A bit of ATC history please
Thread Starter
A bit of ATC history please
Can someone advise when air traffic control was introduced in Australia and the flight information service officers lost the airspace for which they were providing traffic information previously?
I understand ATC was introduced in the USA after the mid-air collision over the Grand Canyon in the 40s. Was it similar here in Australia?
When I came along we had flight service officers, members of the PREI if I remember rightly. (Was that the Professional Radio & Electronics Institute?) ATCs were in Civil Air.
Were the professional radio officers there from the 1930s? I presume so. What were they called then? On what date did the first controlled airspace come in?
Any information that you could give would be greatly appreciated.
I understand ATC was introduced in the USA after the mid-air collision over the Grand Canyon in the 40s. Was it similar here in Australia?
When I came along we had flight service officers, members of the PREI if I remember rightly. (Was that the Professional Radio & Electronics Institute?) ATCs were in Civil Air.
Were the professional radio officers there from the 1930s? I presume so. What were they called then? On what date did the first controlled airspace come in?
Any information that you could give would be greatly appreciated.
Airways Museum / Civil Aviation Historical Society
As someone who was once Chairman of the Board of CAA, and who has continuously fiddled with the ATS system, I thought you might already know some of this.
Yes the union was the PREI - a strange way to spell "next to useless". I believe Civil Air refused entry.
As someone who was once Chairman of the Board of CAA, and who has continuously fiddled with the ATS system, I thought you might already know some of this.
Yes the union was the PREI - a strange way to spell "next to useless". I believe Civil Air refused entry.
Hi Dick,
The name of the union of the time was P.R.E.I.A.
Professional Radio Employees' Institute of Australia.
At the time, we were affiliated with the metal trades industry union.
Quote - "Within the Department, P.R.E.I.A. has determination (No. 4/1941) coverage for all radio / electronics Technician and Technical Grades, Flight Service, Communication and Aeronautical Telecommunications Officer Staff."
In my 'introductory' letter, it states that 'This Institute has been registered and active since 1916.....(Yep - 1916).
Alas, I do know the history prior to my joining in Feb 1974 as a 'Trainee' and on a then salary of $4580, awarded from 18.4.74.
An interesting book, "Call Of The Kyeema" by ex FSO, Doug Whitfield,
ISBN 0 9751289 4 9 refers.
It has a wealth of material and is well worth the read for any / all interested aviation persons.
The origins.....As is "usual', it took a tragedy for the necessary changes to occur.....
A DC-2, VH-UYC, and named 'Kyeema' with 14 passengers was en route from Parafield to Essendon and at approx. 2pm on 25th October 1938, they had what is now called a 'CFIT' on Mt Dandenong, some 20nm EAST of Essendon.
The subsequent enquiry in 1938/39 resulted in the formation of the Dept of Civil Aviation (DCA), and subsequently the many 'other' titles under which we were employed, as well as the introduction of Navaids and the Radio Reporting system of the time, 'Aeradio' in conjunction with AWA (Amalgated Radio Aust.), later called 'Flight Service' and then 'modernisation' of the Air Traffic Services system to the present day.
From memory, 'other' titles were, and not necessarily in order, Dept of Transport, DoT (Air Transport Group) (Dept of 'confused arrows'...) Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), Airservices Australia (AsA)....
However, for the interested reader, I recommend the above book as it is both interesting reading, and it contains a very good background story.
So, I guess you could say that, like the USA, it took a disaster to get a 'system' which suited the Australia of the time, 'up and running'.
That system was ATC and FS working as a team, with HF being the 'longer range' radio to provide coverage over our sparsely populated continent.
I cannot remember the date of the change from PREIA to the CPSU (Community and Public Sector Union), perhaps others may be able to assist.
Cheers
The name of the union of the time was P.R.E.I.A.
Professional Radio Employees' Institute of Australia.
At the time, we were affiliated with the metal trades industry union.
Quote - "Within the Department, P.R.E.I.A. has determination (No. 4/1941) coverage for all radio / electronics Technician and Technical Grades, Flight Service, Communication and Aeronautical Telecommunications Officer Staff."
In my 'introductory' letter, it states that 'This Institute has been registered and active since 1916.....(Yep - 1916).
Alas, I do know the history prior to my joining in Feb 1974 as a 'Trainee' and on a then salary of $4580, awarded from 18.4.74.
An interesting book, "Call Of The Kyeema" by ex FSO, Doug Whitfield,
ISBN 0 9751289 4 9 refers.
It has a wealth of material and is well worth the read for any / all interested aviation persons.
The origins.....As is "usual', it took a tragedy for the necessary changes to occur.....
A DC-2, VH-UYC, and named 'Kyeema' with 14 passengers was en route from Parafield to Essendon and at approx. 2pm on 25th October 1938, they had what is now called a 'CFIT' on Mt Dandenong, some 20nm EAST of Essendon.
