[Kharon]

Sense prevailing?

Another nicely balanced article from that man ‘Iggins; some of the subtleties, complexity and complications of airspace management touched on, without taking the topic beyond the grasp and interest of the ‘man at the back of the room’.  

Mr Cash cited as an example of the variety of contradictions a recent incident at his airport, now under investigation, in which a ground staff officer had been forced to make an unauthorised radio call to a pilot to prevent a potential collision between one aircraft and another, which was apparently not making the required radio calls

Cash brings up a good point in a pragmatic fashion; it does happen; not often, but often enough to justify some form of risk mitigation.  I look at the log book pile and decide (as a Sunday treat) not wade through and count the incidents where unexpected traffic has caused a bad language event, in various degrees, to be recorded on the trusty CVR.  The unannounced opposite direction take off leading to a go-around; the same direction take offs leading to bloody dangerous go-around; all at low level.  Then there’s the opposite direction landings which have created havoc; the close encounters with aircraft at low level after just breaking cloud etc.  Thinking back there have been many occasions, outside controlled airspace where advice would have been welcome.  

Back in the FSU day, these incidents were ‘less frequent’ BUT, back then everyone had the radio on and were paying attention.  I should do the numbers, but it seems to me that many of the recent ‘cursing events’ were brought about no comms aircraft.  I might add that non of this is a ‘regular’ occurrence and the incidents do tend to stay in your mind.  The mantra of “See and Be Seen” gets trotted out, IMO one the big problems with ‘see and be seen’ is that it is not always easy to ‘see’ traffic; even with TCAS, visually sighting an aircraft is not that simple; particularly if you need to look away to do something else, then try to relocate the traffic.  Great theory and on a perfect day, it mostly works, but there is a risk there and if that risk could be mitigated around an aerodrome, then it should be.  The old chestnut 'affordable' safety is so abused now that it has become risible and only used when it suits the authorities purpose; so we may safely ignore that. 

The chairman of Airservices Australia, Angus Houston, has joined forces with the air traffic controllers union in opposing such a move, saying the first duty of the fire and rescue crews is emergency response.

Makes me smile; if the unions supporting the folk on FIFO transport ever cotton on to the notion that their members are placed in a high risk environment and the ASA had objected to mitigating some of that risk and refused to act for political purposes; I wonder what would transpire then.  If there is an elevated risk which can, simply and easily be reduced then the government is obliged to act or face the legal consequences. 

All that aside though, it’s great to have someone ‘on the ground’ to check in with, just for the basics – just knowing what the wind is doing and who’s in the circuit is a great help when planning an approach, saves time and fuel, even when it’s not IMC to the minima.  The RFFS troops are not dummies, not by a long shot; responsible, sensible, capable, trained and alert by profession to potential hazard – also they constantly use radio and listen to traffic; so why not?. Considering the millions wasted on executive lunches, travel, hotel rooms by the hour and the occasional ‘new’ system, training for the RFFS troops seems to be a very small amount being well spent, for much gained and mitigating a potential risk.   

No brainer Angus; get on with it.  Remember, we pay for this, not you.

Toot toot.

[Peetwo]

Mystique of Aviation Safety strikes again [b]--  [/b]

Birds of a feather flock together - From PSNews on the Frau Staib bullshit missive to the Oz, where the bollocks headline says it all - FCOL :

Airservices grounds ‘misleading’ claims




The national aviation Agency, Airservices is defending itself from an apparent campaign of ill-informed and unfounded criticism in The Australian newspaper.

In the past week, the Agency has refuted incorrect and misleading reports in the newspaper that the Gladstone (Qld) and Ballina (NSW) airports were unsafe for landings, that radar systems were being switched off, that weather services for pilots were inadequate, that the Agency ignored safety regulations, and more.

Chief Executive of Airservices, Margaret Staib (pictured) said passengers flying into regional airports should be assured that all passenger flights in Australia were supported by continuous air traffic services throughout their entire flight, with highly trained and professional air traffic controllers helping to keep them safe at all times.

She said The Australian was making inaccurate and misleading claims that were damaging to the good reputation of Airservices and its Chairman, Sir Angus Houston.
Ms Staib said the level of air traffic service for each airport was determined by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and was based on a detailed risk assessment that considered the number and type of aircraft using the airspace.

Aviation Agency corrects newspaper

“Sir Angus’s statement to The Australian makes the point very clearly that a person providing air traffic information to pilots must be qualified, that our firefighters are not, and that we consider this would detract from their primary role,” Ms Staib said.

She said the full statement that Sir Angus had made on this matter was:

“The regulator (CASA) has decided that if anybody is to provide air traffic information to pilots in a regional context, they must be suitably qualified people. Our fire fighters are not trained in that way. Moreover, we want our firefighters ready to respond to any incident or rescue requirements, not handling the radio.” (“Dick Smith is wrong on air safety: Houston”, The Australian, 26 June 2015)

Ms Staib said the newspaper had also misrepresented Airservices in relation to the provision of weather services to pilots both generally and in relation to Ballina Airport.
“Comments provided by Airservices in relation to weather have been reported out of context and selectively quoted to create a false and misleading impression,” she said, referring to the story entitled “Radical overhaul to deliver safer skies” (Weekend Australian, 11 July 2015).

