Radio use.

[skippydiesel]

 

"The "problem" at the moment is that aircraft using the same airspace can be on one of 5  frequencies - all legitimate. There is also a sixth legal option - no radio at all (crazy for congested airspace)"

 

I have come up with a proposed solution to the above insanity ;

 

One frequency for ALL VFR aircraft operating, below the CTR steps, outside the current Controlled GA fields of Bankstown & Camden, above (Circ alt +500ft) & away from (3-5 Nm) the non controlled Circuits  of The Oaks, Mittagong, Wedderburn and may be  Shell Harbour. The outer boundaries would have to be decided on.

 

The existing frequencies would remain BUT only be used within the Circuit area and for 10 Nm Inbound calls.

 

In my mind this is a simplification that reduces risk by having all (non Circuit)  aircraft on the one operational frequency.

 

The requirement to maintain a listening/monitoring watch on Area frequency, would also remain, allowing ATC to  make contact with the PIC (& visa versa) and for the PIC to maintain situational awareness of any IFR operations. 

 

Remember, I also think, that as a minimum standard, ALL aircraft, within this operational boundary should be fitted with a dual channel transceiver and SE2 (or similar) ADSB In/Out.

 

What do you suggest???

 

😈

[Moneybox]

1 hour ago, skippydiesel said:

 

"The "problem" at the moment is that aircraft using the same airspace can be on one of 5  frequencies - all legitimate. There is also a sixth legal option - no radio at all (crazy for congested airspace)"

 

I have come up with a proposed solution to the above insanity ;

 

One frequency for ALL VFR aircraft operating, below the CTR steps, outside the current Controlled GA fields of Bankstown & Camden, above (Circ alt +500ft) & away from (3-5 Nm) the non controlled Circuits  of The Oaks, Mittagong, Wedderburn and may be  Shell Harbour. The outer boundaries would have to be decided on.

 

The existing frequencies would remain BUT only be used within the Circuit area and for 10 Nm Inbound calls.

 

In my mind this is a simplification that reduces risk by having all (non Circuit)  aircraft on the one operational frequency.

 

The requirement to maintain a listening/monitoring watch on Area frequency, would also remain, allowing ATC to  make contact with the PIC (& visa versa) and for the PIC to maintain situational awareness of any IFR operations. 

 

Remember, I also think, that as a minimum standard, ALL aircraft, within this operational boundary should be fitted with a dual channel transceiver and SE2 (or similar) ADSB In/Out.

 

What do you suggest???

 

😈

Fortunately I don’t have your problem but your suggestion makes sense to me. It’s hard enough to be swapping frequencies when you cross boundaries but if you can be on the correct frequency and be different to the aircraft around you then there will never be clear lines of communication. 

[BurnieM]

I do not have a suggestion for the Sydney metro airspace due to the complexity of the current airspace, number of frequencies currently  and procedures currently in use for both Mascot and Bankstown. I expect this to get worst when Western Sydney becomes more active.

 

All of the aircraft I have flown have radio receivers capable of monitoring 2 frequencies.

I agree in/out ADS-B transponders for all aircraft are a very good idea.

CASA has already said you need a minimum of a mode C transponder to enter controlled airspace.

ie more than a SE2 is required for this airspace.

 

You have offered a suggestion.

I have suggested that this will make the current bad situation even worse.

We obviously do not agree.