[Peetwo]

Them holes are aligning

Very disturbing report that perfectly highlights all the major problems with an aviation safety system that is totally rooted beyond redemption and will remain so while the current crop of inept, self-serving, ass-covering,  aviation safety bureaucrats is allowed to continue unabated covering up potentially embarrassing serious safety issues & occurrences...



Courtesy the Oz:

Near miss for planes carrying 18 people  

• by: Matthew Denholm
  
• From: The Australian
  
• September 17, 2015 12:00AM
  

Tasmania Correspondent
Hobart




Too close for comfort. Source: TheAustralian



An “unsafe” close encounter ­between two planes near Mount Hotham Airport in Victoria allegedly placed up to 18 lives at risk, fuelling demands for better use of radar at Australia’s regional airports.  

According to an incident ­report obtained by The Australian, two Beechcraft B200 King Air planes on private charters from different companies — one from Essendon in Melbourne and one from Bankstown in Sydney — were vertically within 300ft (90m) of each other on September 3.

It appeared the Essendon-based pilot, struggling with a faulty GPS in heavy morning cloud and poor weather, did not know where he was and reported being in vastly different locations, varying by up to 20 nautical miles, within a short period of time.
Radar traces of this plane, chartered from small Essendon-based operator Seidler Properties, show an apparently erratic path at times, and that the scheduled 38- minute flight took an hour and 27 minutes.

The Essendon plane came within one nautical mile (1.8km) of the other aircraft and eventually landed at Mount Hotham, in the Victorian Alps northeast of Melbourne, but only after what the report by the other pilot ­described as an “unsafe” approach from the “wrong direction”. There were three other aircraft also en route to the airport at the time.

The report, titled “breakdown of separation”, says passengers on the Essendon-based plane were so shaken they refused to return with the same pilot later that day, ­requiring another to be flown to Mount Hotham to pick them up.

In a report being investigated by the Australian Transport ­Safety Bureau, the pilot of the Bankstown-originating aircraft — a senior pilot at a major charter firm — describes the situation as “not safe”.

He suggests he is making the report not to attack the Essendon-based pilot, but rather to highlight an ongoing risk of tragedy in the absence of a safety back-up in cases of pilot error at uncontrolled regional airports.

“If this event did result in a midair collision, two aircraft would have been destroyed and 18 people would have been killed,” says the Bankstown-originating pilot in the report, sent to the ATSB two days ago.

“As a chief pilot, I am significantly concerned with the breakdown of (aircraft) separation caused by this incident. This is not a standard of operation that I would tolerate from my pilots and I do not accept that his event goes without investigation.

“Two high-performance aircraft with 300ft separation (vertic­ally), within one nautical mile of each other (horizontally), in IMC (instrument meteorological conditions), is not safe.”
The incident has further highlighted the lack of radar control of aircraft to low altitudes at ­regional airports in Australia, which The Australian has documented in the series of articles over the past two months.

In uncontrolled airspace, ­pilots must communicate with each other by radio to ensure they remain safely separated, with no support from an air traffic controller monitoring them on radar or providing co-ordination.

At Mount Hotham, radar-based separation of aircraft ends at 18,000ft, below which pilots must self-separate, despite radar being available to a far lower altit­ude.

Veteran aviator Dick Smith told The Australian the latest Mount Hotham incident highlighted the need to make full use of radar coverage at regional airports to improve safety.

“If they were using the existing radar for control at Mount Hotham, neither of these things (the ­alleged mid-air near collision and subsequent alleged dangerous ­approach) would have happened, because the controller would have told the pilot what was happening,” Mr Smith said.

He said it was particularly frustrating the existing radar was not being used to control aircraft to low altitude at Mount Hotham, given the deaths of three people in a crash there in 2005 and of six people in an accident at Benalla, about 150km from Mount Hotham, in 2004. He believed both crashes could have been averted had radar control close to ground level been provided.

“How many more frightening incidents like this before there are more unnecessary deaths?” Mr Smith said.

He said all that was needed to make use of existing radar for separation control to low altitudes at regional airports was for Airservic­es Australia to provide more training to controllers at its Melbourne and Brisbane radar centres.

Airservices insist the air traffic system is safe and that levels of control around the country are appropriate for local traffic volumes and types.

An ATSB spokesman said the latest Mount Hotham incidents were being investigated.
However, an official statement on the bureau’s website refers only to the “unstable approach” to the runway; not the earlier alleged close encounter. Seidler Properties suggested it was unaware of any investigation and declined to comment.

To think this 'serious incident' may have gone unreported 
How many other similarly serious occurrences have gone unreported (I personally know of a couple) because of fear of retribution or incriminating oneself.
MTF..P2
Tick..tick..tick..tick..

[Gobbledock]

The game of musical near misses continues

Oh c'mon now Peetwo, what incident? Did they have a midair? No. Did they land safely? Yes. I ask you what's the problem here?? ASA has full confidence in the radar coverage in Tasmania (just ask Sir Anus and Hoody), and the fact that the ATsB under the direction of the super sleuth penny pinching bearded buffoon Beaker who has even removed radar safety related incidents from it's reporting and investigation data base (shows that Beaker is confident in the system) and the fact that CAsA have done nothing about all of this that has occurred under its child's watch (ASA), there is obviously no problem here!

Now, as Sunfish would say; to put that another way - Dear Miniscule, bureaucracies, Pumpkin Head, Sir Anus, Beaker, Mark Skateboard, Jason Half-inch and all the other spin doctoring pooh peddlers - TICK TOCK! In the words of Senator Heffernan 'you have a real problem here boys'.

Agh yes, the acrid smell of charred bodies, Jet A1, burning hydraulic oil and composite material dust wafts mercilessly into the air out of a deep impact creator. It's a marvellous experience and one that these fu#kwits in power should participate in. Dear Politiicans, ever picked up a charred baby's foot or fragmented body parts that are no bigger than a coffee cup? Wake up FFS.

Fix it dipshits fix it.

[Ziggy]

The game of musical near misses continues

Oh c'mon now Peetwo, what incident? Did they have a midair? No. Did they land safely? Yes. I ask you what's the problem here?? ASA has full confidence in the radar coverage in Tasmania (just ask Sir Anus and Hoody), and the fact that the ATsB under the direction of the super sleuth penny pinching bearded buffoon Beaker who has even removed radar safety related incidents from it's reporting and investigation data base (shows that Beaker is confident in the system) and the fact that CAsA have done nothing about all of this that has occurred under its child's watch (ASA), there is obviously no problem here!

