[Peetwo]

Last LMH for 2017 - Merry Xmas Hitch..

Via the Yaffa:

The Last Minute Hitch: 15 December 2017
15 December 2017
    
– Steve Hitchen

Sometimes timing is everything, and it doesn't seem to have worked for CASA this week at all! With the ink still wet on their proposal to use Multicom 126.7 in Class G en route airspace beneath 5000 feet, they published their VFR ADS-B discussion paper. The two seem somewhat incompatible, because ADS-B is only of value to VFR aircraft if controllers can warn them of proximity, which they can't do on 126.7. The ADS-B paper does say that in an ideal world all VFR aircraft would have ADS-B Out and In so pilots could see the threats themselves, but aviation is a compromise and the ideal very rarely exists. I don't think it will with voluntary ADS-B fitment either. I've had my say on the Multicom issue already, so I won't sound off on it any further, except ...

it clearly has its genesis somewhere else, which does add credence to the rumblings

Rumbling sounds are coming from Canberra over what appears to be heavy influence into the Multicom issue from both Australia's airlines and CASA's Office of Airspace Regulation (OAR). The rumblings are mostly around the concept of re-introducing the CTAF as a physical dimension and expanding it to 20 miles. According to CASA, this is to make sure all RNAVs are contained within their own CTAF zone. Hang on, this Multicom issue is all about VFR traffic, which doesn't use RNAVs, so it has to be an IFR issue. Personally, I doubt private IFR pilots would be plumping for this, and it didn't rate a mention in the original DP, so it clearly has its genesis somewhere else, which does add credence to the rumblings. If not the commercial operators or the OAR, who else would want this? It wasn't the Australian Federation of Air Pilots; it's not in their submission. It wasn't REX; they wanted to keep the area VHF. Most likely it was suggested in a submission not made public, or specially brewed inside CASA.

However, the good news of the week is that CASA has said it will create a GA branch as they move to a new internal structure. Why is this good? It shows that CASA is understanding that GA is not heavy commercial and has characteristics and requirements that are incompatible with those ops. Hopefully, GA branch will be staffed with people who not only have a passion for general aviation, but also are fueled by a desire to see more logical regulation that promotes rather than stunts growth. The last thing we need now is staffers with a passion for bureacracy. Several years ago. CASA set up the GA Task Force, which seemed not to complete a lot of tasks. Technically, I suppose it still exists, but it didn't take long for it to degenerate to a mere shadow of what CASA told us it would be. I suspect the new GA branch will be more durable, given that it's going to be in charge of CASR Part 149 Approved Self-administering Aviation Organisations. That's a concept that is not going anywhere anytime soon.

Our first print edition for 2018 is now on the shelves just in time to fill out Christmas stockings. January-February 2018 Australian Flying is the perfect gift for the flying enthusiast, packed with information, entertainment, new, views and just the odd bit of controversy. If you're not convinced, have a look at the feature line-up, then go and get one before they're all gone.

And that's it from me for the year! The Last Minute Hitch goes into hiatus now until mid January. I will keep news stories going on the website, but the weekly newsletter won't be coming out. Sometime between now and then, the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development is due to release the BITRE GA Study and its response. Keep checking in on our website www.australianflying.com.au to get all the news when the study goes public.

May your gauges have jingle bells on them,

Hitch

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/the-l...Bp1OHw2.99

---

And a comment from dj :

dj • 17 hours ago
The MULTICOM saga has now dragged on for far too long (4 years). The RAPACs had to fight to get the DP in place and now we have a NPRM that has a proposal that was not part of the DP - the 20nm Radius CTAF. This was never on the table with industry during discussions. The lessons of 15-20 yrs ago show that this system did not work, and it will not work now. There are so many unintended consequences and any sort of safety case or risk analysis is not yet on the table. The OAR was only formed in 2007 and the corporate history in CASA on this (and many other matters) is poor once they try and reinvent the wheel on issues that have been tried previously, especially over 15 yrs ago.

This proposal is only a problem at those CTAFs that do not use 126.7, so what are CASA looking for? Some sort of frequency protection for the paying passenger no doubt. Is this really going to be solved by a 20nm CTAF? The alternative is an extra radio call the airlines say on the MULTICOM, which is workload related and not desirable. I am sure that an independent safety case will show the risk is no more than what we have now. The effort should be directed at pilot education across the board, from the airlines that operate in G down to simple GA ops. Sadly at the moment there does not seem to be any standardisation in the training world on airspace knowledge or procedures.

MTF...P2