“Airservices never claimed, in relation to Ballina or any other airport, that automated weather stations alone are a comprehensive solution,” Ms Staib said.

Rather, she said, these stations formed part of a comprehensive suite of weather services and additional weather information was available from controllers on request.

“Safety is, and will always be, Airservices number one priority,” Ms Staib said.

Well I guess the PS news will always stand up for Public Servants, even if they happen to be fat cat Mandarins feeding off a massive taxpayer funded trough. Perhaps the PS news would do well to view this poohtube video before publishing such blatantly one-eyed bollocks...

 

 MTF...P2  

[Peetwo]

Day 12 - Well I'll be buggered...

After reading the latest from that 'man again', I'm still thinking about the possible permutations, strange bedfellows etc., it certainly might explain why McComic was sighted at the Pumpkin's Patch in Can'tberra...  

Airservices resisted safety drive, says ex CASA boss John McCormick  

• by: EAN HIGGINS
  
• From: The Australian
  
• July 22, 2015 12:00AM
  

Reporter
Sydney





John McCormick Former head of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, at Canberra Airport. Picture: Kym Smith Source: News Corp Australia
  

The former head of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority says his five-year campaign for safer skies came up against repeated resistance from Airservices Australia, which dragged its heels against ­reforming airspace management along US lines.  

John McCormick, who stepped down from CASA last year, said that he met opposition each time he moved to have Airservices, the government-owned body that runs the nation’s air traffic control and navigation system, extend controlled airspace.

In his first interview since ­leaving the aviation watchdog, Mr McCormick said Airservices seemed reluctant to implement measures that involved its air ­traffic controllers directing aircraft over a wider range of airspace where reliable radar was available. “Their objections were not based on safety; to my belief, they were internal Airservices ­issues,” Mr McCormick said.

In one case, Mr McCormick said, he had to issue a directive to have Airservices’ air traffic controllers take charge of aircraft around Avalon airport in Victoria, a move he believes may have ­prevented a potential serious air accident.

Mr McCormick said he supported calls from businessman and aviator Dick Smith and others for Airservices to have its fire and rescue crews at regional airports without control towers to provide pilots with basic local air traffic and weather information via radio, as do their counterparts in the US.

Airservices chairman Angus Houston has vigorously opposed the suggestion.
Mr McCormick said it made sense because Airservices’ prime responsibility was air safety and the firefighters were its employees. “You have to say, ‘What are they there for … what do we want them to do’,” Mr McCormick said.

Mr McCormick, who started his career as a RAAF fighter pilot before becoming a Qantas pilot and later a senior executive with Cathay Pacific, put his weight behind restarting the effort begun in the early 2000s to move to the US and Canadian national airspace system.
In those countries, whether radar is available or not, commercial aircraft are always under direction by air traffic controllers almost right to the runway. “They say they have implemented it, but of course they haven’t,” Mr McCormick said of the unfulfilled plans to introduce the North American system.

Australia still has a mishmash of regimes in which some airports are in designated controlled airspace, but most others, including some with significant airline traffic, are not, requiring pilots in cloud to talk to each other to work out their relative positions and avoid collisions.

The Airservices media unit yesterday refused to provide information or comment.
Mr McCormick’s decision to speak out follows a sustained campaign by The Australian raising issues of air safety and the administration of government aviation organisations.

While the new CASA chairman, Jeff Boyd, recently unveiled to this newspaper a reform agenda to embrace the US model, Mr Smith suspects he will encounter push-back from Airservices because of what he claims is a misguided assumption on its part that it would mean hiring more air traffic controllers.

Mr McCormick said he did succeed in some reform, such as improving airspace arrangements at the main secondary airports used for general aviation in each mainland capital.

At Avalon, not far from Melbourne’s Tullamarine airport, the situation was absurd, Mr McCormick said, because the radar coverage of the area was so good “you could see aircraft on the ground” but it was not being used for air traffic control down to the runway.

“I said that this was unacceptable. For various reasons, there was a bit of objection,” Mr McCormick said, referring to Airservices.

He said Airservices did not move fast to implement the CASA directive to bring Avalon under controlled airspace. “It took them a year. They hybrided their way towards it,” Mr McCormick said.

It was after controlled airspace was introduced at Avalon that air traffic controllers helped avoid what potentially could have been a major air accident, Mr McCormick said, after a Tiger Airways airline pilot decided on a go-around of the runway at night.

“In the subsequent missed approach procedure the radar controller noticed they were descending when they shouldn’t be,” Mr McCormick said. “The controller told them, then they arrested their descent. If that airspace wouldn’t have been changed, he or she would not have had the requirement to monitor that aircraft.”

It was a further example, Mr McCormick said, of how controlled airspace should be extended at least wherever reliable radar coverage was available.

In 2004, air traffic controllers did not intervene when a radar alarm warned them an aircraft was off-course in uncontrolled airspace, and it crashed into terrain near Benalla in Victoria with the loss of six lives.

 
Someone pinch me...   Oh well at least Higgo hasn't been permanently sin-binned...
The 2 comments from Pete & Ted summarise quite well this strange development:

Peter
51 minutes ago

I always got the impression that Mr McCormick was not much chop in his job...now this revelation explains why. May I personally now apologise to him. I have posted my total support for Jeff Boyd and my amazement why Houston can't explain his role in this matter ??

