainations provided by Australian controllers of what they do and why. Pilots who operate regularly in those regional airspace areas seem to understand readily.
Oh, I know! To make the airspace look busy and complex!
mostlytossas
You last post was insightful. Is the pseudonym a hint to deliberate tomfoolery? or self reflecting?
Last edited by ARFOR; 13th Oct 2009 at 16:58. Reason: typing
CAPN BLOGGS
Bloggsy
I love your absolute confidence in the ability of government bureaucracies to act correctly. You seem to have forgotten what happened in the old Soviet Union. I love your comment,
Bloggsy, re your comment on Jamestown and why you believe there wasn’t a tower there, you seem to have also forgotten that at both Birdsville and at Bathurst, control towers were put in for the races until I stopped this ridiculous waste of money and safety-reducer going ahead.
I well remember the NOTAM for Bathurst recommended that aircraft should fly to Orange or, in fact, any other airport if they didn’t want to be delayed. Of course, those were the days when Air Traffic Control actually separated VFR from VFR.
ARFOR
FAA Class D towers are not generally radar equipped – Class D in the USA is for a non-radar tower. In the US just as in Australia, some of their D towers do have a radar situation display, but the tower controllers are not radar rated and the radar cannot be used for separation purposes.
My estimate is that at least one third of the 350 US Class D towers do not have a radar display as the airspace is not covered by radar.
Your comment:
is absolute rubbish.
The USA has many Class D towers which have a similar traffic mix to our Rockhampton, Alice Springs or Launceston.
ARFOR, just like Bloggsy, you are doing everything you can to keep the status quo. What do you think of the CASA decision, which I understand is in writing, that Airservices is to move all non-radar towers to US FAA Class D NAS procedures? Are you going to continue to hide behind anonymity, or are you actually going to say something under your own name so you will be listened to? Or do you really expect CASA to take notice of anonymous entities posting on PPRuNe?
Bloggsy
I love your absolute confidence in the ability of government bureaucracies to act correctly. You seem to have forgotten what happened in the old Soviet Union. I love your comment,
You see Dick, Australia for years has had a graded, tailored airspace system commensurate with the risk that makes your ICAO/Yank one-size-fits-all NAS arrangements look very average
I well remember the NOTAM for Bathurst recommended that aircraft should fly to Orange or, in fact, any other airport if they didn’t want to be delayed. Of course, those were the days when Air Traffic Control actually separated VFR from VFR.
ARFOR
FAA Class D towers are not generally radar equipped – Class D in the USA is for a non-radar tower. In the US just as in Australia, some of their D towers do have a radar situation display, but the tower controllers are not radar rated and the radar cannot be used for separation purposes.
My estimate is that at least one third of the 350 US Class D towers do not have a radar display as the airspace is not covered by radar.
Your comment:
Australian class D handles large numbers of Regular Public Transport Aircraft (by comparison to the average US FAA class D)
The USA has many Class D towers which have a similar traffic mix to our Rockhampton, Alice Springs or Launceston.
ARFOR, just like Bloggsy, you are doing everything you can to keep the status quo. What do you think of the CASA decision, which I understand is in writing, that Airservices is to move all non-radar towers to US FAA Class D NAS procedures? Are you going to continue to hide behind anonymity, or are you actually going to say something under your own name so you will be listened to? Or do you really expect CASA to take notice of anonymous entities posting on PPRuNe?
Dick,
FGS, that was almost 20 years ago! Let it go, will ya!
You won't be supporting the new towers at Karratha and Broome then?
Err, who said they were? I thought the NPRM process was the appropriate method of feedback to CASA. And no, I won't be submitting under "Capn Bloggs".
Anyway, thread drift. Stick to the radio calls, boy!
you seem to have also forgotten that at both Birdsville and at Bathurst, control towers were put in for the races until I stopped this ridiculous waste of money and safety-reducer going ahead.
safety-reducer
Or do you really expect CASA to take notice of anonymous entities posting on PPRuNe?
Anyway, thread drift. Stick to the radio calls, boy!
Bloggsy
Yes, almost twenty years ago an enormous amount of money saved and without one accident resulting! At that time, there were people resisting the removal of those towers.
I totally support new towers at Karratha and Broome if they comply with a sensible cost/benefit formula.
Hopefully the new towers will be E with D below, and most importantly the E replacing the D when the tower controller is off duty. This means we will have the safety of a full IFR control service twenty-four hours per day.
Yes, almost twenty years ago an enormous amount of money saved and without one accident resulting! At that time, there were people resisting the removal of those towers.
I totally support new towers at Karratha and Broome if they comply with a sensible cost/benefit formula.
Hopefully the new towers will be E with D below, and most importantly the E replacing the D when the tower controller is off duty. This means we will have the safety of a full IFR control service twenty-four hours per day.
Just a minute...Bathurst was designated class C and limited ONLY to IFR CHTR because back then it was very popular as was Birdsville at the time...it had nothing to with restrictions for restriction sake...it just got so busy that the place was running out of room.