Now, as Sunfish would say; to put that another way - Dear Miniscule, bureaucracies, Pumpkin Head, Sir Anus, Beaker, Mark Skateboard, Jason Half-inch and all the other spin doctoring pooh peddlers - TICK TOCK! In the words of Senator Heffernan 'you have a real problem here boys'.

Agh yes, the acrid smell of charred bodies, Jet A1, burning hydraulic oil and composite material dust wafts mercilessly into the air out of a deep impact creator. It's a marvellous experience and one that these fu#kwits in power should participate in. Dear Politiicans, ever picked up a charred baby's foot or fragmented body parts that are no bigger than a coffee cup? Wake up FFS.

Fix it dipshits fix it.

Dear Politicians,

Live through this!

Concur with all above.

Fix it dipshits. 

Rationalise why so many Lawyers compared to Aviation Experts.

Dangerous, Defiant, Deathly, Destroying, Disconnected Drones.

Sweep out the contaminated "leaders and behind the scene scripters". 

Seriously, 
Live through this.
Live through the pain of others who have lost loved ones
Live.


Fix it DipShits. 

[Peetwo]

NOTAM - Danger Area promulgated - ASA Bus Stop

Hmm..look's like JH has taken up Sir A's lead and thrown CASA under the bus...

"..Airservices acting chief executive Jason Harfield last night said its assistance to the pilot reporting GPS problems was in-line with Civil Aviation Safety Authority requirements..."

Q/ Why exactly is the Ag CEO fielding calls on this matter?  I would have thought he has minions better placed, informed & trained to carry out that particular task - perhaps staff cutbacks are taking effect?
By that little bloke from Tassie courtesy the Oz:

Inquiry vowed on near air collision at Mount Hotham

• by: MATTHEW DENHOLM
  
• From: The Australian
  
• September 18, 2015 12:00AM
  

Tasmania Correspondent
Hobart




Former air safety chief Dick Smith fears the inquiry will be too narrow. Picture: Renee Nowytarger Source: News Corp Australia
Australia’s transport safety watchdog has promised a broad-ranging investigation into claims 18 lives were endangered in the skies above Mount Hotham, in the Victorian Alps, but is being urged to also seek overseas expert advice.  

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau vowed yesterday to examine all the events of September 3, when a pilot claims there was a “breakdown of separation” between his plane and another­ that could have caused a disaster.

“The scope of this investi­gation will cover air traffic aspects such as communications and radar coverage,” ATSB media manager Marc Kelaart told The Australian. “We are now gathering information to assess how significant these aspects were in relation to the occurrence.

“The proximity of aircraft to each other will be examined as a part of establishing the facts surrounding this incident.”

However, former air safety chief Dick Smith expressed concern that the ATSB investigation was likely to be too narrow and wrote to its chief commissioner, Martin Dolan, urging it to seek input from American aviation authorities to ensure the Mount Hotham airspace was safe.

As revealed in The Australian yesterday, the pilot of a charter from Bankstown, in Sydney’s west, to the Victorian alpine resort­ on September 3 made an incid­ent report to the ATSB claiming the safety of passengers on both planes had been ­“compromised”.

The pilot’s report says the second plane, part of the same overall charter but from a different company based in Essendon, in Melbourne’s northwest, reported its position as 10 nautical miles to the west of Mount Hotham but later changed this to 10 nautical miles to the east.

In between, based on the initial position given by the second plane, the first pilot had started his final approach to the airstrip.

His report says he was “alarmed at the close proximity” of the other plane implicit in the changed advice and believed the situation could have caused a mid-aid collision in cloud and poor weather.

It is understood the second pilot, who had report­ed trouble with his GPS in the lead-up to the incident, will tell investigators there was no danger of collision.

It is understood he will say he contacted Airservices Australia to ask it to use its Melbourne-based radar to help keep him separated from the four other aircraft involved in the overall charter.

While the area has radar coverage, radar is not used to provide a separation service to aircraft once they descend below 18,000 feet. Below this altitude, pilots must “self-separate” by telling each other their location via radio.

Pilots can ask Airservices to use the radar to help keep them separated from other aircraft in the event of an equipment failure, as the second pilot suggests he did on this occasion.
However, the first pilot suggested in his report that a collision could easily have occurred in the meantime, and that the incident highlighted the need to “identify the root causes, thereby preventing a similar occurrence that may cause an accident”.

Airservices acting chief executive Jason Harfield last night said its assistance to the pilot reporting GPS problems was in-line with Civil Aviation Safety Authority requirements.

By the para in bold it would appear that the VH-OWN pilot has lawyered up, which in the circumstances is probably fair enough, will be interesting to view the transcript of the comms between pilot & ATC? Pound to a penny the CVR recording was not able to be retrieved..

{ Upon reflection That radar track - especially after VH-OWN (presumably after a MAP??) turns towards the NE (presumably for intercept of HOTEC to HOTEI track??) - recording bears some disturbingly similar manoeuvres to the 2005 Chieftain accident see here - AAIR 200503265 }

MTF...P2

[Gobbledock]

The 'vegemite kid' said;

"However, former air safety chief Dick Smith expressed concern that the ATSB investigation was likely to be too narrow and wrote to its chief commissioner, Martin Dolan, urging it to seek input from American aviation authorities to ensure the Mount Hotham airspace was safe"

I couldn't agree more with Dick. The issue in Australia is;

a) There is a huge black cloud hanging over the radar system, and the potential problem has not been properly identified, investigated or mitigated despite continued calls to do so. Therefore the ATsB, ASA and CAsA should be sidelined from the process. We need an independent third party international assessment.

b) The ATsB has proven it is not independent and this in turn would indicate that a fair and transparent investigation of its sister bureaucracies is not possible. Again, good reason to hire an international third party authority to investigate.

c) King Muppet Beaker isn't even capable of carrying out an investigation into a piss stain on his pants let alone a radar coverage system issue resulting in multiple findings on numerous occasions.It is farcical that this buffoon is still even employed by the Government.

I believe that Dick Smith is/has become the only voice with muscle out there. The inept bureaucracies are too busy covering for each other and their own asses, and the successive Governments are as weak as a gay mans bitch slap.

Dear Minuscule - It's time to call in international assistance and FFS will the equally incompetent Minister please personally walk Beaker, Half-inch, Skid'Mark and Pumpkin Head out the door. DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!

Dear Minuscule , you hired Boyd, you hired Manning, and you hired Skid'Mark however NONE of them, for whatever the reason, have gotten on with the job. DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!