He should be replaced with someone who is prepared to communicate seriously with CASA and hang his head in disgrace if he does not....he is a much honoured Australian and this attitude of his seems way out of character and the puppeteers hand must be removed !!

Ted
19 minutes ago

@Peter Totally agree with all your statements including your apology to Mr Mc Cormick, so here's mine.

Although Sir Angus is to be much admired, helicopter flying in the weeds is quite different from airline flying in controlled airspace, and he should take heeds of his peers.

MTF...P2

[Gobbledock]

Well well well, never, ever, cross a sociopath!!

You gotta ask the question as to why Herr Skull has come out swinging, now?
Has the cigar puffing volatile one switched to the dark side, to the IOS?????? Surely not! What will we do? How will we handle such an unprecedented move?? Oh Lordy, my head is starting to ache!

There are many possible scenarios, the obvious being 'payback', which is a skill well practised and finely tuned at CAsA. But the real reason can be attributed to ASA and something they have done to him in the past. For Skull to choose The Australian and 'that man' for his first post-CAsA interview, and the interview being about ASA mismanagement, speaks volumes.

But why was Skull in Can'tberra the other day with hierarchy, and now this interview? Perhaps Skull is working (consulting) with some serious muscle hellbent on bringing down the houses of cards? Maybe it's a vindictive move to stitch up Hoody who is rumoured to be heading back to CAsA? Maybe Skulls interview will help drive the need for Frau Staib's and Sir Anus's scalps to be offered up on a platter, creating a catalyst for Hoody to become ASA CEO and get on with the job of reforming the organisation? Maybe Skull has turned Christian and is willing to confess his aviation sins to Pastor Higgins?

I tell you one thing, Frau Staib, Mairi Antoinette and 'he who flew helicopters through weeds' will be furious, and busy penning somebody a 'dipshit' letter today.
Either way, Herr Skulls 'moment of honesty' is truly, and bizarrely, worthy of a chocolate frog, Yak poster or freshly chewed stoogie. Is it ok to say 'well done Skull'? I don't know. Someone please help me.

Message to Truss;
Dear Miniscule, sir you have a real problem on your hands. It might be time to acknowledge that your 'advisers' have tipped a trailer load of elephant pooh on your desk and you are up to your eyeballs in it. Staib and Anus must go, now. And so must Beaker, Pumpkin Head, the remainder of the CAsA dross and the list goes on. Time for you dear Miniscule to source the largest broom and biggest pineapple in the Southern Hemisphere and put them to good use.

Message to Skull;
More please. What else do you have in your colostomy bag of goodies oh angry one? Please, confess your aviation sins, expose the rot, repent, and cash in your River Styx economy ticket for front row tickets to the fireworks show. You know you want to....

TICK TOCK

[Kharon]

A three pipe problem.

Hard to know what to make of it all, ain’t it.  Covering exposed, sensitive anatomical areas seems to nearly fit.  The whole thing is starting to look and smell like the aftermath of a playschool push and shove and the kids are dobbing each other in to the teacher  Makes me wonder just what the Senators have in the hopper; must be good stuff and lots of it.

Somehow, I just can’t see McComic in the role  of  ‘saviour of aviation’; not after witnessing the unbelievable mess, damage and havoc he left behind him.  In fact I’m still a little shocked he dare pop his ugly mug out in public, let alone say “it’s not my fault, ASA told me to bugger off”.  Which is bollocks when you think back on his track record.  But as DAS was he responsible?  Or, has he now rolled over and grassed his mates up, in hopes of a lighter sentence?   Nuremburg wont work and history is against him; so why now and why this topic?  

Dunno; it’s all too hard, but it makes my curiosity bump itch like hell.  

Toot toot.

[Peetwo]

Day 13 - Unions in bed with Angus & Frau Staib.

'Four in the bed and the little one said.."roll over, roll over"---  

From that man again...

Airport unions back Houston on fireys talking to pilots

• by: EAN HIGGINS
  
• From: The Australian
  
• July 23, 2015 12:00AM
  

Reporter
Sydney

The unions covering Airservices Australia’s air traffic controllers and airport firefighters have formally backed Airservices chairman Angus Houston’s opposition to having fire crews deliver air traffic and weather information to pilots over the radio.  

The controllers’ union, Civil Air, has also rejected assertions that the US air traffic control system is safer than Australia’s, and has shown no immediate support for new Civil Aviation Safety Authority chairman Jeff Boyd’s announced campaign to embrace it.

Many aviation experts have argued the practice in the US and Canada, where commercial aircraft are always under the direction of controllers, who maintain separation, is safer than the Australian system where at many airports, including some with substantial air traffic, airline and light aircraft pilots flying in cloud have to talk to each other over the radio to negotiate how they will each manoeuvre to avoid a collision.

“The inference in the position that the Australian system is less safe in comparison with the American system is not sup­ported by any benchmark to draw such a conclusion,” Civil Air executive secretary Peter McGuane said. “Regarding the comments from Jeff Boyd on the airspace issue, until Civil Air is provided with a concrete proposal for change we are unable to assess the ramifications for our members.”

Mr McGuane added that he would be seeking a meeting on the issue.

Businessman and aviator Dick Smith has claimed Airservices, the government-owned body which runs the nation’s air traffic control and navigation system and airport fire services, is disinclined to take on the ­unions to enforce a campaign of reform.