I well remember the NOTAM restricting VFR ops for the races...it had nothing to do with control issues just space issues in a given timeframe. Had nothing to do with you,Smith....more like the change to GroupA and the coming of the internationalised race that interest dropped off...no holdens and ford V8s mate
That and the recession we had to have...
Jazzie, you are showing good airmanship...you will go far in this industry with your professional attitude
As for the dill who tries to hijack a thread on CURRENT procedures...Dick, I think you have worn out your welcome...once again....and again...and again..
EDIT to add THE most important reason for Bathurst....Oz Iron going hard all day Not the same anymore...no more 8 and 10 laps in front, no more different classes of traffic making for interesting moves...that AND getting rid of the left hander at the end of Conrod with a high speed wiggle and giggle
I well remember the NOTAM restricting VFR ops for the races...it had nothing to do with control issues just space issues in a given timeframe. Had nothing to do with you,Smith....more like the change to GroupA and the coming of the internationalised race that interest dropped off...no holdens and ford V8s mate
That and the recession we had to have...Jazzie, you are showing good airmanship...you will go far in this industry with your professional attitude
As for the dill who tries to hijack a thread on CURRENT procedures...Dick, I think you have worn out your welcome...once again....and again...and again..
EDIT to add THE most important reason for Bathurst....Oz Iron going hard all day
Not the same anymore...no more 8 and 10 laps in front, no more different classes of traffic making for interesting moves...that AND getting rid of the left hander at the end of Conrod with a high speed wiggle and giggle
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: various areas
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Smith,
If you are to have any credibility you must compare apples with apples. So let’s narrow down the equivalents
Compare;
1. FAA D towers at class 1 licensed Air Carrier airports, as is the equivalent case at all current Australian class D regional airports, then compare those airports IFR (>7t) movements (see 4. below).
2. If as you suggest FAA D towers (with radar) do not use the radar for separation, what pray tell is it used for? That is the second hint!
3. You seem to have overlooked the Approach and Departures TRACON associated with FAA D towers that fit 1. above. The overall number of FAA D towers is superfluous to this comparison as they are not servicing the same traffic mix, or volume of large Air Carrier/Regular Public Transport Aircraft as Class D Regional towers in Australia.
4. Are you familiar with the IFR AC/RPT/PTO comparison data between Class 1 American Airports and those servicing RPT/PTO (greater than 30 pax seat capacity) in Australia? I suggest you find out, the result will shock you with a CAPITAL Class C
Apart from Guam and Hawaii, list for us the number of mainland US Class D airports with IFR Air Carrier (licensed for >30 pax seat capacity) that are moving more IFR (> 7t) than Australian Class D regional towers?
Then list for us the number of US Class D TRSA, C and B airports moving less IFR (> 7t) that Australian Class D regional towers? The data is readily available!
It matters not what I think, the decision should be based on solid cost and safety benefit analysis untainted by political interference, not simply because a freshly minted Wyatt Erp is spraying Winchester edicts around like a skull possessed!
I ask, where is the process and analysis?
Never assume Mr Smith that contributors here are not voicing their view elsewhere. As I mentioned once before, you cannot cherry pick which anonymous contributions are valid based on alignment with your agenda. As is the case with the expat yank former Airbus driving Mustang man Duke, their views are no more or less valid or invalid because they choose anonymity on the forum. Wouldn’t you agree?
If you are to have any credibility you must compare apples with apples. So let’s narrow down the equivalents
Compare;
1. FAA D towers at class 1 licensed Air Carrier airports, as is the equivalent case at all current Australian class D regional airports, then compare those airports IFR (>7t) movements (see 4. below).
2. If as you suggest FAA D towers (with radar) do not use the radar for separation, what pray tell is it used for? That is the second hint!
3. You seem to have overlooked the Approach and Departures TRACON associated with FAA D towers that fit 1. above. The overall number of FAA D towers is superfluous to this comparison as they are not servicing the same traffic mix, or volume of large Air Carrier/Regular Public Transport Aircraft as Class D Regional towers in Australia.
4. Are you familiar with the IFR AC/RPT/PTO comparison data between Class 1 American Airports and those servicing RPT/PTO (greater than 30 pax seat capacity) in Australia? I suggest you find out, the result will shock you with a CAPITAL Class C
The USA has many Class D towers which have a similar traffic mix to our Rockhampton, Alice Springs or Launceston.
Then list for us the number of US Class D TRSA, C and B airports moving less IFR (> 7t) that Australian Class D regional towers? The data is readily available!
What do you think of the CASA decision, which I understand is in writing, that Airservices is to move all non-radar towers to US FAA Class D NAS procedures?
I ask, where is the process and analysis?
