– Steve Hitchen
How did we go from needing to scratch an itch to being treated for scabies? Several years ago members of the RAPACs noted that CASA had changed the frequency for use at uncharted airports from Multicom 126.7 to the area frequency without consulting anyone. All we, the aviation community, ever wanted was that issue sorted out. The NPRM that came out during the week has reinstated 126.7, but spread it across all Class G airspace below 5000 feet unless at an airport with a discrete frequency, and expanded the meaning of "vicinity" to mean 20 nm and up to 4999 feet. According to sources inside CASA, it had to happen to make the aviation community's preference for 126.7 a safe option. The presumption there is that simply using 126.7 for the airfields and retaining the area VHF for en route was unsafe, despite years of safe operation before CASA changed it. But there is a larger viper hiding in the woodpile: CASA's move to make 126.7 an en route frequency isolates VFR aircraft below 5000 feet from ATC centres. ATC centres can neither monitor nor transmit on 126.7. The snakebite comes when you realise they just negated any advantage of ADS-B below 5000 feet for VFR aircraft. At the moment, ATC will often call a VFR aircraft and warn them of other ADS-B paints in their vicinity. This is an expansion of the "alerted see-and-avoid" principle. Now, under the new CASA proposal, they will be unable to provide that service. Theoretically, ATC could be watching an accident in the making, but be unable to do anything to prevent it. My feedback to CASA will be that it's more important to have that ADS-B connection with ATC than to worry about potential issues for which there is no supporting data. To add to that, watering down the value of ADS-B is no way to encourage voluntary fitment. If you check back through the discussion paper, you will note CASA did not include the option to switch the frequency for uncharted airports back to 126.7 and be done with it. It seems CASA ruled out simply scratching the itch from the very start.
CASA's medical reform continues to create what the regulator calls "noise": plenty of talk and opinion in the industry in equal measures of informed and uninformed. Despite the proposals removing DAMEs from the process and instituting a lesser medical standard, there are still commentators out there that believe nothing has been delivered, most still calling for the USA's BasicMed system or self-declaration RAAus-style. The BasicMed system is not Nirvana; it has its issues and in many cases is less liberal than Basic Class 2 (BC2). For example, CASA has restricted the use of BC2 to aeroplanes carrying no more than five pax. BasicMed restricts pilots from flying aeroplanes that were certified for more than six seats. You could be flying your Chieftain alone, but not on BasicMed because the aircraft was certified for more seats than the FAA will allow. CASA won't; if you want to fly your Chieftain, Airvan 8 or Cherokee Six (originally certified with a seventh seat), knock yourself out ... just don't do it with more than five pax. Yes, BasicMed allows IFR and BC2 doesn't, but I would counsel the aviation community to watch this space on that one. What we need to remember is that CASA was under pressure to make reforms, but not under any obligation. The truth of that has been shown by the lack of progress made over the last 10 or so years.
There's another issue brewing in Victoria that stands to have ramifications right around Australia: windfarms. Cobden Airport near Warrnambool is soon to be overlooked by a stand of massive wind turbines that are dangerously close to the approach paths to the airport. The issue is that Cobden is neither certified or registered, which means there no Obstacle Limitation Surfaces (OLS) that apply, and CASA will not intervene. The aviation analysis shows that the top of the highest turbine tip will infringe the 500-foot mark by 90 feet, yet CASA has decided "the proposal in its proposed format [is] unlikely to be a hazard to aviation safety given the current levels of limited civilian air activity in the area." This is a real slap-down to Cobden's 900-metre sealed and lit runway that provdes medevac, firebombing and aerial ag services. The previous Victorian government thought Cobden was important enough to sink development money into the airport, and CASA has just declared the airport to be of little importance. The ramifications could extend to up to 2000 airports around Australia that are uncertified or unregistered. And CASA's argument that they should simply get certified or registered ignores that fact that CASA imposes demands on those airports that small operations like Cobden couldn't possibly afford. Some times, it seems CASA doesn't know when to get involved and when to remain "hands off".
May your gauges always be in the green,
Hitch