The Airservices media unit yesterday refused to supply any information or comment, but in earlier correspondence vigorously rejected such claims, saying the organisation made its decisions with safety first in mind.

Mr Smith, former CASA head John McCormick, and the chief executive of Gladstone airport in Queensland, Phillip Cash, have called on Airservices to have the fire crews it employs at regional airports which do not have control towers man the Unicom radio to provide pilots with basic weather and air traffic information, as they do in the US.

Sir Angus has said the priority for the fire and rescue teams was to be in a high level of readiness to respond, not handle the radio.

At present, CASA regulations stipulate only individuals who have held an air traffic controller’s licence in the past 10 years can provide such a service, although exemptions are available and Mr Boyd has initiated a review to see if the restrictive rules might be freed up.

Mr McGuane said: “It is imperative that any individuals providing a service be appropriately trained and qualified.”

The secretary of the aviation branch of the United Firefighters Union of Australia, Henry Lawrence, said the union had been in contact with Airservices and been told there was no request for its members to provide the radio service.

“In the absence of any request ... the union policy remains that our members do not perform this function; they are employed for other functions,” Mr Lawrence said.

{Comment: Considering the state of the polls, here's a thought for the Mad Monk's Govt?? Why not call these 2 unions before the #turc & have them explain why they are putting the air travelling public at risk at a number of significant Regional Airports??}
FCOL what a load of BOLLOCKS---

MTF...P2

[thorn bird]

P2, yeah its all bollocks. If the firies don't want to do it, anyone else would do.

At a little airport in Florida, popular as a weekend retreat with the NY hoi poloy because of its golf courses. Friday afternoon is like the battle of Britain, lots of heavy metal corporates mixes up with training traffic and choppers. A calm voice on Unicom sorts it out, no "Instructions" just advice. The Unicom operator is a retired navy pilot, stuck in a wheelchair from an accident. Unicom was his hobby and probably what kept him going.

An Australian example, which I have de-identified because here it is illegal, strict liability and all that. Flying into a country airport on a crap day, made my inbound call and up came a voice with advice that the wind was calm, the QNH was xxxx, weather appeared lighter to the North, darker to the south and "Traffic Heard overhead". At this I held at 25 miles and tried to contact the aircraft overhead. The mysterious Unicom operator then came up and said the aircraft has made a missed approach and had headed away from the airport. I asked him to keep an ear out should he come back, waited for a while and called inbound again. Unicom advised weather lighter to the north so I shot the approach from that direction and successfully landed. What occurred that day under Australian Bullshit rules was totally Illegal, from all aspects, except the midair that was a real possibility.

That's why I say CAsA in all its glory do NOT write regs for safety, they write them to abrogate their responsibilities and Liability for anything, particularly  safety, in fact they have become a positive impediment to safety.

[Gobbledock]

What that man thorny said. To you I dedicate a giant double thumbs up mate!! Great example.

I have the utmost respect for our aviation Firies, don't get me wrong. But at the end of the day it is a cushy job, and again I have no problem with that. When it is quiet it is quiet - game of blackjack, some solitaire, a kip on a comfy cot and even a game of naked Twister. However when it is busy it is busy - practise sessions, real life emergencies, equipment maintenance, physical training and so on. So here is the proposal - find a balance, work out a solution, move forward and let's stop living in the dark ages FFS. This is 2015! Roster the Unicom task through the individual Firies - train them - support them - qualify them - engage with them!

Sir Anus, you and your organisation bleat on about 'best practise models' and other such chestnuts. Then grow a pair mate. Listen to the Yanks, look at what they do, how they do it, when they introduced it, what the challenges were. Stop hiding in the shadows scared to make a hard call, it's pathetic. Improve our safety and do it now. Man up, face off with the unions and kick some goals for once. Maybe, just maybe, you and Frau Staib could do something that justifies your outrageous salaries, bonuses and add-on's???

TICK TOCK MINISCULE

[Peetwo]

Good story Thorny, perhaps we could start a de-identified archive of similar tales of good common sense & sensible safety risk mitigation...

That's why I say CAsA in all its glory do NOT write regs for safety, they write them to abrogate their responsibilities and Liability for anything, particularly safety, in fact they have become a positive impediment to safety.

      
And aided & abetted by our supposedly ICAO SARP (Annex 13 & 19) fully independent, State funded/administered AAI (air safety watchdog).
What might of been.. :

Just think for one minute if VH-YIR & VH-VYK (see continued ATSB investigation - AO-2013-100) prior to TOPD; or on calling inbound to Mildura had of been informed by UNICOM of developing FOG in the vicinity of the Airport??
We could have ended up with this scenario:



Instead we were very fortunate that it ended up like this:
 


And in response from our ATSB we get a more than 2 year, completely nugatory & typically politically corrected bureau investigation; where they do not appear to be in any great hurry to attempt to mitigate any of the significant safety issues highlighted by this very serious incident, let alone put out a final report...FFS!

Therefore Thorny I would argue that the current status quo of the ATSB, also represents another serious impediment to air safety risk mitigation..
 
MTF...P2
  

[Gobbledock]

What pisses me off is that these alphabet soup agencies/organisations ram 'safety' down our throats. They make us introduce measures and processes that are expensive, they even pineapple industry CEO's (by way of the SMS) if they don't support the individual organisation with adequate resources (manpower, money, the corect infrastructure or systems), yet these hypocrites prioritise budgets and fat trimming exercises in their own backyards, suffer from their own non-compliances, yet remain untouchable and non-accountable.

