[Peetwo]

TICK TOCK! - Federal Government abrogated responsibility to airport safety standards?? -  
 
Via LinkedIn:

Simon Hatfield
Airworks Consulting - Airport Operations/ Masterplans/Designs simon@airworksconsulting.com.au
4d

"..I think this article misses a number of key points. Take into consideration the aircraft that crashed was a Beech 200 Kingair and only requries a strip width of 140m overall under the CASA Part 139 rules - not 300 which is a requriement for a an A380 sized aircraft. The weight of the aircraft exceed takeoff (but did not contribute to the crash) it was put down to the flight control trim tabs being set incorrectly...(added to)...Ironically ICAO are looking to reduce the runway strip width and OLS standards. and they will certainly be a lot different to the ones we have now..."

---

AFAP response:

Australian Federation of Air Pilots (AFAP)
5,571 followers
1d

The article - and the AFAP's commentary - focuses on the key point that the DFO buildings impinge on the runway. International and local laws dictate an Obstacle Limitation Surface (a "buffer" protected for aircraft operating during the initial and final stages of flight).

In reply to the AFAP LinkedIn post discussion:

 ...Not to mention that these standards and indeed all Australian airport safety standards should be properly oversighted by the Federal Government NASAG and the associated NASF guidelines B, F & I. Ref: https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/infras...guidelines

It is also worth contemplating that the NASF and safety risk mitigation at airports is meant to be properly oversighted by our ICAO Annex 19 SSP: Ref - https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/...-Areas.pdf

".. A: Safety at aerodromes is enhanced in a variety of ways and is governed by Australia's Aviation State Safety Programme (SSP), as required by the International Civil Aviation Organization. The SSP sets out Australia’s arrangements for maintaining and improving aviation safety. Under the umbrella of the SSP, Australia's aviation agencies and the aviation industry have significant roles to play in delivering quality safety outcomes. For example, runway safety is enhanced by airport operators through investment in infrastructure such as longer, wider landing strips; Runway End Safety Areas; dual taxi lanes on aprons; installation of runway stop bars; and upgraded approach lighting..." 

It is also worth reflecting on your (allied) 'Way Forward' in the AusALPA submission to the 2019 NASF consultation review:

A Way Forward

To be clear, AusALPA recognises that the economic decisions surrounding airports, i.e. determining the balance between the economic benefits of developments and the detriments to the accessibility, efficiency and capacity of an airport, rest entirely with the relevant jurisdiction within which the airport is situated or which retains legal control. The issues of enforceability and dispute resolution of development approvals would remain consistent with those jurisdictional norms.

However, contrary to current practice, we are proposing that the assessment, mitigation and enforcement of the safety consequences of all relevant developments be ceded by those jurisdictions to CASA as an independent decision-maker.

Consequently, CASA needs to change its model of how airport standards are applied and enforced so as to obviate the gaming of the system so exemplified by the Essendon experience or by the uncontrolled expansion of the thousands of airspace penetrations at Sydney. As a further consequence, DITCRD should seek major amendments to the Airports Act 1996 that change the current subservient and excessively constrained role attributed to CASA and that also clarify the safety considerations that ABCs must undertake in regard to minor developments.

Furthermore, we are proposing that the visibility of developments affecting the safety outcomes at airports is vastly improved in all jurisdictions.

The public interest is best served by accepting that the potential hazard created by a development is on or near an airport not a function of cost but rather the amalgam of the issues set out in the Guidelines. Each jurisdiction should commit to a public register of development proposals that may present a potential hazard to safe airport operations, enhanced by a published list of stakeholders who are alerted to each new relevant development submitted to the jurisdiction for approval.

  
MTF...P2