The subsequent enquiry in 1938/39 resulted in the formation of the Dept of Civil Aviation (DCA), and subsequently the many 'other' titles under which we were employed, as well as the introduction of Navaids and the Radio Reporting system of the time, 'Aeradio' in conjunction with AWA (Amalgated Radio Aust.), later called 'Flight Service' and then 'modernisation' of the Air Traffic Services system to the present day.
From memory, 'other' titles were, and not necessarily in order, Dept of Transport, DoT (Air Transport Group) (Dept of 'confused arrows'...) Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), Airservices Australia (AsA)....
However, for the interested reader, I recommend the above book as it is both interesting reading, and it contains a very good background story.
So, I guess you could say that, like the USA, it took a disaster to get a 'system' which suited the Australia of the time, 'up and running'.
That system was ATC and FS working as a team, with HF being the 'longer range' radio to provide coverage over our sparsely populated continent.
I cannot remember the date of the change from PREIA to the CPSU (Community and Public Sector Union), perhaps others may be able to assist.
Cheers
After WW1 my great grandfather was a wireless operator for AWA and worked at Thursday Island and Broome off and on through the 20s and 30s.
Moving back to Essendon in the mid 30s he began to work at Essendon and his role grew into that of talking to aircraft, from what I was told he and another man were the first to fill this role as a dedicated profession. I understand that date to be mid to late 30s.
I cannot recall exact dates, the airways museum had the info when I last visited about ten years ago
Moving back to Essendon in the mid 30s he began to work at Essendon and his role grew into that of talking to aircraft, from what I was told he and another man were the first to fill this role as a dedicated profession. I understand that date to be mid to late 30s.
I cannot recall exact dates, the airways museum had the info when I last visited about ten years ago
http://www.airwaysmuseum.com/Coastal%20Radio%20Stations.htm
....
The first passenger aircraft to be fitted with wireless communications was the Tasmanian Aerial Services DH84 Dragon VH-URD Miss Launceston, in 1934. By the end of 1937, about 24 Australian aircraft had been fitted with radio equipment. Prior to the creation of the Aeradio service in 1938-39, the Civil Aviation Board arranged for AWA to provide an interim ground-to-air communications service. This was achieved through a combination of Coastal Radio Stations and temporary stations at aerodromes. Frequencies of 333 kHz and 325 kHz were allocated for the service. The Coastal Radio Stations provided a ready-made network for communication with aircraft in flight.
....
The first permanent aeronautical communications facility provided by AWA was at Essendon Airport in 1935. It was sited near the reservoir on the eastern side of the field, and was connected via a PMG landline to the CRS transmitter station at Ballan. The operators were Mr A.S. (Gus) Hart and Mr Lou Fontaine. Other interim stations were set up at Canberra, Forrest and Groote Eylandt. In conjunction with some rural broadcast stations, the coastal service also collected and conveyed meteorological information for aircraft pilots planning their flights.
....
The first passenger aircraft to be fitted with wireless communications was the Tasmanian Aerial Services DH84 Dragon VH-URD Miss Launceston, in 1934. By the end of 1937, about 24 Australian aircraft had been fitted with radio equipment. Prior to the creation of the Aeradio service in 1938-39, the Civil Aviation Board arranged for AWA to provide an interim ground-to-air communications service. This was achieved through a combination of Coastal Radio Stations and temporary stations at aerodromes. Frequencies of 333 kHz and 325 kHz were allocated for the service. The Coastal Radio Stations provided a ready-made network for communication with aircraft in flight.
....
The first permanent aeronautical communications facility provided by AWA was at Essendon Airport in 1935. It was sited near the reservoir on the eastern side of the field, and was connected via a PMG landline to the CRS transmitter station at Ballan. The operators were Mr A.S. (Gus) Hart and Mr Lou Fontaine. Other interim stations were set up at Canberra, Forrest and Groote Eylandt. In conjunction with some rural broadcast stations, the coastal service also collected and conveyed meteorological information for aircraft pilots planning their flights.
Re 'I understand ATC was introduced in the USA after the mid-air collision over the Grand Canyon in the 40s. Was it similar here in Australia?'
June 30th 1956 at around 10.30am, Two RPT aircraft flying virtually VFR, collided over the Grand Canyon.
United Airlines DC-7 v TWA L-1049 'Super Constellation'.
I think I have read where one of the aircraft was simply 'on track' whilst the other did a small diversion to enable the pax to enjoy the scenery of the Grand Canyon....