Dear Minuscule, you paid for the Forsythe review and you said you were committed to implementing the recommendations so stop playing with your todger and  DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!

Dear Minuscule, please go and research James Reason and the Swiss cheese model because for some time now the holes have been lining up and currently your cheese is hanging in the wind! You made promises to topple that master elephant Albo and fix all things aviation, but you've done jack-shit. So before you end up with blood on your hands  DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!

TICK TOCK DIPSHITS

[thorn bird]

"Dear Minuscule, you paid for the Forsythe review and you said you were committed to implementing the recommendations so stop playing with your todger and  DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!"

Couldn't agree more Gobbles, but it wasn't Miniscule paid for it!!! it was us!!!.....

[Peetwo]

Skywars Update - Houston says?



From the latest article in the Weekend Oz on the Sky Wars saga it would appear that old mate Halfwit has learnt well from the master Sir A...

“Airservices provides services consistent with these regulatory requirements, with safety of the travelling public and the national airways system is our first priority at all times,”

Also from that little chappy in Tassie's latest article, I don't get the feeling Dick Smith is going to back off anytime soon...

Airservices radar reluctance ‘makes no sense’: expert  

• by: MATTHEW DENHOLM
  
• From: The Australian
  
• September 19, 2015 12:00AM
  

Tasmania Correspondent
Hobart




Air traffic control expert Ken Fairbairn at Archerfield Airport in Brisbane. Picture: Lyndon Mechielsen Source: News Corp Australia

An air traffic control expert with decades of experience in Australia, the US and Hong Kong has called for greater use of existing radar to low altitudes at Australian region­al airports.  

Ken Fairbairn, who has broad global experience in air traffic oper­ations, airspace design, training and procedures over 46 years, said Airservices Australia’s refusal to make full use of existing radar “makes no sense”.

Mr Fairbairn, who has worked for Airservices as well as the US Federal Aviation Administration, and spent five years managing radar training in Hong Kong, called for a rethink after this week’s revelations in The Australian of a safety incident at Mount Hotham in the Victorian Alps.

“Australia is a first-world nation­ with a highly advanced radar infrastructure already in place — these resources can be used to ensure the safety of instrument flight rules aircraft,” said Mr Fairbairn, now based in Brisbane. “This includes charter flights into resort areas or mining town airports where paying passengers are entitled to as much protection as the concept of affordable safety can provide.

“(Former Civil Aviation Safety Authority chairman) Dick Smith’s idea to make full use of radar, where available, to provide safe and orderly sequencing to non-tower regional airports should be given careful consideration.”

At Mount Hotham, where one pilot alleges that a “breakdown of separ­ation” between two planes on September 3 threatened 18 lives, radar is not routinely used to separate aircraft below 18,000 feet.

Even though radar works below this level, planes on approach­ to what is Australia’s highest airstrip must “self-separate” by telling each other where they are via radio.
On September 3, one pilot report­ed problems with his GPS and, according to another pilot, gave wildly varying reports of his location, resulting in the two nine-seater charter planes coming into “close proximity” in cloud and poor weather.

The Australian Transport Saf­ety Bureau is investigating while Mr Smith has called for radar control to be extended to lower altitudes at Mount Hotham and other regional airports where it already exists, to avoid similar incidents.

Mr Fairbairn backed these calls. “(Then) pilots would no longer be flying blind in cloud ­approaching or departing from these airports. This category of safety protection is routinely provide­d in Canada and the US.”

He found it difficult to understand why radar control to the ground was not provided at ­Hobart and Launceston airports, despite­ a $6 million Tasmania Wide Area Multilateration radar-like system being installed in 2010.

Below 8500 feet, Airservices uses TASWAM as a “situational awareness” tool only, to assist local tower controllers providing pro­ced­ural separation, where planes are kept apart by controllers relying on radio contact with pilots.

“It would make no sense to spend that money and then use it for situation awareness only,” Mr Fairbairn said.

“There is no logical reason. It would be far better to use it for a radar separation service (to the ground).” While procedural separation was safe, radar control was far more efficient and had added safety benefits, he said.

“In the modern world it (proced­ural separation) is not approp­riate; it’s an obsolete 1930s approach that is far less efficient than radar control.

Airservices acting chief executive Jason Harfield said the level of air traffic service at each airport was determined by CASA, based on detailed risk assessments that considered the number and type of aircraft using the airspace.

“Airservices provides services consistent with these regulatory requirements, with safety of the travelling public and the national airways system is our first priority at all times,” he said.

Does not bode well for Farmer Truss in the lead up to the next election especially when you can't use the Crudlin roadblock excuse anymore -"The wheels on the bus go round & round.."

Tick..tock Miniscule..


MTF..P2

[Gobbledock]

Beakers boys cock up another one. Rail this time

http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/09...er-s-death

"PTA spokesman David Hynes said the transport authority was reviewing the preliminary findings, but had identified "factual inaccuracies" in the report and was working with the ATSB to correct them".



Oh super sleuth, you've done it again! Mi mi mi mi

[Peetwo]

Murky Mandarin's take on ADSB mandate 

At 'Safeskies are empty skies' today, the aviation Mandarin & his minions had a love-in where they talked about their future plans for slicing & dicing up what is left of the GA industry...

From Aviation Safety bullshit artist G Thomas's publication Oz Aviation:

Mrdak outlines cautious approach to expanding ADS-B mandate

September 23, 2015 by Jordan Chong


ADS-B station at Woomera. (Airservices)

There will be a cautious approach to any broadening of ADS-B (Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast) mandates beyond 2017, Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development secretary Mike Mrdak says.

The current mandates require all flights operating under instrument flight rules (IFR) to have ADS-B, which is a satellite-based technology enabling aircraft to be accurately tracked by air traffic controllers and other pilots without the need for conventional radar, by February 2 2017.

While there is presently no requirement for flights operating under visual flight rules (VFR) to have ADS-B, Mrdak says expanding the mandate is something that will be looked at in 2016.

“We haven’t looked beyond IFR at this stage but our intention was to always post-2020 to have a program which would then start to expand,” Mrdak told delegates at the 2015 Safeskies conference in Canberra on Wednesday in response to a question.

“We will probably through the course of next year start to go back to government with our thinking on whether we expand the ADS-B mandate further. It will be a cautious approach. We do recognise … there is a significant cost for most of the industry in doing that.”

Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) director of aviation safety Mark Skidmore also spoke favourably about one day extending the use of ADS-B to VFR flights.

“The aspect of ADS-B and all aircraft, I would encourage everyone to get ADS-B, it is a wonderful idea,” Skidmore said.

