Vital connections

Our regional airports not only provide vital connections for their local communities, but also create opportunities for AOPA’s members to access and enjoy the regions.

AOPA should therefore be standing alongside local councils to support the sustainable operation of their airports, for the benefit of their members.

Instead, they chose an approach that – quite simply – demonstrated a lack of respect and understanding for the hard work of our councils to support the national aviation network.

Regional airports remain complex pieces of infrastructure, and the maintenance of runways, terminals and associated facilities requires ongoing Investment.

Our councils invest significant funds to maintain local airports and airstrips, while ensuring the safety and security of those that use them.

In fact, many councils must supplement any income their airport does generate to maintain it, to ensure it continues to meet community needs.

This can be very challenging, with councils needing to balance limited funds with a wide range of obligations to their ratepayers.

So just as motorists pay fuel levies and car registration fees, boat owners pay for a mooring and caravan owners pay for a spot at the caravan park, aircraft owners should expect to pay to land and park at a local airport.

This is a long-established, industrywide practice – and one that’s worked well for our regions and the aviation industry as a whole for many years.

To suggest private owners who have the ability to purchase, maintain and operate their own aircraft cannot afford less than $10 per tonne to use airport facilities is highly insensitive, and not in the best interests of the aviation Community.

‘Regional airports remain complex pieces of infrastructure.’

It’s time that we, as an industry, work together to ensure we can all enjoy access to regional airport facilities throughout the country. Any failure to do so represents a choice to put the vested interests of a few ahead of the many.

Safety benefits

CASA’s planned frequency use changes for low-level Class G

CASA has issued a notice of proposed rule making with the intent of changing the procedures for radio frequency use in low level airspace. The aim is to maximise aircraft operating at low-level in Class G airspace to be on the same frequency and to make and receive broadcasts for ‘alerted see-and-avoid’.

To ensure safe and effective implementation, CTAF areas would be expanded. This will ensure that aircraft conducting instrument approaches are on the same frequency as aerodrome traffic, prevent multiple frequency changes during climb and descent, and ensure transmissions at busy aerodromes do not experience clutter from the MULTICOM frequency.

This proposal has two elements intended to be implemented together: The first is to establish a MULTICOM below 5,000ft. This change would allow VFR and IFR aircraft to monitor and broadcast on the MULTICOM frequency of 126.7 MHz up to but not including 5,000ft AMSL in Class G airspace where a discrete frequency, such as a CTAF or broadcast area, does not exist.

Secondly, CASA seeks to expand the airspace volume of CTAFs. At noncontrolled aerodromes this change would expand the volume of airspace contained in the CTAF to a 20nm radius laterally and up to, but not including, 5,000ft vertically. For the few aerodromes with an elevation of 3,000ft or higher, the vertical limits would extend to 3,500ft AGL. The RAAA supports CASA’s Proposal.

The proposal will ensure that aircraft conducting instrument approaches, or those high performance RPT jet and turboprop aircraft using the aerodrome, are on the same frequency as aerodrome traffic. This would have the desired effect of eliminating multiple frequency changes during climb and descent and ensure transmissions at busy aerodromes do not experience clutter from the MULTICOM frequency.

However, the only way to ensure safe and effective implementation would be for all CTAF areas to be expanded under the proposal. We understand that at non-controlled aerodromes this proposed change would expand the volume of airspace contained in the CTAF to a 20nm mile radius laterally and up to, but not including, 5,000ft AMSL vertically.

The RAAA also supports the proposal of establishing MULTICOM below 5,000ft, as this would allow VFR and IFR aircraft to monitor and broadcast on the MULTICOM frequency in Class G airspace where a discrete frequency, such as a CTAF or broadcast area, does not exist.

These changes would provide safety benefits for IFR and VFR flights, provide additional protection for passenger transport operations and reflect the strong preference from the aviation community for keeping air traffic control transmissions separate from general transmissions, particularly at aerodromes.

‘The RAAA supports CASA’s proposal.’