"The Board determines that the probable cause of this mid-air collision was that the pilots did not see each other in time to avoid the collision. It is not possible to determine why the pilots did not see each other, but the evidence suggests that it resulted from any one or a combination of the following factors: Intervening clouds reducing time for visual separation, visual limitations due to cockpit visibility, and preoccupation with normal cockpit duties, preoccupation with matters unrelated to cockpit duties such as attempting to provide the passengers with a more scenic view of the Grand Canyon area, physiological limits to human vision reducing the time opportunity to see and avoid the other aircraft, or insufficiency of en route air traffic advisory information due to inadequacy of facilities and lack of personnel in air traffic control."
Found it ....thanx to Google....
June 30th 1956 at around 10.30am, Two RPT aircraft flying virtually VFR, collided over the Grand Canyon.
United Airlines DC-7 v TWA L-1049 'Super Constellation'.
I think I have read where one of the aircraft was simply 'on track' whilst the other did a small diversion to enable the pax to enjoy the scenery of the Grand Canyon....
"The Board determines that the probable cause of this mid-air collision was that the pilots did not see each other in time to avoid the collision. It is not possible to determine why the pilots did not see each other, but the evidence suggests that it resulted from any one or a combination of the following factors: Intervening clouds reducing time for visual separation, visual limitations due to cockpit visibility, and preoccupation with normal cockpit duties, preoccupation with matters unrelated to cockpit duties such as attempting to provide the passengers with a more scenic view of the Grand Canyon area, physiological limits to human vision reducing the time opportunity to see and avoid the other aircraft, or insufficiency of en route air traffic advisory information due to inadequacy of facilities and lack of personnel in air traffic control."
Found it ....thanx to Google....
I reckon that it'll be that if "Kyeema" had been provided with radar guidance in Class G, the tragedy would never have happened. 
Griffo, it was the Professional Radio & Electronics Institute of Australasia while I were in it.
Because FS came from Aeradio which came from old time wireless operators (hence the union).
ATC started from airline pilots (who historically had needed wireless operators on board) and never the two would meet.
Read the relevant sections in the link I posted earlier.
Griffo, it was the Professional Radio & Electronics Institute of Australasia while I were in it.
Do you know why FSOs were not simply trained to separate aircraft?
ATC started from airline pilots (who historically had needed wireless operators on board) and never the two would meet.
Read the relevant sections in the link I posted earlier.
Thread Starter
Traffic. I could not find a link between airline pilots and ATC.
Can you give me any further info ?
Also do you know why FS kept the low level non radar airspace and ATC the radar airspace. ?
In other countries FS just gave FS and ATC took over all the airspace
Why did we keep separate?
Can you give me any further info ?
Also do you know why FS kept the low level non radar airspace and ATC the radar airspace. ?
In other countries FS just gave FS and ATC took over all the airspace
Why did we keep separate?
By Roger Meyer:
Part 1
Until the mid 1930s, there was no formal wireless organisation or control of air traffic in Australia. Few aircraft apart from the ‘all-metal’ DC2 carried two-way radio equipment. The few which did could communicate with Coastal Radio Stations and with the fledgling Aeradio organisation. The first Aeradio stations at Darwin, Essendon and Launceston were temporary rigs, operated by the RAAF and AWA Ltd.
In 1937, the Civil Aviation Branch appointed Aerodrome Control Officers (ACOs) at Archerfield, Mascot, Parafield and Essendon. Their function was to regulate air traffic at aerodromes, provide a meteorology service, and give advice to pilots of aircraft engaged in cross-country flights. The personal qualities required of Aerodrome Control Officers were mature age, discipline, power of command and level-headedness. The salary range was £306 - £384 (about $17,000 in 2003 dollars), being slightly above that of a Rifle Range Superintendent. The first appointments were: Commander H.T. Bennet and Flt. Lt. A.A. Poole (Mascot); A.V. Lauchland (Archerfield); and Sq.Ldr. A.E. Hempel (Essendon).
Lacking radio communications, ACOs used visual signalling devices - the Aldis signalling lamp and Very cartridge pistol. At Essendon and Mascot they operated from rudimentary Control Towers on the roofs of the Aero Clubs. From these Towers hung red and cream cane balls, which were raised or lowered to indicate aerodrome conditions. A signalling square located in front of the Tower conveyed information on wind speed and direction and general aerodrome conditions. Using a combination of red and green flare cartridges, and white or red signalling lights they gave instructions to aircraft when to land or takeoff, and to taxi safely. These signals had an effective range of two miles, and were based on RAAF procedures of the time.
Following the crash of ANA’s DC2 aircraft Kyeema in October 1938 it was revealed that two major weaknesses existed in the ground control organisation. A radio beacon to provide pilots with a positive course along which to fly was soon introduced. This was the Lorenz 33 MHz Radio Range, the precursor of the VAR and today’s VOR.
The other major innovation was the appointment of Flight Checking Officers whose job it was to maintain a watch on the progress of flights on the main air routes. This was to guard against a pilot making a grave miscalculation of his position, as had happened with the Kyeema.