“ADS-B is the future. It is definitely going to give us a solution that allows us to see everyone across this great country of ours.”

“I really think that it is necessary but I have got to understand the impact on the community out there, particularly VFR operations and how we actually are going to implement that so I can’t say I am going to do it.”

Figures from Airservices presented at the conference showed 230 VFR aircraft were fitted with ADS-B at Septemebr 14 2015.

Meanwhile, some 99.5 per cent of all commercial jet flights at FL290 and above were ADS-B equipped as of September 14, with turboprops at 94 per cent and business jets at 79 per cent.

Overall, 66 per cent of all IFR flights were currently fitted with ADS-B.

“It is actually progressing along at a rate which is consistent with where we are with the mandates,” Airservices acting chief executive Jason Harfield said.

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development Warren Truss noted Australia’s ADS-B network of 74 ground stations was the “first in the world to achieve comprehensive continent wide ADS-B capability”.

“As ADS-B regulatory mandates draw near, CASA and Airservices will work closely with all industry sectors in the implementation of this important safety initiative,” Truss told the conference.

“Australia has become an early adopter of ADS-B given the significant benefits it brings to vast parts of the continent that for so long have had no surveillance coverage.”

There were plans to build 15 more ADS-B sites, which would provide blanket coverage down to 10,000ft, from 30,000ft currently.

Mrdak said the potential expansion of Class E airspace, which covers populated coastal areas, would also lend itself to a potential expansion of the ADS-B mandate.

“The availability of E airspace and what that gives us in terms of efficiency as well as improved safety outcomes is something we all want,” Mrdak said.

“I can certainly see post 2017 a significant expansion of E and I know that is something Mark and the OAR (Office of Airspace Regulation) are working on and over time that will mean that a number of VFR operators will need to equip more and more with ADS-B to get the benefits of access to the E airspace.”

Australian Business Aviation Association (ABAA) chief executive David Bell said his organisation supported the implementation of ADS-B.

“Very nearly all of the ABAA members’ aeroplanes are equipped. There is a few dragging the chain because of one manufacturer in America who has been very slow on the uptake there and I am hoping those remaining jets will be equipped in the next couple of months,” Bell told the conference.

“But I do think that parts of general aviation have a major problem with it, some of the training schools etc equipping their aircraft can be quite expensive as a percentage of the value of their aircraft.”

Bell said some of the non-ABAA members that were yet to equip their fleet with ADS-B technology were either flying older aircraft or had aircraft for sale.

Skidmore said industry was doing a good job of reducing the cost of fitting ADS-B.

“I’ve actually been demonstrated recently a kit that was 400 grams and very cheap,” Skidmore said.

“Industry is taking up the challenge and producing some great pieces of equipment.”



A chart presented at the Safeskies conference detailing the percentage of flights with ADS-B in Australia.   

Hmm..passing strange that old Murky is so suddenly knowledgeable on ADSB & the future imposition to the GA industry?? From someone who hasn't given a rats arse before WTF is that all about

MTF..P2

[Kharon]

Skidmore said industry was doing a good job of reducing the cost of fitting ADS-B.

What sort of a line is that to deliver? – what a ducking load of self serving, smug, disingenuous crap. The only reason industry has the expense is because CASA and ASA want this system in ahead of the real world, who admit there’s problems, admit to cost blowouts and have delayed implementation until things are sorted.  

This huge impost has been inflicted by the ‘agencies’; lied about, twisted and manipulated by those same agencies, enforced by those agencies and now, being bragged about as being the ‘world best’ by those same, detached from reality agencies.

But I am so pleased ‘industry’ has found a way to reduce costs and make the agencies look good at Safe-Skies.  

Nah, stopping there; too nice a morning for a full head of steam; but the bare faced effrontery, the shear arrogance and calculated deception have a good chance of providing one.  

Coffee GD, and turn off that computer while the keyboard is still in one piece......

[Gobbledock]

ANAO audit of ASA

http://m.theaustralian.com.au/business/a...7546369418

Does anyone know how long the audit will take and whether the report made public?

[Kharon]

Senate treasure hunt.

Good question GD.  There is some interesting variety in the gossip which relates to when the audit will be complete: seems it all depends when the audit started……….

One top contender is the notion that the committee have been playing with a marked deck for a while and inside information to base their questions on.  There’s some say what we are seeing publicly is the end game rather than the beginning.  ASA were told, in no uncertain terms, they were ‘in a world of hurt’, before the audit was announced.  It makes sense, there would need to be a foundation of some form, a base to support the expense and time of a full dress ‘look-see’. 

Other versions vary; some look back to the Staib resignation as the trigger, others look at Clark, some go back as far as Russel being the catalyst.  On balance the majority seem to favour some form of structured ‘plan’ to take Houstoblame and his trusty off-sider out of the front row, before the kick off.  

Pay your money and take your pick; one thing is certain, the audit was not spontaneous nor called for at the whim of the man at the back of the room.  P2 tried to find some information on the ANAO website – Nada, zip, nuffin’, tight as a drum.  One way or another, it’s going to take time, lots of money to track, lots of carpets to peep under, much to ‘un-shred’.  You can even get odds on an AFP investigation, a real one.

It’s interesting though; are those who buried the loot smarter than those who are trained to sniff it out?  X marks the spot.

Toot toot.

[Peetwo]

Raiders of the lost trough? - He's back, 'that man again'..

Airservices Australia was the major sponsor of the fun and frivolity of the Safeskies (..are deadset empty skies ) and Chair Sir A & AgCEO Harfwit both made major contributions to the gobfest:

Airservices talks technology at Safeskies 2015
23 Sep 2015
[url=http:://auntypru.com/forum/javascript:window.print()][/url]
Airservices Australia Acting Chief Executive Officer Jason Harfield focused on the safety and efficiency benefits that will flow from advances in aviation technology at this year’s Safeskies conference in Canberra.

Mr Harfield took part in the Aviation Policy Group panel session held this morning, which included the Chief of Air Force, Civil Aviation Safety Authority and Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.

Department Secretary Mike Mrdak outlined the key aviation issues facing the Australian industry and Mr Harfield expanded on the role advanced technology will have in service provision, airspace and air traffic management and civil military aviation harmonisation.

Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast had already resulted in significantly improved surveillance coverage of aircraft across the continent, including at lower altitudes, as well as closer tracking of oceanic flights across the Pacific, he said.

Meanwhile, Airservices Chair Air Chief Marshal Sir Angus Houston AK, AFC joined a distinguished list of great contributors to the field of Australian aviation by giving the annual Sir Reginald Ansett Memorial Lecture at the conference dinner on Tuesday September 22.