Never assume Mr Smith that contributors here are not voicing their view elsewhere. As I mentioned once before, you cannot cherry pick which anonymous contributions are valid based on alignment with your agenda. As is the case with the expat yank former Airbus driving Mustang man Duke, their views are no more or less valid or invalid because they choose anonymity on the forum. Wouldn’t you agree?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Class D Radio procedures....
What Cptn Bloggs said plus.....
If a first timer, be ready to write down your taxi clearance.....They can be amazingly long winded at YBMC , for a 'little' airport.
eg " ABC cleared taxi via taxiway delta to holding point alpha RW18 , hold short RW12 ,caution R22 hovertaxiing to 'beckers south'.
When you read back the clearance make sure you read back the taxiway, holding point, runway, hold short instruction,acknowledge the traffic, and if you don't happen to guess where 'becker's south' is ,ask them!
Have the ERSA open at the correct page in case they want you to hold short at bravo2 just to be different!Or taxi via delta and echo to holding point juliet RW12.
But above all ..........be prepared and have fun!
Flopt.
If a first timer, be ready to write down your taxi clearance.....They can be amazingly long winded at YBMC , for a 'little' airport.
eg " ABC cleared taxi via taxiway delta to holding point alpha RW18 , hold short RW12 ,caution R22 hovertaxiing to 'beckers south'.
When you read back the clearance make sure you read back the taxiway, holding point, runway, hold short instruction,acknowledge the traffic, and if you don't happen to guess where 'becker's south' is ,ask them!
Have the ERSA open at the correct page in case they want you to hold short at bravo2 just to be different!Or taxi via delta and echo to holding point juliet RW12.
But above all ..........be prepared and have fun!
Flopt.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: various areas
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jazzy
Forgot to mention. Ignore all the airspace category tech stuff, as Flopt and others have said, do the small amount of prep needed, if your not sure ask ATC, but most importantly stay relaxed, and enjoy. If your timing is right, you will get up close experience with all sorts of interesting traffic, from A320's, to helo's to Lear's etc, all in a safe ATC environment.
Also, appologies for the techo thread drift.
Forgot to mention. Ignore all the airspace category tech stuff, as Flopt and others have said, do the small amount of prep needed, if your not sure ask ATC, but most importantly stay relaxed, and enjoy. If your timing is right, you will get up close experience with all sorts of interesting traffic, from A320's, to helo's to Lear's etc, all in a safe ATC environment.
Also, appologies for the techo thread drift.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's interesting to note that CASA, in its recent aeronautical study at Alice, sees no need to change the architecture of C over D. Common sense prevails with respect to cost/benefit and risk.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: various areas
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How ironic the timing. The message might be sinking in with government and the CASA
Presumably the CASA and SCC will provide the Part 172 drafts and other applicable documents to industry for comment in a timely fashion.
History
15 Oct 2009
Project AS 09/19 - Amendments to CASR Part 172 Manual of Standards
Project approved.
Project Objective
The objective is to complete a Notice of Proposed Change for an up-to-date edition of the Part 172 MoS by 10 December 2009.
15 Oct 2009
Project AS 09/19 - Amendments to CASR Part 172 Manual of Standards
Project approved.
Project Objective
The objective is to complete a Notice of Proposed Change for an up-to-date edition of the Part 172 MoS by 10 December 2009.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: various areas
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Smith,
Let me help you!
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m...der/7400.9.pdf
A tantalising hint, in the spirit of cross ocean friendship and awareness.
Let us know when you are ready for instalment 2
Let me help you!
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m...der/7400.9.pdf
A tantalising hint, in the spirit of cross ocean friendship and awareness.
Let us know when you are ready for instalment 2
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: various areas
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Smith,
Part 139 Certification – Classes of Airports
US Class 1 Airports (Scheduled Air Carrier >30 seats)
- How many have FAA D and E airspace associated?
- How do the Large aircraft IFR numbers compare to Australian D and C locations?
Let us know if you cannot find the data!
Part 139 Certification – Classes of Airports
US Class 1 Airports (Scheduled Air Carrier >30 seats)
- How many have FAA D and E airspace associated?
- How do the Large aircraft IFR numbers compare to Australian D and C locations?
Let us know if you cannot find the data!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Class D airspace
I note as a new user that this forum, like many others contains everything from concise and useful information to useless self gushing rubish. I guess that sums up our society generally; however. As a GA pilot of some 40 years I have always found controllers to be most helpful if you have done your best to comply with the process. Whether some poeple beleive that too much talk on the radio causes confusion, I for one believe that it is better to communicate more than less - with the proviso that is relates to safety and the ciscumstances at hand. I am keen to see how CASA prepare the pilots of Australia for new Class D; especially us poor unfortunate second class VFR pilots.
My pet hate is the RPT blokes (who should know better) when they are on a SID e.g. HB and LST when they waffle on with "tracking on the blah blah radial blah blah" when all they have to give is the SID identifier. If you are not going to give an enroute position report, because you will be radar identified, you don't have to give an estimate for a reporting point you will not have to report at.