Flight Checking Officers (FCOs) were introduced in August 1940 and were at the same locations as Aerodrome Control Officers. They were selected from experienced airline pilots and provided what would become known as a uniquely Australian aviation service - Operational Control. Their duties were to check flight plans and ensure that adequate fuel was carried, to divert aircraft if conditions at the destination were unsafe, close airports if weather conditions deteriorated below minimum standards, and to keep pilots informed of changing flying conditions.
After an aircraft took off, the pilot was instructed by the Aerodrome Controller to ‘call Aeradio’ on a given frequency, on which he transmitted his position to Aeradio every half hour. Aeradio passed the position report on a slip of paper through a chute to the FCO who recorded the position, making sure that the it was reasonable for the pilot to be where he claimed to be. It was not unknown at times when Aeradio was busy for the FCO to receive a report that an aircraft was over Benalla just as the aircraft was taxying past the Essendon control tower! Such were the limitations in this form of position reporting.
During the war, the widespread installation of radio facilities made it possible to take positive control of flights en route. A ground organisation capable of exercising such control, including positive separation between aircraft, was established. The first Flight Control Manual was published in 1943, and in early 1944 the use of radio for Aerodrome Control purposes made it possible to exercise greater control over aircraft operating in the vicinity of aerodromes.
Aircraft were separated by the most rudimentary rules: northbound aircraft flew at odd thousands of feet and those southbound at even thousands. This was the NOSE rule. Also, aircraft flying at the same height along an air route had to be separated by ten minutes flying time. With aircraft of vastly different speeds on the same trunk air routes, a procedure was needed to maintain this longitudinal separation.
The solution was presented in 1944 by a Sydney FCO, Mr Norman Rodoni, who invented a form of computer, known as the ‘Rodoniscope’. It comprised a rotating circular glass disk 60 cm in diameter, under which was a chart showing aircraft reporting points. At the outer edge of the chart was a clock face. By marking the position reports and circulating the glass disk in real time, the controller could see at what time Aeradio was likely to receive a position report and would then mark the actual position when the radio report was received. Thus is was possible to accurately predict when a faster aircraft would overtake a slower machine.
Mr Rodoni’s simple invention saved the number of controllers needed, and was more accurate than other more cumbersome methods of control. Despite its officially agreed merits, it was not until 1950 that he was finally paid £200 by the Public Service Board and a further £250 pounds by the War Inventions Committee.
At the end of the War, Australia had to decide on a peacetime air traffic organisation, having cognizance of the fact that radio had developed enormously over the past five years, and that new higher-speed piston engined aircraft were being designed. Whatever decision was made had to be the right one. Aviation could not wait.
Part 1
Until the mid 1930s, there was no formal wireless organisation or control of air traffic in Australia. Few aircraft apart from the ‘all-metal’ DC2 carried two-way radio equipment. The few which did could communicate with Coastal Radio Stations and with the fledgling Aeradio organisation. The first Aeradio stations at Darwin, Essendon and Launceston were temporary rigs, operated by the RAAF and AWA Ltd.
In 1937, the Civil Aviation Branch appointed Aerodrome Control Officers (ACOs) at Archerfield, Mascot, Parafield and Essendon. Their function was to regulate air traffic at aerodromes, provide a meteorology service, and give advice to pilots of aircraft engaged in cross-country flights. The personal qualities required of Aerodrome Control Officers were mature age, discipline, power of command and level-headedness. The salary range was £306 - £384 (about $17,000 in 2003 dollars), being slightly above that of a Rifle Range Superintendent. The first appointments were: Commander H.T. Bennet and Flt. Lt. A.A. Poole (Mascot); A.V. Lauchland (Archerfield); and Sq.Ldr. A.E. Hempel (Essendon).
Lacking radio communications, ACOs used visual signalling devices - the Aldis signalling lamp and Very cartridge pistol. At Essendon and Mascot they operated from rudimentary Control Towers on the roofs of the Aero Clubs. From these Towers hung red and cream cane balls, which were raised or lowered to indicate aerodrome conditions. A signalling square located in front of the Tower conveyed information on wind speed and direction and general aerodrome conditions. Using a combination of red and green flare cartridges, and white or red signalling lights they gave instructions to aircraft when to land or takeoff, and to taxi safely. These signals had an effective range of two miles, and were based on RAAF procedures of the time.
Following the crash of ANA’s DC2 aircraft Kyeema in October 1938 it was revealed that two major weaknesses existed in the ground control organisation. A radio beacon to provide pilots with a positive course along which to fly was soon introduced. This was the Lorenz 33 MHz Radio Range, the precursor of the VAR and today’s VOR.