Previous lecturers have included astronaut Dr Andy Thomas, former British Airways CEO Sir Rod Eddington and Qantas CEO Alan Joyce.

Widely-recognised as a pre-eminent event in the Australasian aviation industry calendar, Safeskies is attended by key industry leaders, regulators, government, operators and academia and Airservices is a sponsor of the biennial event.

Under a theme of ‘training for change’, Safeskies 2015 highlighted the rapid and dynamic change occurring in aviation from the demographics of our aviation professionals to the growth of remotely-piloted aircraft.

 Shame that after such a good week of positive spin & bulldust for ASA it may all come to nought, because it would appear that at the last Senate Public hearing (09 September) there was more than a figurative 'person at the back of the room'...

Back from hols 'that man' again, courtesy the Oz:

Audit office looks into Airservices management  

• by: EAN HIGGINS
  
• From: The Australian
  
• September 28, 2015 12:00AM
  

Reporter




Airservices chairman Angus Houston. Source: News Corp Australia



The Australian National Audit Office has secretly launched an investigation into Airservices Australia amid serious concerns about its financial management, executive use of corporate credit cards and alleged conflicts of interest in awarding big contracts.  

The move follows revelations in The Australian in recent months and disclosures at public hearings of the Senate’s rural and regional affairs and transport legislation committee.
Senators across the political spectrum have repeatedly grilled executives of the government-owned organisation that runs the nation’s air-traffic-control and navigation system, and fire and rescue services at airports.

This month, the committee called Airservices chairman Angus Houston to account for how much the board knew about what senators had described as “dodgy” and “incestuous” relationships among senior Air­services executives, a consultancy group hired to negotiate huge contracts on Airservices’ behalf, and the Thales aerospace group, which won a lead contract.

It is understood the ANAO considered a request from the Senate committee to investigate Airservices and came to a view the concerns were warranted.

“They’re doing a review of the whole thing because there are ­serious issues,” a source said.

It is understood ANAO officials attended an in-camera session of the Senate committee hearing this month.

In the public part of that hearing, Sir Angus admitted to some problems with a “perception” of conflicts of interest associated with the $1.5 billion program to integrate the nation’s civilian and military air-traffic-control systems, known as OneSKY.

These included a “husband and wife team” on opposite sides of a transaction between Airser­vices and the International Centre for Complex Project Manage­ment, the consultancy group it engaged in a multi-million-dollar contract to advise it on OneSKY.

Senators also pointed to the fact Chris Jenkins, the managing director of Thales Australia, is also chairman of ICCPM, which employs former Royal Australian Air Force officer Harry Bradford on an Airservices contract worth $1 million so far to negotiate on Airservices’ behalf with Thales.

Sir Angus told the committee “the board was very concerned” at the revelations and had commissioned an external consultancy to examine the issue.

“They agreed that there is a possible perception of conflict which requires additional management, but this possible perception did not have any actual effect on the tender process,” he said.

“There is no evidence that the issues raised by the Senate resulted in any improper influence, bias, favour or breach of confidence or any incompatibility.”

Sir Angus defended Airser­vices executives’ use of corporate credit cards but said at a recent meeting of the board’s audit risk committee, “a lot of the people, even those with very small amounts of credit card fraud, were referred to the police or had their employment terminated”.

Senate committee member Nick Xenophon yesterday said he was not wholly satisfied with Airservices’ responses to a range of allegations. “There are some critical issues of governance that need to be explored,” he said. “There is concern of whether this doesn’t impact on safety.”

Senators are expected to further question Airservices executives next month.
Airservices spokeswoman Vicki Huggins was unable to respond to questions by deadline.

 

Safeskies - "Perpetual Troughs For All" (except the IOS )

P7 - "Pay your money and take your pick; one thing is certain, the audit was not spontaneous nor called for at the whim of the man at the back of the room.  P2 tried to find some information on the ANAO website – Nada, zip, nuffin’, tight as a drum.  One way or another, it’s going to take time, lots of money to track, lots of carpets to peep under, much to ‘un-shred’.  You can even get odds on an AFP investigation, a real one."

Yep checked it out, sources know zip & there is not even a whiff of it on the ANAO website. Shame really, because I'm sure there'd be plenty - e.g Dick Smith & certain members of the IOS - who would like to contribute as good citizens & industry stakeholders...

While on ASA news, I see that there is yet another potential client willing to contribute to the perpetual FTF (Futures Trough Fund) :

Airservices Australia Examines Deploying Space-Based ADS-B
Posted by: PR Newswire Posted date : October 5, 2015 at 6:00 pm UTC 34 views In : Press releases

Airservices Australia and Aireon sign MOA to improve airspace safety, visibility and efficiency over oceanic, remote and terrestrial airspace

MCLEAN, Virginia, Oct. 5, 2015 /PRNewswire/ – Aireon LLC announced today, that it has signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with Airservices Australia, Australia’s Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP). Airservices will assess the concept of Aireon’s space-based Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) solution. Aireon’s space-based ADS-B system will be the first 100 percent global air traffic surveillance solution.
Aireon(SM) will enable real-time air traffic surveillance everywhere in the world, including full coverage over oceans, mountains, remote areas and polar regions.

The Aireon ADS-B solution will facilitate smooth transition with neighboring Flight Information Regions (FIR) while also lowering ground infrastructure costs, reducing costs to airlines and improving airspace safety. The solution, utilizing ADS-B receivers launching as part of the Iridium NEXT satellite constellation, is expected to be operative by 2018.

Leading ANSP Airservices Australia manages air traffic control, aviation rescue and air navigation services for over 20 million square nautical miles (51.7 million square kilometers) of airspace. This includes commanding air traffic operations for over 90 million passengers on more than four million flights every year.
 
Airservices has been operationally separating aircraft with ADS-B for a decade and became the first ANSP to commission a continent-wide ADS-B system. It now has more than 60 percent of Australia-based aircraft IFR flights ADS-B equipped. That number is slated to increase due to Australia’s safety regulator, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), mandating that all IFR aircraft flying in Australia’s airspace be ADS-B equipped by February 2017.

According to Greg Hood, Executive General Manager Air Traffic Control, Airservices Australia, “We are interested in examining how space-based ADS-B could potentially be used in the future and will work with Aireon to determine the potential safety benefits of the technology and efficiency benefits it may offer for our customers, especially for oceanic services and in cross-boundary coordination with our neighbors.”

