[Peetwo]

Mount NCN shrinking but Airports still loom as biggest risk?? -   

Via the AuntyPru email chains, extract to multiple interested parties:

The attached doc gives you a sense of the trajectory of CASA's strategic direction for this financial year.

CASA will ensure the directions of the Australian Government, as presented in the Minister’s Statement of Expectations, are implemented effectively and efficiently. CASA’s Corporate Plan fully details the activities and initiatives to be undertaken by the organisation to meet the expectations.

The Australian Government has set out some clear objectives relevant to CASA including:

- to continue to focus on aviation safety as the highest priority
- to consider the economic and cost impact on individuals, businesses and the community in the development and finalisation of new or amended regulatory changes
- to take a pragmatic, practical and proportionate approach to regulation as it applies to different industry sectors having regard to risk
- to implement its regulatory philosophy, with the philosophy being reflected in relevant policies, procedures, manuals, and when CASA personnel are carrying out their day-to-day operations.
CASA’s comprehensive planning framework fully incorporates the Australian Government direction and ensures the relevant requirements are implemented effectively and efficiently. CASA aims to achieve its commitment to aviation safety through its three key goals. They are:
- to maintain and enhance a fair, effective and efficient aviation safety regulation system
- to engage collaboratively with the wider aviation community to promote and support a positive safety culture
- to continuously improve organisational performance.
Each goal is supported through a number of key performance areas (KPA) and indicators (KPI). The progress and achievement against the KPIs are monitored by a comprehensive performance management and reporting process. CASA will continue its commitment to making further improvements to the way it operates and continuously strive to achieve its high-level goals.

IMO the above highlights the importance of industry of having input to the re-writing of the current Ministerial SOE.

 This is also significant IMO (part in bold):

As a key priority, CASA continues to develop and implement new safety standards and regulations, taking into account the Australian Government’s regulatory reform agenda. CASA will stay abreast of changes within the aviation industry by carefully analysing safety and operational data to look for trends and emerging risks which need to be addressed. This approach will further focus CASA on its core activity - the regulation of aviation safety.

What is the current Government 'regulatory reform agenda'? Does the RRA consider the underlying philosophy of COAG 'competition principles agreement'? If not shouldn't the SOE and CASA strategic direction (above) have the CPA included?

Finally I note the following from table on page 262:

CASA maintains the Effective Implementation (EI) Score determined by International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) Universal Safety Oversight Audit Program (USOAP)/Maintain or improve EI score/Target expected to be met

Note: The current EI score is still I believe only a self-assessment.



Referring to the 2nd attachment (extract above, from Dr Kennedy to the RRAT committee, 21 February 2018), this was apparently the total number of differences from the beginning of 2018. Despite the weasel words, this IMO highlights the importance of discovering what the current number of notified differences are and also reviewing how those differences are negatively impacting industry competitiveness both internationally and domestically through non-harmonisation and non-compliance with ICAO.

Referring to the above, I have just completed the rather onerous task of collating the latest list (May 2021) of Australian ICAO NCNs (see HERE).

Although probably not a 100% accurate (lost count and place a number of times) the total figure for notified differences from my calculations has in fact gone down from the high of 4280 calculated by the department in February 2018.

Currently there is 321 pages with a total of 2712 NDs, an average of 8.5 per page. This would suggest that the Dept has been conscious of the problem (ie extreme non-compliance with ICAO from at least 2018) and have been progressively reducing NDs since it was brought to their attention by both the Senate  RRAT committee and by association AuntyPru.

The most disturbing figures for NDs is within Annex 14 (Airports & Heliports, Vol 1 & 2) with a total of 127 pages and 1018 NDs. 

The question is why is it so hard for the Australian authorities to reign in, what is surely a major international embarrassment, our growing non-compliance with ICAO defined safety-risk mitigation (Annex 14) around airports/heliports and the surrounding airspace?

Slight thread drift but the following was a horrific but fascinating video find (that Ventus recently shared with me) that perhaps helps join the dots on my (above) question:    

Although 45 years apart the parallels with the tragic Essendon DFO accident are IMO quite remarkable and highlight how much of a bullet was dodged on 21 February 2021. However the big difference from the two accidents was that the Americans actually learnt from the NTSB accident report and proactively put in place safety risk mitigation policies and actions, including the subject of urban land use around airports. 

Reference:  https://www.usdeadlyevents.com/1972-sep-...-ca-22-23/ 
  

“The second circumstance which added to the catastrophe was the location of the ice cream parlor. The construction of the shopping center was accomplished in accordance with existing statutes of the various jurisdictions. Although some of the structures exceeded the height standards of Part 77, the FAA determined that the obstructions did not constitute hazards to air navigation. The city, county, and State governments all generally agreed that once the shopping center was built, the subsequent addition of the ice cream parlor and sign had little effect on aircraft operations. This conclusion was an obvious extension of the initial rationale that ‘… the construction (of the shopping center) would affect operations no differently than other existing structures such as a gasoline sign, television antennas, traffic signal standards, etc.”….” (NTSB-AAR-73-6, p. 17.)

From Appendix E to NTSB-AAR-73-6, Safety Recommendation A-72-210 thru 223 (to the FAA), dated December 28, 1972:

“…The built-up area around the Sacramento Executive Airport raises serious questions with regard to the suitability for airshows of this and similar airports, especially when one considers the practicability of applying the following sample of a special provision from the pertinent handbook: “The holder of the airshow waiver shall insure that roads adjacent to the airport, as specified below, are devoid of vehicular traffic and the property adjoining the airport shall be free of spectators.” This provision was not incorporated in the certificate of waiver for the Sacramento airshow; if it had been, it would have been very difficult to implement….” (NTSB-AAR-73-6, p. 31.)
NTSB: “Probable Cause.

Pilot in Command – Improper Operation of Flight Controls
Pilot in Command – Failed to Obtain/Maintain Flying Speed
Pilot in Command – Lack of Familiarity with Aircraft
Remarks – Overrotation of Acft due inadequate Plt proficiency & misleading visual cures hit ice cream parlor.”
(NTSB. NTSB Identification: OAK73AP008.)

Check-Six.com: “Ultimately, the accident forced the closure of Runway 12-30 to jet traffic, became the impetus to a comprehensive land-use plan for the area around the airport, and resulted in a $5 million settlement for the survivors and the families of those who died, but only after years of legal maneuvers, concluding in May of 1976.

P2 comment: One could hypothesise that this accident was the prelude that ultimately led to the internationally recognised California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook in regards to public safety zones around airports - 

Ref: https://auntypru.com/essendon-dfo-accide...christine/


Meanwhile at Essendon Fields airport there the DFO still sits? -   

MTF...P2