[Peetwo]

Airports Act in spotlight after YMEN crash -

Joseph Wheeler (via the Oz) brings back to ToRs the contentious issues surrounding Government airport lease agreements (in particular secondary airports), that were originally drawn up under the conditions of the Airports Act 1996:

Profit should never be allowed to override airport safety
Joseph Wheeler
The Australian
12:00AM February 24, 2017

When is an airport not about ­aviation? In Australia at least, the answer to that question depends on whom you ask.

Residents around most federally leased general aviation airports in Australia might say that there is too much aviation, or that aviation is too close to home. If you ask an aviator who flies to such airports, their answer might be that they prefer flying to “old-fashioned” airfields rather than being made to endure the headaches that come with avoiding ever-increasing developments such as office blocks and shopping centres taking up space on valuable airport land.

While this week’s tragedy at ­Essendon Airport is freshly the subject of investigation, the accident is again an important reminder that lessons are there to be learned about the regulation of planning and development at federally leased airports to ensure the right balance is struck between air safety and commercial operations.

Essendon is one of a handful of Australian airports that were once run by the commonwealth, but privatised in the late 1990s by way of long-term leases to private airport operators.

What those operators learned fairly quickly is that aviation doesn’t pay. In fact, the value to be had from the airport sites was not from fostering the growth of Australia’s general aviation sector at airports like Essendon, or bringing commercial efficiency to the operation of our major air gateways (although that was one positive contribution, some will argue).

No: the value to be had was simply the land. Property like federally leased airport sites was and is in short supply. Typically it is near major cities, with existing road or rail infrastructure to connect them to the outposts of trade. Subleases, with rentals paid by high-volume box-movers and retail mega-warehouses, easily trump the few dollars that can be earned from landing fees from student pilots trying to earn their wings.

And this is why we see ­encroachment on airports by property developments.

Areas that once were grassy and necessary excess spaces for mitigating aviation accidents are now dwindling because they equal money to airport operators. Notwithstanding height limitations and certain use limitations, airports have increasingly come to be associated with commercial development more than aviation.

The upshot is that aviation is being edged out of airports. And of course, while the major impediments such as adherence to Obstacle Limitation Surfaces are mandatory for airport operators to preserve, it is arguable that any further control given to them (for example, permitting temporary intrusions as “controlled activities”, which intrude into that airspace) should solely be the reserve of our air safety regulators.

The Airports Act 1996 and its regulations (which facilitated the sale of long-term leases of major airports to private operators) allow airport operators to make safety-sensitive interim decisions about the protection of airspace used by fare-paying passengers.

This is one of the many concerns open for critique in a public consultation paper published by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development (which administers the leased airports), focusing on “Modernising Airspace Protection”. The paper, open for comment until Tuesday, follows the recommendation of the Aviation Safety Regulation Review Panel in 2014, which sought that the department “take a leadership role to ensure the future viability of airport infrastructure is not compromised by poor planning and land-use decisions”. The department “found a number of regulatory gaps ranging from outdated regulatory ­approaches ... regulatory overlap … and considerable scope for improvement in regulatory oversight”.

It must be hoped that this process will help to bring to a head the need to ensure that airports are getting the balance right on safety versus commercial imperatives. Greater planning control on leased airports under the Airports Act; more stringent airspace protection by DIRD and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority than current regulations permit; or, as a last resort, commonwealth buyback of the airports at the end of their lease are all options to review.

The causes of this week’s accident are still to be determined, but at a minimum it serves as a tragic and timely reminder to all airspace users and to the commonwealth that airspace protection at airports is an issue sorely in need of greater oversight.

Influential corporate interests should never trump the primacy of air safety.

Joseph Wheeler is the principal of aviation and aerospace law firm IALPG, national head of aviation law at Maurice Blackburn Lawyers and aviation legal counsel to the Australian Federation of Air Pilots.

Next a related story from ABC Local on Brisbane's Archerfield airport:

Call for urgent safety review of Brisbane's Archerfield Airport after Essendon tragedy
By Lexy Hamilton-Smith and Andree Withey
Updated Wed at 5:35pmWed 22 Feb 2017, 5:35pm
Photo: Archerfield Airport is located about 10 kilometres from the Brisbane CBD.

Concerns have been raised about development at Brisbane's Archerfield Airport following yesterday's fatal plane crash at Essendon in Melbourne.

Key points:

• Pilots, local business say dangerous developments are occurring at Archerfield
  
• Airport denies projects are putting people at risk
  
• Developments include accommodation, training schools
  

Aviation and community groups are now calling for an urgent review of what they call "dangerous" developments on airport land.

For years the local chamber of commerce has fought the airport's master plan arguing against proposed new facilities like an aviation business park.

President Lindsay Snell said it is was "tombstone mentality" for people to wait until there was a tragedy like Essendon before dealing with the problem.

Ben Morgan from the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia (AOPA) has also been battling over development of secondary airports.

He said Archerfield, like many airports around the country, had been reconfigured.

"It has changed the runway lengths and undertaken a multitude of modifications which have been opposed by the industry," he said.

Mr Morgan said obstacles had been created which could reduce options for a pilot in the case of an emergency.

Archerfield Airport developments:

• Student accommodation
  
• Training schools
  
• Maintenance facilities
  
• Queensland Government air wing
  
• Police air wing
  
• Parking areas
  

"The safety of pilots, the safety of the flying public needs to be prioritised above the profit interests of these property developer airport owners," he said.

Both groups said appeals to the Federal Government for a review on safety grounds had fallen on deaf ears.

They are hoping now, in wake of this week's tragedy, their concerns will finally be taken seriously.

Mr Morgan is urging Federal Transport Minister Darren Chester to begin a rapid review of policies and mechanisms regarding development plans at secondary airports.

"He needs to assure the Australian public that future developments are going to be given a far tighter degree of investigation when it comes to safety risk analysis," Mr Morgan said.

"And that any building on airport precincts will not pose a safety risk to pilots."

Mr Chester did not comment on Archerfield specifically, but said any developments approved were made with the backing of Airservices Australia and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

Photo: Five people died when a plane crashes into DFO at Essendon Fields on Tuesday. (Metropolitan Fire Brigade)

'Airports are all about safety': general manager

Archerfield Airport is located just over 10 kilometres from Brisbane's CBD and is in the middle of a busy industrial hub and fast-growing residential area.

The airport was privatised in the late 1990s but remains on Commonwealth-owned land.

The Archerfield Airport Corporation has since injected more than $38 million into the restoration and renewal projects.

General manager Heather Mattes admits ongoing growth has been and continues to be a priority because the airport needed to be run as a commercial airport.

However, Ms Mattes insisted none of the developments were dangerous.

" I reject that totally. Airports are all about safety," she said.

"All the runways are built and designed and maintained in accordance with civil aviation safety regulations.

"I am a pilot myself and I have landed here at the airport numerous times, aviation safety is our key priority here."

The airport's latest master plan for 2017 to 2037 was closed for public comment on February 17.

    
To follow from the above I note that AOPA Oz has declared they will be conducting an independent investigation into the Essendon crash focussing on retail encroachment at airports. If true I hope they consider advice from the Archerfield Chamber of commerce and the many expert depositions, consultations and historical records they have amassed with their AAT case...

AOPA Oz should also consider a thorough briefing/consultation from one Senator David Fawcett..

Just saying...


MTF...P2