“There is potential for space-based ADS-B to offer value not only to Airservices, but for all of our customer airlines, airports and search and rescue teams and we are keen to explore that in further detail.”

“Airservices operates, maintains and controls over 11 percent of the world’s airspace, much of which is oceanic,” said Cyriel Kronenburg, vice president, Aireon. “Airservices has always been a leader in investing in best-in-class systems and an early adopter of technology to not only improve efficiency and reduce separation, but also increase safety.

 Airservices and Aireon will collaborate to examine the value of space-based ADS-B. Also, by gaining a better understanding of how Aireon’s system will improve operations, they will also be able to consider the savings that the service may provide.”

Airservices joins a growing list of ANSPs, airlines and regulators who are exploring the use of Aireon’s space-based ADS-B surveillance system. Aireon is currently working with UK NATS, the Agency for Aerial Navigation Safety in Africa and Madagascar, Airports Authority of India, Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore, Blue Med Functional Airspace Block, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, Airways New Zealand and Isavia.
 
About Aireon LLC
Aireon is deploying a space-based air traffic surveillance system for Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) equipped aircraft throughout the entire globe. Aireon will harness next-generation aviation surveillance technologies that are currently ground-based and, for the first time ever, extend their reach globally to significantly improve efficiency, enhance safety, reduce emissions and provide cost savings benefits to all stakeholders. Real-time ADS-B surveillance will cover oceanic, polar and remote regions, as well as augment existing ground-based systems that are limited to terrestrial airspace.

In partnership with leading ANSPs from around the world, like NAV CANADA, the Irish Aviation Authority (IAA), ENAV and Naviair, as well as Iridium Communications, Aireon will have an operational, global, space-based air traffic surveillance system by 2018. For more information about Aireon, visit: www.aireon.com.

  
Hmm...is it just me or is this just a tad suss when you think of the MH370 disappearance, the lack of ADS-B ground-based stations & that TASWAM bullshite...


MTF...P2  

[thorn bird]

"Department Secretary Mike Mrdak outlined the key aviation issues facing the Australian industry"

Bet those "Issues" didn't include his interference and influence in the destruction of the general aviation Industry. His influence in flogging off secondary airports to Development sharks. His influence in employing sociopathic lunatics into senior management, and after their trail of destruction promoting them into the International area.
He wouldn't know an "issue" if it bit him on the ass,...He IS the Issue!!

"Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast had already resulted in significantly improved surveillance coverage of aircraft across the continent, including at lower altitudes, as well as closer tracking of oceanic flights across the Pacific, he said".

"He said"...hmmm?? did he mention the hundreds of "MILLIONS" of dollars it has cost Industry?? Did he mention the $$$ paid in bonuses to ASA management because Industry paid and ASA benefited, the old cost benefit thing. Did he mention that there is no benefit to general aviation in Australia's race to be the first in the world, only cost. Besides he's a bureaucrat, what would he know about actual "Operational" matters?? Does he have operational experience to pontificate about "Operational" Matters??

Widely-recognised as a pre-eminent event in the Australasian aviation industry calendar, Safeskies is attended by key industry leaders, regulators, government, operators and academia and Airservices is a sponsor of the biennial event.

Funny I cannot find anyone outside of Australia that has ever heard of it.
Just a wankfest for unconnected idiots I fear.

[Gobbledock]

Space based ADS-B, will they send up the software on an Aussie satellite, perhaps the Aussie satellite piggy backing on the back of a new US spy satellite? Speaking of playing 'piggy back', will Hoody go to the launch pad to watch ASA executives newest bonus take flight?

I say take all of ASA's senior trough dwellers, MrDak, and other assorted dross and stick them up in space instead. Maybe the rocket will blow an O-ring and do us all a favour. Or perhaps send them all to Uranus. I'm sure Hoody knows the direction!!

[Gobbledock]

More dribble from Sir flappy hands

More bollocks from Sir Spin-doctor, interview titled 'Beyond the black box'. Now why doesn't that surprise me, after all we had that idiot Beaker with his 'Beyond Reason' approach to accident investigations.

https://exchange.telstra.com.au/2015/09/...-blackbox/

Angus, bugger off please. Go support your local orchestra or go flog water overseas somewhere. What's next, CAsA with 'Beyond the safety realm' or something equally queer? 

Bucket please!!!!!

[Peetwo]

Finally the Budget Estimates QON have been answered, here is the ASA AQON  - 7Airservices.pdf.

First one that relates to all three of the dodgy ass agencies was the Nx QON on the Melbourne v Essendon tower 'breakdown in air traffic control coordination'  incident. 

From the ATSB SMH thread:

[quote pid='2364' dateline='1444606473']

Question no.: 102


Program: n/a

Division/Agency: Australian Transport Safety Bureau

Topic: Breakdown in air traffic control coordination

Proof Hansard Page: 21 (28 May 2015)

Senator Xenophon, Nick asked:

…

Senator XENOPHON: No. I am not trying to do circle work. This is important. Will the ATSB at least look at the publicly available information on WebTrak out of the two airports for that three-hour period to see whether there was a loss of separation assurance?

Mr Dolan: We thought it was more effective to ask Airservices to take a look at the tapes and to provide us with their view as to whether there had been a loss of separation assurance.

Senator WILLIAMS: How long would it take you to look at what Senator Xenophon is requesting? How long would it take you to look at that information? A couple of hours?

Mr Dolan: Possibly. It would need to be done by someone with air traffic control experience so that they could understand it, and we have a range of priorities that we have got our limited air traffic control expertise focused on. This is a matter of the management of limited resources.

Senator XENOPHON: Could you please, Chief Commissioner, take on notice whether the ATSB will be taking this matter any further, at the very least, to look at the WebTrak for that three-hour period out of the Essendon and Melbourne airports, and also whether it would look at radar tapes? Also, it appears, from what has been put to me, that there is a fundamental issue that Airservices did not give you the full story initially.

Mr Dolan: In terms of not being informed of a three-hour period, that is true.

Senator XENOPHON: Does that not worry you, Mr Dolan?

Mr Godley: Could I just clarify something, Senator? We did have one of our air traffic control investigators review the whole three hours. What happened was that after the repcon we got back to Airservices. They reviewed the tapes and said there was no loss of separation or loss of separation assurance. Our ATC investigator then reviewed the three hours. She determined that there was a potential loss of separation between two aircraft. But, due to the limitations of WebTrak, she could not be sure.