The other major innovation was the appointment of Flight Checking Officers whose job it was to maintain a watch on the progress of flights on the main air routes. This was to guard against a pilot making a grave miscalculation of his position, as had happened with the Kyeema.
Flight Checking Officers (FCOs) were introduced in August 1940 and were at the same locations as Aerodrome Control Officers. They were selected from experienced airline pilots and provided what would become known as a uniquely Australian aviation service - Operational Control. Their duties were to check flight plans and ensure that adequate fuel was carried, to divert aircraft if conditions at the destination were unsafe, close airports if weather conditions deteriorated below minimum standards, and to keep pilots informed of changing flying conditions.
After an aircraft took off, the pilot was instructed by the Aerodrome Controller to ‘call Aeradio’ on a given frequency, on which he transmitted his position to Aeradio every half hour. Aeradio passed the position report on a slip of paper through a chute to the FCO who recorded the position, making sure that the it was reasonable for the pilot to be where he claimed to be. It was not unknown at times when Aeradio was busy for the FCO to receive a report that an aircraft was over Benalla just as the aircraft was taxying past the Essendon control tower! Such were the limitations in this form of position reporting.
During the war, the widespread installation of radio facilities made it possible to take positive control of flights en route. A ground organisation capable of exercising such control, including positive separation between aircraft, was established. The first Flight Control Manual was published in 1943, and in early 1944 the use of radio for Aerodrome Control purposes made it possible to exercise greater control over aircraft operating in the vicinity of aerodromes.
Aircraft were separated by the most rudimentary rules: northbound aircraft flew at odd thousands of feet and those southbound at even thousands. This was the NOSE rule. Also, aircraft flying at the same height along an air route had to be separated by ten minutes flying time. With aircraft of vastly different speeds on the same trunk air routes, a procedure was needed to maintain this longitudinal separation.
The solution was presented in 1944 by a Sydney FCO, Mr Norman Rodoni, who invented a form of computer, known as the ‘Rodoniscope’. It comprised a rotating circular glass disk 60 cm in diameter, under which was a chart showing aircraft reporting points. At the outer edge of the chart was a clock face. By marking the position reports and circulating the glass disk in real time, the controller could see at what time Aeradio was likely to receive a position report and would then mark the actual position when the radio report was received. Thus is was possible to accurately predict when a faster aircraft would overtake a slower machine.
Mr Rodoni’s simple invention saved the number of controllers needed, and was more accurate than other more cumbersome methods of control. Despite its officially agreed merits, it was not until 1950 that he was finally paid £200 by the Public Service Board and a further £250 pounds by the War Inventions Committee.
At the end of the War, Australia had to decide on a peacetime air traffic organisation, having cognizance of the fact that radio had developed enormously over the past five years, and that new higher-speed piston engined aircraft were being designed. Whatever decision was made had to be the right one. Aviation could not wait.
Part 2
In September 1946 the Provisional International Civil Aviation Organisation (PICAO) appointed a Special Radio Technical Committee to evaluate the wartime developments in navigation, communications and air traffic control which could be used by civil aviation in peacetime. ICAO later issued a series of Annexes which established uniform standards to be observed by member States. Interestingly, under Australian Regulations Air Traffic Controllers were not required to be Licensed until 1961.
Australia’s Air Navigation Regulations were re-drafted to embody, as far as possible, the PICAO recommendations. The new Regulations, issued in August 1947, gave legal authority to the establishment and functions of the Air Traffic Control service. A new Manual of Air Traffic Control was issued at the same time.
A steady growth in air traffic, particularly on the main air routes between Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne led to congestion in the vicinity of these aerodromes where aircraft were on descent from their cruising height prior to landing. The already overloaded radio communications facilities did not allow a sufficiently rapid means of communication between ATC and the pilots of aircraft flying in these critical areas, especially in conditions of bad weather.
A separate service called Approach Control was introduced, and evaluated on a trial basis at Essendon, Mascot and Archerfield in July 1947. By 1950 it was introduced at other locations where traffic density warranted such units.
At the same time Australian and New Guinea airspace was divided into ten large areas of responsibility, called Flight Information Regions.
The next major innovation was the Flight Progress Board (FPB), which was based on an American model. The Flight Progress Board was introduced from 1950, and performed two separate control functions. First, it looked after aircraft travelling on controlled air routes. At a distance of more than 60 miles from the major airport aircraft were under the control of an Area Controller, who used Aeradio stations for communications with aircraft.
Second, within a 60 mile radius of a major airport, the Arrivals Controller was in direct radio communications with all aircraft so that control was positive and carried out with least possible delay, thus providing control of aircraft converging on a busy airport.
At least four people were needed to work the Board. On one side was an assistant who used an aircraft’s Flight Plan to prepare coloured flight progress strips with each flight’s details prior to its departure. On the opposite side, Air Traffic Controllers actually directed the traffic using the data prepared by the assistant, updated as the flight progressed. Finally, the Senior Area Controller supervised and coordinated all activities. Click here to see photos of Essendon Area Control Centre's FPBs in the late 1950s.