They are allowed full freedom to pick, choose, ignore or reject as they feel fit. They don't have to act safely and responsibly, yet we do? WTF?

The whole thing is a pathetic joke. One set of safety rules an standards for bureaucracy, and another set for the rest of the human race. As I've said for years, you can only push people so far before they well and truly rebel. I think that day is drawing ever closer. They can't continue to kick us with the jackboot while they rort travel allowances, piss our money against the wind, rort allowances, enjoy luxurious 'work' trips, pay boat people in cash to 'disappear', enforce archaic tax rules and regulatory rules upon us, dine endlessly from the trough, enjoy the nations highest superannuation, and erode my Grandchildren's future due to the complete mismanagement of everything they touch. Enough is enough.

FFS, steam off, I'm out.........
A very angry P_666

[thorn bird]

I agree Gobbles, the firies are a great bunch of blokes, highly trained and capable.
Where I have trouble is in the cost benefit area, as in the Australian public service model, the cost is all ours, the benefit is all theirs.

Airport fire services are provided by a mandate backed up with regulations exclusively by ASA. As I understand under ICAO fire services are only required at International Airports.
 
I've been in the industry for nearly fifty years and I can't recall airport fire services ever saving anyone in Australia. From an airline pilots perspective, sorry guys, your expendable, the firies would never get through the armoured cockpit doors to get you out anyway so your doomed to fry. Passengers more likely to get run over by the fire trucks themselves as in San Fran.
So is there really a safety case to have fire services at any domestic airport?  In NZ fire services are provided by the airport by tender and are half the price ASA charge here, same in the US.

Just why does anything the public service builds or operates have to be twice that which can privately be provided is beyond me?

I think about the privatisation of our airports where there should have been care and attention paid to the letting of contracts with clear guidelines on how the airports were to be run. What do we find?

Primaries that turn over Billions yet pay no tax, Why?

Perhaps because very clever people structured it so borrowed money bought public assets and the interest bill exceeds the income. All that income that should have been ploughed into development of infrastructure for the benefit of the users disappears offshore and benefits neither the taxpayer nor the users of the airports, both air-side and land-side. Our gateways into Australia consistently voted some of the costliest and worst in terms of customer satisfaction in the developed world, our politicians should hang their heads in Shame for what has happened.

Secondaries, placed at the tender mercies of development sharks, the sort of people who hire Bikey gangs to conduct their industrial relations, and who from newspaper reports regularly flout environmental laws.

The recent travesty in the Archerfield AAT hearing that will pretty much give the sharks open slather to do whatever they want, because the interests of developers are considered more important that of airport users.

News that almost half of Jandakot is slated for industrial development, threatening its utility as an airport.

Wed SMH is a fair indication that one of Australia's richest men who also has a "reputation" of getting his way, and also is a big political donor, has designs on Bankstown airport.
Do any of these developments serve the public interest? past lining a few pockets here and there. Do they serve any users of the airports interests? Once they were public land used as airports, now their becoming playthings for wealthy people to become even wealthier. What's next?? flog off our National Parks?? then when nobody visits because of the insane fees, run to the Guvmint with the story the parks are not viable anymore, nobody visits, so we might as well turn them into industrial parks instead.

On top of the tsunami of Toxic impossible to comply with regulations about to flood across the Australian aviation landscape, is it any wonder the industry is collapsing, and people, battle scarred and broke, are just giving up.

[Peetwo]

Day 15 - Ballina Band-Aid.  

 "..nothing to see here, move along..!"  

IMO the following is a classic example of bureaucratic obfuscation rule 101, where the bureaucrats (in this case CASA & ASA) concede some ground to the protagonists (in this case the growing ranks of the IOS). They then precede to put in a Band-Aid fix (Ballina airspace), while stating that they were always fully aware & informed, long before the protagonists came along (see *1 quote)...

By that happy chappy from Tassie, courtesy of the Oz:

Safety win: CASA pushes changes at ‘near-miss’ Ballina airport  

• by: Matthew Denholm
  
• From: The Australian
  
• July 25, 2015 12:00AM
  

Tasmania Correspondent
Hobart

Airspace safety will be tightened at Ballina airport, following at least 11 recent incidents in which aircraft strayed closer to each other than is deemed safe.  

The recommendations of a Civil Aviation Safety Authority report, released yesterday, include the introduction of a ground-based radio service to guide pilots — vindication of a wave of safety concerns raised in The Australian over recent weeks.

A rapid increase in commercial passenger traffic to the NSW northern rivers town of Ballina has caused congestion in uncontrolled airspace.

A CASA review of airspace above Ballina Byron Gateway Airport reveals there were 11 “separation-related incidents” — planes flying closer to each other than is deemed safe — between 2009 and last year.

All involved a “breakdown in communication” as an increasing number of aircraft communicate with each other to avoid collision below 8500 feet.

The report identifies a lack of “discipline” in the use of radio by pilots and the sheer volume of radio messages due to “congestion” at the airport, where scheduled passenger flights have increased 27 per cent in just five years.

“When compared with other similar locations, Ballina had the greatest number of communications incidents,” the report concluded.

