PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Some truth about the ML incident
View Single Post
Old 20th Dec 2003, 07:11
  #145 (permalink)  
Shitsu-Tonka
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. If the controller was concerned about a potential conflict why didn't he simply ask the C421 to do a orbit or standard rate turn at his current position. This would have given an immediate 2 minute increase in seperation. Happens going into CBR all the time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Isn't that the whole reason E was introduced? So those pesky Air traffic controllers don't have to issue clearances and delay important VFR operators?..... actually this is a good example of why the old system DID work. The only time an ATC clearance was not immediately issued was when a Sep standard did not immediately exist but would do very soon - it was safe. (or when the aircraft had not submitted a flight plan which the controller has to do on a screen which goes over the top of their traffic picture they are trying to run).

One point I think is not appreciated here is that the ATC was under no obligation to cut off VB's descent. VB could have sailed right on thru the E airspace.

The point about descending thru E airspace on descent to C - just about all major AD in Australia almost require that now with the E steps. e.g. Gold Coast E starts at 30nm S at 8500 ' up.

If you apply the Ministers rhetoric one step further....IF the worst HAD happened and there WAS a midair.... there still would have been NO BREAKDOWN in SEPARATION, because.... no sep standard existed! Now tell me again how this is safe and not crazy??

Why wont Anderson talk to CivilAir or AIPA? If he is so confident in the system why doesnt he get out and tell the professional bodies why?

Why hasnt he responded to Martin Fergusons questions in parliament about why Dick Smith didnt oppose him in Gwydir?


Then we have the final Dick: Mr Dick Smith. Dick, to be fair, is an enthusiastic amateur pilot, adventurer and successful marketing man. Mr Smith and the Minister for Transport and Regional Services are not the best of mates. They had a very public stoush in the lead-up to Mr Smith's leaving the CASA board. Mr Anderson, as we were told then, was not going to work with him again. We then had Mr Smith embark on a strategy to get back into the tent. He threatened to stand against the minister in Gwydir.

Before we knew it, Dick Smith visited the Liberal Party court and soon announced that he would not run in Gwydir. We do not know what happened in those discussions but, soon after the election, the minister put him in charge of airspace design and reform. The design and development of our airspace has been outsourced to Dick Smith. The result is that not one person on the Airspace Reform Group has air traffic control or airline pilot qualifications.
The proposed NAS system does not have widespread industry support and it will put the Australian travelling public at risk. It is one thing to lose ownership of Telstra, and it is another thing to spend millions of dollars to prop up a friend's industry; but to risk the aviation and the travelling public's safety to deliver a political outcome—in essence, to get Mr Dick Smith not to run or support a candidate in Gwydir at the 2001 election—is unforgivable.
From Hansard link: http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/reps/dailys/dr210803.pdf

Last edited by Shitsu-Tonka; 20th Dec 2003 at 07:27.
Shitsu-Tonka is offline