It was soon realised that there was a need for some positive means of coordination between a control tower and the associated air traffic control centre in the assignment of aircraft altitudes. Without this coordination, there was the ever present possibility that the same altitude for different aircraft could be assigned and although the control tower was responsible for the control of aircraft only in a restricted area, there existed the possibility of double assignment of altitudes.
In order to obviate this difficulty, altitude assignment boards were developed, one of which was designed for building into the tower console, and the other for the flight progress board in the ATC Centre. To assign an altitude, the controller in the tower plugged into his board a flight progress strip, and the fact that this altitude was then assigned was indicated by a lamp in the control tower and a corresponding indication was presented on the flight progress board. If an attempt was made at the flight progress board to assign the same altitude to another aircraft by plugging in a flight strip, alarms in both the tower and at the centre operated. Click here to read more about the altitude assignment board.
This method of separating air traffic within controlled airspace continued to be used until the mid-1960s when Area Approach Control Centres (AACCs) were established, which now leads us, inevitably, to the introduction of radar. This quantum leap changed what had been a static display of a dynamic situation with the flight progress board, to a completely dynamic radar display.
Possibly the most dramatic impact on ATC in Australia was the introduction of radar. Radar was invented in Britain in 1935, and its contribution to the Allied war effort is well documented. The Department of Civil Aviation, after the war, experimented with a number of ex-wartime radar installations at Essendon Airport. Some were, by today’s standards, positively primitive, such as the Australian Light Weight Air Warning (LW/AW) radar, housed under a canvas tent. Another was the 276 radar with its daylight plotter in the tower. An operator worked in a small, darkened building on the airport, tracking aircraft on his screen. The x and y coordinate voltages, representing the location of the aircraft, were connected to the tower by a control cable, and traced as a brown line on a sheet of chemical-impregnated blotting paper.
In 1959, short-range ‘raw display’ Cossor radars were provided at Sydney and Melbourne airports to facilitate control of arriving and departing aircraft within up to 50 miles of each respective airport. The displays were located in the tower cab at Melbourne/Essendon, and in a room under the tower in Sydney. Being raw displays, they were only viewable in semi-darkness.
In 1961, DCA produced a long-term plan outlining ‘Surveillance Radar Requirements’, recommending the provision of dual-purpose radars for approach and area control at Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth. Scan-converted bright radar display systems were incorporated in new AACCs at Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane. The AACCs were commissioned, respectively, in 1965, 1967 and 1969. In 1964 the upper limit of controlled airspace was increased to 40,000 feet in 1964 to accommodate the introduction of domestic jet services.
A further enhancement was Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR) which required target aircraft to be fitted with a receiver/transmitter (transponder) which responded to a recognised signal radiated from the ground radar beacon. In early systems only a symbol, different depending on the code being squawked by the aircraft, was displayed superimposed on the aircraft’s Primary Radar return.
In later display systems, such as the fully synthetic, computerised ATCARDS system, an aircraft’s callsign, altitude and computed ground-speed were displayed against the aircraft target on the operator’s screen.
This is a very brief overview of the some of the many innovations which ATC and the supporting Airways Engineering organisation implemented in response to the vastly increased volume of air traffic, and the introduction of jet aircraft.
In September 1946 the Provisional International Civil Aviation Organisation (PICAO) appointed a Special Radio Technical Committee to evaluate the wartime developments in navigation, communications and air traffic control which could be used by civil aviation in peacetime. ICAO later issued a series of Annexes which established uniform standards to be observed by member States. Interestingly, under Australian Regulations Air Traffic Controllers were not required to be Licensed until 1961.
Australia’s Air Navigation Regulations were re-drafted to embody, as far as possible, the PICAO recommendations. The new Regulations, issued in August 1947, gave legal authority to the establishment and functions of the Air Traffic Control service. A new Manual of Air Traffic Control was issued at the same time.
A steady growth in air traffic, particularly on the main air routes between Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne led to congestion in the vicinity of these aerodromes where aircraft were on descent from their cruising height prior to landing. The already overloaded radio communications facilities did not allow a sufficiently rapid means of communication between ATC and the pilots of aircraft flying in these critical areas, especially in conditions of bad weather.
A separate service called Approach Control was introduced, and evaluated on a trial basis at Essendon, Mascot and Archerfield in July 1947. By 1950 it was introduced at other locations where traffic density warranted such units.
At the same time Australian and New Guinea airspace was divided into ten large areas of responsibility, called Flight Information Regions.