“The provision of a third-party radio service … would be ­expected to reduce this number …. and … may also have a positive ­effect on the number of separation incidents.”
As well as calling for a ground-based radio service to be introduced by the end of June next year, the report recommends Airservices Australia extend radar control closer to ground level.

Currently, radar controllers in Brisbane monitor and direct aircraft to 8500 feet. The report recommends extending radar controlled airspace down to 6500 feet.

This partly addresses the concerns of the Virgin Independent Pilots Association, which had ­expressed frustration that radar at Ballina and some other regional airports was not being used to its full potential.

The report says Airservices should consider introducing an Aerodrome Flight Information Service — high-standard telecommunications operated by an air traffic controller — “as a precursor” to the provision of full air traffic control with a local tower.

“CASA should continue to monitor movement numbers at Ballina with a view to designating Ballina as a controlled aerodrome as soon as the risk to traffic warrants it,” the report says.

It says the measures would be “a proactive response” to a further rapid rise in passengers, with trends suggesting numbers will exceed 500,000 a year by the end of next year.

Airservices yesterday committed to implementing the final ­recommendations, due after a consultation period closes on ­August 7.

“We welcome the report — this has been a matter of discussion, particularly in the last few weeks, and we are supportive of the recommendations,” said Airservices spokesman Rob Walker.

“Once the report is finalised we will make whatever changes are required of our operations.”

He said Airservices had been involved in providing data and the views of air traffic controllers to assist CASA with the report.


*1"..He rejected any suggestion Airservices chairman Angus Houston had played a role in pushing forward the report, ­following the recent calls by pilots and others in the aviation ­industry for greater control of ­regional airspace and CASA chairman Jeff Boyd flagging a shift in that direction.


Both Airservices and CASA said the report was in line with their approach of reviewing airspace safety when there were ­increases in air traffic at certain airports or changes to the mix of aircraft type.."


The report also reveals stakeholders, which include pilots and air traffic controllers, are concerned about the risk of flying foxes striking aircraft at Ballina.

“Stakeholders reported wildlife (flying foxes) as the greatest threat to safety,” the report says. “That was supported by incident data.”

However, communications problems were significant compared with similar airports and the report noted Ballina Byron Gateway was being expanded to accommodate growth.

Weekends, and in particular Sundays, were already prone to congestion, with the number of both passenger services and general aviation, such as smaller private aircraft, increasing.

 
Ok so Boyd & the Board have effectively followed through on part of their promise as outlined - in a yet to be published - Board directive.
From the Oz article - Radical overhaul to deliver safer skies:

..The sweeping new initiatives were revealed to The Weekend Australian by newly appointed CASA chairman Jeff Boyd in his first media interview since taking up his appointment last week. “We have become inward looking, but we’re just a dot in the world community,” Mr Boyd said. “We need to look outside of Australia.”

The new moves offer a promise to fix an air traffic control system judged by many in the aviation industry to be not as safe as it could be outside the major cities — and by some, including Mr Smith, to be dangerous...

...Mr Boyd said he would encourage a lowering of the floor of controlled airspace, known as cate­g­ory E, at airports on a case-by-case basis. “Let’s see where we can do E where we have reliable air traffic control surveillance,” he said.


Mr Boyd would not discuss spec­ifics, but The Weekend Australian can reveal CASA will recommend such a move for Ballina.

It is expected to recommend that the controlled airspace around Ballina be lowered from 8500 feet to 5000 feet, and that the airport install a radio operator to help pilots with local weather and air traffic inform­ation, something the airport’s management is keen to do...

So reasonable start JB but don't sit on your hands just yet, there is still much promised and much to be done...  
 
Oh & could you please...please publish the Board response (SOI) to the minister's SOE & that Board directive??

..Mr Boyd said he would sponsor a board directive to management to see if it could free up what the industry describes as absurdly tight rules, restricting what ground staff who are not serving or former air traffic controllers can provide pilots over the Unicom radio in the way of weather and traffic information. “If it’s used as supplementary flight safety information, we have no argument against it,” he said...

 
Finally JB could you tell Pinocchio to pull his finger out & update the CASA website..FCOL

CASA Board


Board role
The CASA Board is appointed by the Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development.

The Board is responsible for deciding the objectives, strategies and policies to be followed by CASA and for ensuring that CASA performs its functions in a proper, efficient and effective manner.

Board members

• Dr Allan Hawke AC - Chair
  
• Mr Jeff Boyd - Deputy Chair
  
• Mr Trevor Danos AM
  
• Ms Anita Taylor
  
• Mr Ian Smith AM
  
• Mr Murray Warfield
  
• Mr Mark Skidmore AM - The Director of Aviation Safety
  

CASA Board Contact

CASA Board Secretariat Brian Calder
PO Box 2005
CANBERRA ACT 2601

MTF..P2

[Gobbledock]

There you go Sir Angus, that's how something gets fixed. It still makes me wonder how/why/what you personally do every day to justify your fat salary? Tosser

[Gobbledock]

The six million dollar men!!

Blast from the past boys. 2004;

"The move follows a review of the new airspace system after a near- collision over Launceston on Christmas Eve.
Airservices Australia chose to install a radar system in Launceston ahead of other regional airports that face similar safety concerns.
Under new regulations introduced in late November, light aircraft can operate below 3000m without radio or radar contact, meaning that they can remain unnoticed by commercial aircraft, creating the risk of collision".

http://www.examiner.com.au/story/600156/...n-airport/

It would seem that air traffic separation (or lack off) was identified as a risk way back then?