…

Answer:

The ATSB does not intend taking any further action on this matter, noting that an ATSB air traffic control specialist did review the WebTrak information for the entire period following receipt of the REPCON and that the ATSB is satisfied with the response provided by both Airservices Australia and CASA to the REPCON report (see http://www.atsb.gov.au/repcon/2013/ar201300090.aspx).

REPCON

Mode

Aviation
Reference No.
AR201300090
Date reported
18 November 2013

Concern title
Possible loss of separation due to a breakdown of coordination

Concern summary
The concern related to the potential of a loss of separation or loss of separation assurance as a result of a breakdown of coordination between Essendon tower and Melbourne tower.

Industry / Operation affected
Aviation: Airspace management
Concern subject type
Aviation: Air Traffic Control

Reporter's concern
The reporter expressed a concern that a breakdown in communication, which occurred in November between Essendon Tower and Melbourne Tower, may have resulted in a loss of separation assurance or potentially a loss of separation between aircraft operating at Melbourne and Essendon.

Operator's response (Operator 1)

Airservices Australia (Airservices) appreciates the opportunity to respond to the reported concern regarding a breakdown in communication between Essendon and Melbourne.
Airservices confirms that the breakdown of communication was reported via Airservices Corporate Integrated Reporting and Risk Information System (CIRRIS).

The reported occurrence involved Melbourne Terminal Area Control who received coordination from Essendon Tower advising that they could not separate overshoots with Melbourne traffic due to the cloud base. The breakdown of communication occurred as the Melbourne Terminal Area Control passed the information to the Melbourne Approach Controller but failed to receive acknowledgement of the coordination resulting in the Approach Controller being unaware of the need to identify Essendon arrivals to Melbourne Tower.

A preliminary investigation confirmed that the documented procedure was not correctly followed in that the controller concerned failed to confirm acknowledgement of the coordination.

The investigation determined that no systemic issues existed and the potential safety impact that may have resulted from the breakdown of coordination was understood by the controller. Nonetheless, the Check and Standardisation Supervisors of the involved ATC group have been tasked with reviewing the coordination requirements with the aim of identifying potential opportunities to minimise the likelihood of a similar breakdown of communication reoccurring.

In the interim a temporary console display has been created to highlight separation responsibility for Essendon traffic arriving from terminal control unit (TCU) airspace.
With reference to the reporter's concern that the occurrence may have resulted in a loss of separation (LOS) or a loss of separation assurance (LOSA), Airservices can confirm that there was no LOS or LOSA occurrences during the time of the breakdown of communication.

Regulator's response (Regulator 1)

We note that there was no loss of separation and CASA does not intend to take any direct safety action with regard to this matter; however CASA will use this information to complement other information that informs us of Airservices Australia safety risk profile.
 



Last update 24 March 2014

Hmm...wonder what variety of wet lettuce the Senate Committee will choose to slap Dolan with this time...FCOL  

[/quote]
True to form it would seem that Sir A & Harfwit (& maybe even Hoody?) have had no hesitation in throwing Dolan & the ATSB straight under the bus...

Senator XENOPHON: As a result of the Cirrus, were the radar tapes kept longer?

Mr Hood: I would have to take that one on notice but, in relation to your previous conversations with the ATSB and with CASA in relation to, 'why didn't the Cirrus notify a three-hour breakdown in coordination?'; Cirruses are submitted as an immediately notifiable. So we try and notify incidents that have occurred in the air traffic management system as soon as practicable, which will not have all of the details in there. So when the Cirrus was submitted, we may not necessarily have known that coordination was null and void for the three-hour period.

…Mr Hood: What would normally happen, and where the human error was made, is that the terminal area controller would have instructed the approach controller, 'Make sure you stagger the aircraft arriving 16 with the aircraft arriving 26 at Essendon,' such that in the event of a missed approach there is separation applied. What I am saying is there was another level of defence in that set-up where, even when that human error was made, had there been a go-around—the aerodrome is 11.3 kilometres away—there would have been additional coordination.

…
Answer:

Radar data is recorded and maintained in accordance with the CASA Manual of Standards Part 172 which requires retention for a minimum of 30 days.

This incident was reported and reviewed in accordance with Airservices’ normal safety management processes.

The incident highlighted an opportunity for introducing improvements to documentation and procedures which were subsequently implemented.

The recording was kept for 30 days while the reviews were concluded, however other data, including some radar positions which allow the detail of the event to be reviewed, was retained.

 
It would seem that CASA also were standing by at the same bus stop:

Senator XENOPHON: How can your colleagues say that it is just about Essendon. That is completely disingenuous.

Mr Cromarty: I did not say that.

Senator XENOPHON: You said it is about Essendon. It also involves Melbourne, obviously.

Mr Cromarty: The REPCON was about communications between Essendon and Melbourne.

Senator XENOPHON: Right. And aircraft are taking off at the same time—

Mr Skidmore: I do not know the full details of it, but they might be taking off in different directions.

Senator XENOPHON: No, they were not. They were taking off where they could have intersected about five or eight kilometres out.

Mr Skidmore: I am prepared to take it on and have a look at it for you.

Senator XENOPHON: Will I know by tomorrow morning?

Mr Skidmore: Regarding?

Senator XENOPHON: These matters. Or will it take longer than that?

Mr Skidmore: I will do my best to find out for you.

Senator XENOPHON: I would be very grateful…

Answer:

Yes, CASA will be looking beyond what was looked at in the response to Question on Notice 174 from the Additional Estimates 2014-15, regarding Cirrus Report #ATS-0125061.

However that answer, & the ASA answer, seems to contradict certain parts of the next AQON by CASA??

Senator XENOPHON: My understanding was this: there was an initial report—the Cirrus. It was not investigated, there was a frustration and there was a confidential report by an air traffic controller, or someone in the sector, who said that this is quite serious, and it was escalated at that level. Could you at least look at the sequence of events as to what occurred?

Mr Skidmore: Certainly. We can look at the sequence of events and provide you with the information.

Senator XENOPHON: CASA was reliant on Airservices assurances that nothing untoward had occurred. Can I ask that you look at these matters, because of the concerns that have been expressed to me directly by people who are worried about raising this publicly for their careers. They say that that three hour period was very problematic. ATSB relied on WebTrak, which is something that a journalist told me this morning they rely on to track the PM's plane. It is not exactly a forensic tool. It is not the same as a radar tape. Would CASA be looking at the radar tapes as to whether the information provided to CASA from Airservices was robust and adequate enough? If you could take that on notice as well.

Mr Skidmore: Certainly.

Answer:
CASA was satisfied with the information provided by Airservices at the time in relation to the REPCON on the incident, and as no Loss of Separation (LOS) or Loss of Separation Assurance (LOSA) was reported by Airservices or through the Cirris database, CASA did not require further explanation.