The next major innovation was the Flight Progress Board (FPB), which was based on an American model. The Flight Progress Board was introduced from 1950, and performed two separate control functions. First, it looked after aircraft travelling on controlled air routes. At a distance of more than 60 miles from the major airport aircraft were under the control of an Area Controller, who used Aeradio stations for communications with aircraft.
Second, within a 60 mile radius of a major airport, the Arrivals Controller was in direct radio communications with all aircraft so that control was positive and carried out with least possible delay, thus providing control of aircraft converging on a busy airport.
At least four people were needed to work the Board. On one side was an assistant who used an aircraft’s Flight Plan to prepare coloured flight progress strips with each flight’s details prior to its departure. On the opposite side, Air Traffic Controllers actually directed the traffic using the data prepared by the assistant, updated as the flight progressed. Finally, the Senior Area Controller supervised and coordinated all activities. Click here to see photos of Essendon Area Control Centre's FPBs in the late 1950s.
It was soon realised that there was a need for some positive means of coordination between a control tower and the associated air traffic control centre in the assignment of aircraft altitudes. Without this coordination, there was the ever present possibility that the same altitude for different aircraft could be assigned and although the control tower was responsible for the control of aircraft only in a restricted area, there existed the possibility of double assignment of altitudes.
In order to obviate this difficulty, altitude assignment boards were developed, one of which was designed for building into the tower console, and the other for the flight progress board in the ATC Centre. To assign an altitude, the controller in the tower plugged into his board a flight progress strip, and the fact that this altitude was then assigned was indicated by a lamp in the control tower and a corresponding indication was presented on the flight progress board. If an attempt was made at the flight progress board to assign the same altitude to another aircraft by plugging in a flight strip, alarms in both the tower and at the centre operated. Click here to read more about the altitude assignment board.
This method of separating air traffic within controlled airspace continued to be used until the mid-1960s when Area Approach Control Centres (AACCs) were established, which now leads us, inevitably, to the introduction of radar. This quantum leap changed what had been a static display of a dynamic situation with the flight progress board, to a completely dynamic radar display.
Possibly the most dramatic impact on ATC in Australia was the introduction of radar. Radar was invented in Britain in 1935, and its contribution to the Allied war effort is well documented. The Department of Civil Aviation, after the war, experimented with a number of ex-wartime radar installations at Essendon Airport. Some were, by today’s standards, positively primitive, such as the Australian Light Weight Air Warning (LW/AW) radar, housed under a canvas tent. Another was the 276 radar with its daylight plotter in the tower. An operator worked in a small, darkened building on the airport, tracking aircraft on his screen. The x and y coordinate voltages, representing the location of the aircraft, were connected to the tower by a control cable, and traced as a brown line on a sheet of chemical-impregnated blotting paper.
In 1959, short-range ‘raw display’ Cossor radars were provided at Sydney and Melbourne airports to facilitate control of arriving and departing aircraft within up to 50 miles of each respective airport. The displays were located in the tower cab at Melbourne/Essendon, and in a room under the tower in Sydney. Being raw displays, they were only viewable in semi-darkness.
In 1961, DCA produced a long-term plan outlining ‘Surveillance Radar Requirements’, recommending the provision of dual-purpose radars for approach and area control at Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth. Scan-converted bright radar display systems were incorporated in new AACCs at Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane. The AACCs were commissioned, respectively, in 1965, 1967 and 1969. In 1964 the upper limit of controlled airspace was increased to 40,000 feet in 1964 to accommodate the introduction of domestic jet services.
A further enhancement was Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR) which required target aircraft to be fitted with a receiver/transmitter (transponder) which responded to a recognised signal radiated from the ground radar beacon. In early systems only a symbol, different depending on the code being squawked by the aircraft, was displayed superimposed on the aircraft’s Primary Radar return.
In later display systems, such as the fully synthetic, computerised ATCARDS system, an aircraft’s callsign, altitude and computed ground-speed were displayed against the aircraft target on the operator’s screen.
This is a very brief overview of the some of the many innovations which ATC and the supporting Airways Engineering organisation implemented in response to the vastly increased volume of air traffic, and the introduction of jet aircraft.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 72
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick, it wasn't a radar/non-radar division. ATC had huge non-radar areas. As for the low level FS areas, it had a lot to do with radio coverage. ATC needed to use reliable VHF radio to keep in constant communication. Any ATC instructions relayed through FS HF and VHF were time consuming. The technology just didn't exist for nationwide VHF coverage. As VHF coverage improved, FS was no longer required. As FS wound down, training courses stopped an the FS average age increased. Another reason why the majority of FSOs took redundancy.