And another blast from the past from 2010 (thanks Ben);

"Lost in the ‘clutter’ of the last days of the election campaign are two promises made by shadow transport minister, Warren Truss.
They concern direct government action to support pilot training, and an independent expert inquiry into the best use of radar in air traffic control in Australia.
This is part of the press release issued by Warren Truss and Tasmanian Liberal Senator Guy Barnett yesterday"

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/...her=mobile

So here we are, midway through 2015!
Oh c'mon Warren Eroll Truss, did you think we forgot? But you promised us a safer system, did you forget your words? You promised us because you were aware of our air traffic risks. And now you have been the accountable Miniscule for 2 years sir, and still nothing!! Oh my, did you lie to the Australian public? Have you not got the balls to get on with the job? Are your agencies not capable of fixing the system and creating safer skies? If there is an accident are you prepared for the mother of all inquiries, to share in the blood guilt, to spend untold millions of taxpayer green on compensation?

TICK TOCK WARREN ERROL TRUSS TICK TOCK

[Kharon]

Not often lost for words; but the cost to the country, just on ‘airspace’ the last decade is beyond imagining, let alone reckoning.  There are calls for red tape reduction, budget cutting, belt tightening and all manner of notions, potions and spells to cure the Australian financial ills.  Then you look back over the wasted years, effort and even crass monitory considerations and you realise that a good percentage of our kids are denied food, clothing and shelter, while countless millions are pissed up against the walls of junkets, fact finding, conferences, meetings and services which the general community expect to be delivered promptly and properly, but ain’t, which are just another through for the select few to feed from.

I can only hope that at the next Estimates, the committee have managed to sort out how much of the incredible sums of money passing through the ASA coffers are not being used effectively, where it is going, how much the government is not getting of those monies and how little return or gain is made for industry from the investment we make in the ASA monopoly.  Even if it’s just to regain some of that revenue, rightfully belonging to a tightened belt Australia, to put to more practical use for the benefit of the many; not the chosen few.  

Fat chance? – we shall see.

[Peetwo]

kharon: ..I can only hope that at the next Estimates, the committee have managed to sort out how much of the incredible sums of money passing through the ASA coffers are not being used effectively, where it is going, how much the government is not getting of those monies and how little return or gain is made for industry from the investment we make in the ASA monopoly...

I share your frustrations Ferryman, fortunately we won't have to wait till October as the good Committee Senators have slated another Performance of Airservices Australia Inquiry hearing for the 18th of August, see here.  

Further to my Ballina Band-Aid post (above)...

..IMO the following is a classic example of bureaucratic obfuscation rule 101, where the bureaucrats (in this case CASA & ASA) concede some ground to the protagonists (in this case the growing ranks of the IOS). They then precede to put in a Band-Aid fix (Ballina airspace), while stating that they were always fully aware & informed, long before the protagonists came along (see *1 quote)...

 ...I note that CASA have now released a DRAFT report titled - Supplementary Airspace Review of Ballina Byron Gateway - that is now opened for public comment.

From Oz Flying:

Ballina Byron Gateway regional airport services northern NSW including Ballina and Byron Bay. (Google Earth image)


CASA Report recommends CA/GRS for Ballina
27 Jul 2015

A draft report issued from CASA's Office of Airspace Regulation (OAR) has recommended a Certified Air/Ground Radio Service (CA/GRS) be established at Ballina Byron Gateway Airport by June next year.

The recommendation is in response to a growth in aircraft movements that is expected to reach 21,800 by the end of 2015, and an increase in passenger traffic to an expected 470,000 by June 2016.

"In this context and in line with Government’s priorities for the safety of passenger transport services, provision of a CA/GRS at Ballina would be a proactive response to the expected increase in passengers which is expected to exceed 500,000 per annum by the end of 2016," the reports states.

"The primary purpose of a CA/GRS or AFIS is to enhance the safety of air transport aircraft operations by providing relevant traffic information. The Government also considers the safety of passenger transport services as the first priority in airspace administration."

Most stakeholders interviewed for the report supported the plan for a trial GA/GRS, even though the OAR assessed the chances of a "separation incident" as unlikely.

In the period 2009-14, 71 incidents were reported at Ballina, of which 48 were wildlife or bird strikes. Aircraft separation accounted for 11 incidents, of which six involved regular public transport.

The draft report also recommends that the Evans Head frequency be separated from Ballina/Lismore to ease frequency congestion, and that CASA continues to monitor traffic levels to establish if the airport should become controlled.

The draft report is on the CASA website and is open for public comment until 7 August.

Less than 2 weeks to comment, geez the 'Iron Ring' & Co can certainly pull their fingers out when they feel so inclined...

MTF....P2
 

[Gobbledock]

"Less than 2 weeks to comment, geez the 'Iron Ring' & Co can certainly pull their fingers out when they feel so inclined"

They only pull their fingers out when they are trying to avoid a big glaring spotlight, or they are about to get their asses kicked.

[thorn bird]

"has recommended a Certified Air/Ground Radio Service (CA/GRS)"

Read that, if its anything like Uralu, about $250K + grand a year. By the time all the agencies have put their bit on, probably two or three bucks per passenger, but I wouldn't be surprised to see double that.
A US style Unicom does the same thing....essentially at zero cost.