CASA’s Annual Reports provide the number of cancelled, suspended or varied pilots and air operator certificates.

CASA has not cancelled, suspended or varied Airservices’ operating certificate in relation to CASA requirements regarding the conduct of Land and Hold Short Operations (LAHSO). CASA’s oversight of LAHSO has revealed no breaches of the Part 172 regulations.

CASA has not cancelled, suspended or varied the licences of air traffic controllers and their managers regarding land and hold short operations beyond the published wind limits. While there was some ambiguity in the procedures relating to runway selection and wind criteria, this has now been rectified by Airservices.

It is not an offence to fail to report an unknown loss of separation.

CASA would be unable to review the radar tapes due to the time elapsed since the incident.

Hmm..interesting??


MTF?- Definitely..P2
 

[Kharon]

Bus stop wars.

Mr Dolan: We thought it was more effective to ask Airservices to take a look at the tapes and to provide us with their view as to whether there had been a loss of separation assurance.

I like this, it’s like asking Ronald Biggs to investigate the great train robbery and expecting him to return a written, signed confession.

Senator WILLIAMS: How long would it take you to look at what Senator Xenophon is requesting? How long would it take you to look at that information? A couple of hours?

Mr Dolan: Possibly. It would need to be done by someone with air traffic control experience so that they could understand it, and we have a range of priorities that we have got our limited air traffic control expertise focused on. This is a matter of the management of limited resources.

An excuse almost as plausible as being unable to retrieve the black box from NGA because of OH&S concerns.  If this department cannot or, more likely cares not to properly investigate ‘safety’ matters, the QoN should be asking ‘what’s the point in having it’.  ATSB a black hole in the public safety constellation.

Senator XENOPHON: Could you please, Chief Commissioner, take on notice whether the ATSB will be taking this matter any further, at the very least, to look at the WebTrak for that three-hour period out of the Essendon and Melbourne airports, and also whether it would look at radar tapes? Also, it appears, from what has been put to me, that there is a fundamental issue that Airservices did not give you the full story initially.

Mr Dolan: In terms of not being informed of a three-hour period, that is true.

Senator XENOPHON: Does that not worry you, Mr Dolan?

Nothing seems to worry Beaker, least of all Nick Xenophon who is treated with a surly disrespect and not quite open contempt.  Teflon Beaker.

Mr Godley: Could I just clarify something, Senator? We did have one of our air traffic control investigators review the whole three hours. What happened was that after the repcon we got back to Airservices. They reviewed the tapes and said there was no loss of separation or loss of separation assurance. Our ATC investigator then reviewed the three hours. She determined that there was a potential loss of separation between two aircraft. But, due to the limitations of WebTrak, she could not be sure.

How FFS can anyone rest until they were 100%, certain sure, with empirical evidence to support that there was no risk; "She could not be sure" is no where near good enough, not by a long shot. The highlighted sentences should be ringing some bloody great big alarm bells; read it again and think on, then read the ATSB contribution to the bust stop wars.

The ATSB does not intend taking any further action on this matter, noting that an ATSB air traffic control specialist did review the WebTrak information for the entire period following receipt of the REPCON and that the ATSB is satisfied with the response provided by both Airservices Australia and CASA to the REPCON report (seehttp://www.atsb.gov.au/repcon/2013/ar201300090.aspx).

Then CASA get to play with the traffic:-

We note that there was no loss of separation and CASA does not intend to take any direct safety action with regard to this matter; however CASA will use this information to complement other information that informs us of Airservices Australia safety risk profile.

ASA says “all good” so we’ll just create a bit more ass covering paper-work and spin it up a bit.

The incident highlighted an opportunity for introducing improvements to documentation and procedures which were subsequently implemented. The recording was kept for 30 days while the reviews were concluded, however other data, including some radar positions which allow the detail of the event to be reviewed, was retained

Then a short backtrack:-

Yes, CASA will be looking beyond what was looked at in the response to Question on Notice 174 from the Additional Estimates 2014-15, regarding Cirrus Report #ATS-0125061.

ASA says “all good” so we’ll just create a bit more ass covering paper-work and spin it up a bit.

CASA was satisfied with the information provided by Airservices at the time in relation to the REPCON on the incident, and as no Loss of Separation (LOS) or Loss of Separation Assurance (LOSA) was reported by Airservices or through the Cirris database, CASA did not require further explanation.

And for a finale:-

It is not an offence to fail to report an unknown loss of separation. CASA would be unable to review the radar tapes due to the time elapsed since the incident.

Then, it was Hoody’s turn to throw the other kids under the bus”

This incident was reported and reviewed in accordance with Airservices’ normal safety management processes. The incident highlighted an opportunity for introducing improvements to documentation and procedures which were subsequently implemented.

The recording was kept for 30 days while the reviews were concluded, however other data, including some radar positions which allow the detail of the event to be reviewed, was retained.

Would you stand at a bus stop with any of these characters behind you?  Aye, the wheels surely do go round – and around and around.

Honk honk.

Notice the kid symbols painted on the side; like in WW II, they painted bombs and aircraft symbols - as a record of 'kills'; I like the grey beard helping the pink pig on board - sinister....

[Gobbledock]

Jason Harfwit - the advocate for 'match fit'

An associate informs me that half-inch spoke at the AAA conference this morning. Supposedly he babbled on about negative publicity, the Senate etc, but the 'Piece de resistance' was his announcing the ASA unofficial slogan of 'Match Fit'! He said 'ASA are now playing a different game and as such they need to be match fit'! Seriously, where do these people learn such wankery? He said 'ASA have good stories to tell but are not good at telling them'. Oh gawd, please get me a bucket, I'm about to regurgitate last nights Thai meal with Whiskey chasers!

Match fit - is that so they can outplay the Senators? Does it mean so they are fit to take on the IOS physically in a game of nude tug-of-war? Does it mean they are fit and have passed their medical so that they can become bus drivers like Sir Flappy Hands?

"Safe catch phrases for all".

[P7_TOM]

Gee whizz GD; not sure which is the worst image, Thai and whiskey; or, a Half-wit verbal stropathon, in a public place.  We shall see if a ‘copy’ of the speech (or facsimile) can be obtained, then we can share the ‘vibe’.   FFS – courage badges, posters, bust stop shenanigans and now, “match fit”.  Bluster, bombast and bull-pooh, what will they think of next?  Bloody fools.

What time is next bus? I might try a hand of bus stop bitch slapping.