Personally, I think the division of services harks back to our imperial class system. Aerodio were ex-enlisted men, while ATC were drawn from the officer ranks. ATC kept the airliners apart, and FS looked after the rest. Keeping aircraft apart was Officers work, and passing weather and grubby HF work wasn't. That division persisted, even though the underlying educational qualifications became irrelevant. There was definately a supposition, particularly amongst ATC, that FSOs were either failed, or unsuccessful ATC applicants. I didn't know anyone during the time I was an FSO who was either.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Melbourne, Vic
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately there are a few myths and inaccuracies in the preceding answers.
However, the CAHS & Airways Museum website is indeed a good place to start for information about the history of Australia's airways system.
To understand why there were two branches of ATS with members in two different unions (or professional associations, depending on your point of view I suppose), one needs to understand how the airways system began and evolved. The result was simply a product of different pathways and operational responsibilities. For example, the first Aeradio Operators were not only communicators but also radio technicians. Whereas the first Air Traffic Controllers (as we would call them today) didn't use radio at all.
By the way, it's a common misconception that the Kyeema accident was the origin of ATC. The real origin was a spate of ground and mid-air collisions at and near the major capital-city aerodromes. Kyeema ushered in Flight Checking, later to become Ops Control (and now the responsibility of the aircraft operator).
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is broadly correct in saying that the early 'ATCs' were all senior pilots, some of whom just wanted a ground job and some of whom lost their flying medical. Norm Rodoni is a case in point, being the former Chief Pilot of Adastra Airways before he lost his medical and entered ATC. After the war there was an influx of ex-aircrew including the likes of Don Charlwood, a former bomber navigator. It wasn't until quite some time later that the first non-aircrew trainees were taken on (not sure exactly when, but possibly the early to mid-1960s).
The functions of both groups evolved over time until they had much in common, while still retaining distinctly different responsibilities, until moves began toward the integration of Flight Service and ATC in the early 1990s (completed in 2000). Many former FSOs re-trained as ATCs. I wouldn't argue to bring back the two separate branches of ATS, but one might question whether you really need the same highly skilled (and paid) traffic separator to also be doing 'traffic is...'. (This is not to denigrate the skills or dedication of the FSO, however.)
As for the Grand Canyon accident, there are many things that can be said about this accident from our lofty vantage point of 60 years on, not the least being the government penny-pinching that left the US airways system struggling to find ways to manage the burgeoning post-war civil air transport boom at a time when the Australian airways system, by contrast, separated all RPT aircraft. If you want to read a good, popular account of this accident, then I refer you to Mac Job's excellent Air Disaster Vol. 4.
However, the CAHS & Airways Museum website is indeed a good place to start for information about the history of Australia's airways system.
To understand why there were two branches of ATS with members in two different unions (or professional associations, depending on your point of view I suppose), one needs to understand how the airways system began and evolved. The result was simply a product of different pathways and operational responsibilities. For example, the first Aeradio Operators were not only communicators but also radio technicians. Whereas the first Air Traffic Controllers (as we would call them today) didn't use radio at all.
By the way, it's a common misconception that the Kyeema accident was the origin of ATC. The real origin was a spate of ground and mid-air collisions at and near the major capital-city aerodromes. Kyeema ushered in Flight Checking, later to become Ops Control (and now the responsibility of the aircraft operator).
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is broadly correct in saying that the early 'ATCs' were all senior pilots, some of whom just wanted a ground job and some of whom lost their flying medical. Norm Rodoni is a case in point, being the former Chief Pilot of Adastra Airways before he lost his medical and entered ATC. After the war there was an influx of ex-aircrew including the likes of Don Charlwood, a former bomber navigator. It wasn't until quite some time later that the first non-aircrew trainees were taken on (not sure exactly when, but possibly the early to mid-1960s).
The functions of both groups evolved over time until they had much in common, while still retaining distinctly different responsibilities, until moves began toward the integration of Flight Service and ATC in the early 1990s (completed in 2000). Many former FSOs re-trained as ATCs. I wouldn't argue to bring back the two separate branches of ATS, but one might question whether you really need the same highly skilled (and paid) traffic separator to also be doing 'traffic is...'. (This is not to denigrate the skills or dedication of the FSO, however.)
As for the Grand Canyon accident, there are many things that can be said about this accident from our lofty vantage point of 60 years on, not the least being the government penny-pinching that left the US airways system struggling to find ways to manage the burgeoning post-war civil air transport boom at a time when the Australian airways system, by contrast, separated all RPT aircraft. If you want to read a good, popular account of this accident, then I refer you to Mac Job's excellent Air Disaster Vol. 4.
The hierarchy of "The Department" were also almost all ex pilots or ATC. If it needed controlling, ATC did it, with or without radar. Money was pretty much no object back then, so CTA was just extended to provide whatever was needed. Remember the vast majority of airspace was uncontrolled, so turning little bits of it into controlled was no big deal and accomplished by the stroke of a pen.. If a jet went there, it got CTA and a tower. Why didn't FS use radar? Ask DCA or Civil Air.