Uralu now pretty well a ghost town, priced themselves out of the market.

Ahh... wonderful Australia that magic land of opportunity dunnunda.... in reality a Pimple on the ass of the world busily regulating itself into banana republic status.

I'd love to know what Sydney airport, that road block to Australian commerce, costs business in Australia. Politically motivated impositions which deny the countries economy billions in productivity, jobs and profits every year.

The public service and government Cost/benefit where the cost is all industries, the benefits all the governments inexorably leads to the spiral of the law of diminishing returns. Its not just aviation that suffers, its the whole economy.

[Peetwo]

Day 21- Dick Smith & 'that man again'.. 

While it would appear the Dick/News Corp campaign has slowed down, I note that in amongst the MH370 media frenzy (MSM & social) that man again has fired yet another salvo...

Dick Smith: air traffic system OneSKY ‘hamstrung by 1930s rules’  

• by: EAN HIGGINS
  
• From: The Australian
  
• July 31, 2015 12:00AM
  

Reporter
Sydney


OneSKY aims to meld the nation’s civilian air traffic control system and the military system in to one highly sophisticated ­operation. Source: AP  
Airservices Australia will proceed with an ambitious new national air traffic control system despite claims from businessman and ­aviator Dick Smith that it will do nothing to improve air safety ­because the rules will still enforce “a 1930s airspace system”.  

Mr Smith has written to Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss, whose transport portfolio covers aviation, calling on the government to put the planned OneSKY radar and air traffic ­control system on hold until moves to introduce the US-style of air space management are ­followed through.

Mr Smith, a pilot and former Civil Aviation Safety Authority chairman, has also described as “irresponsible” the fact that, while Airservices last week announced it had signed “the initial contracts for the design and build of the software system”, neither it nor Mr Truss would say how much the project will cost.

“As a government business ­enterprise it has to be completely transparent,” Mr Smith said.
At the time of its announcement, industry sources put the cost of the implementation phase of the project at $600 million.

Airservices says the cost will be revealed in due announcements.

OneSKY, announced in February, aims to meld the nation’s civilian air traffic control system, which is divided into two parts, split between Brisbane and Melbourne, and the military system into one highly sophisticated ­operation.

It envisages 200 radar consoles operated by civilian and RAAF controllers around the country displaying the same ­information in real time.

“Once implemented, Airservices Australia and Defence will share technology and information, giving Australia the most advanced and integrated air ­traffic control system in the world,” Mr Truss said in a media release in February.

But Mr Smith said the One­SKY program, due to be carried out between 2018 and 2021, would be a pointless exercise until the oft-promised shift to the protocols of the US air traffic control system was carried out.

In the US and Canada, air ­traffic controllers direct all commercial air traffic almost right to the runway, whether radar coverage is available or not, maintaining positive separation between aircraft.

Australia in the early 2000s announced it would introduce the US system, but has not taken on this main element.

In contrast to the US system, in Australia some busy regional airports, like Ballina in NSW and Gladstone in Queensland, are designated as being in uncontrolled airspace and controllers do not direct pilots even if the aircraft remain on their radar screens.

Instead, pilots of both airliners and light aircraft, while flying in cloud, talk over the radio to each other to try to work out their relative positions and negotiate what manoeuvres each can take to avoid a collision, a system pilots describe as “calling in the blind”.

“It is simply not logical to ­install a brand-new radar system that is purchased to operate with a 1930s airspace system and then bring the airspace up to date after the equipment has been ­installed,” Mr Smith said.

Airservices says it “regularly works with the regulators, airlines, airports and government to improve and deliver the safest and most efficient control of air traffic in Australia”.

A spokesman for Mr Truss said there would be no delay to One­SKY. “The transition to OneSKY is not scheduled to commence for a number of years and will operate consistently with the applicable airspace arrangements at Australian airports,” he said.

The spokesman said that ­“revealing the budget for the full contract would compromise ongoing negotiations”.

Oh no is it not bad enough the attacking of the past & present ASA trough dwellers records but now Dick & News have got their sights on the ONESKY TFFF ( trough feeders future fund) golden egg...

MTF...P2

Ps Well done 'that man'---

[Gobbledock]

I love it how Dick Smith and 'that man' continually put their hairy plums out there! Good work boys, not scared to call a spade a spade etc etc. Keep up the robust work. But then along comes the secret squirrels;

Mr Smith, a pilot and former Civil Aviation Safety Authority chairman, has also described as “irresponsible” the fact that, while Airservices last week announced it had signed “the initial contracts for the design and build of the software system”, neither it nor Mr Truss would say how much the project will cost.

What a shock, Farmboy and Sir Angus go quiet! Seriously boys, grow a set, stand up and be counted, not scurry down the closest rat hole like obtuse vermin.
The $6 million dollar men become the $600 million dollar men. And poor poor Frau Staib, she misses out on the bonus at the end of the project!!

But it's interesting that she was going to not renew her contract and leave in October, but now she is leaving around August 8 or 10. Before the next Senate grilling! And 'the cat in the Hat-field' is sitting in the left hand seat til a new CEO is sourced, very interesting as you have him in one faction and the Hooded toga wearer in the other faction. Me thinks it is time to chill the beers and make some popcorn!