You be the judge on the facts.
On 4BC radio on 15 April 2004, the President of Civil Air (the air traffic controllers’ association), Ted Lang, stated the following:
Fancy even suggesting that an air traffic controller could sit and watch two aircraft come together, but unfortunately the situation that happened at Maroochydore, that is exactly what they have to do. There is no way that in the wide world that an air traffic controller can intervene in that circumstance. That Virgin aircraft, it was the pilot’s responsibility to see the other aircraft.
What do the facts state? The official Airservices Australia air traffic controllers training information for the 27 November 2003 changes, entitled “NAS Training Coordinator” dated 30/7/03 states:
ATC has no responsibility to initiate avoiding action with unknown aircraft OCTA;
UNLESS considered a hazard to the aircraft under control.
(Airservices original underlining)
The Airservices training manual then quotes the Australian Manual of Air Traffic Services (the Bible for Australian air traffic control rules):
5.2.1.2 Nevertheless, if in the judgement of the radar controller, the action of an observed radar return or information received from other sources gives good reason to believe that the observed radar return of an unknown aircraft is likely to be a hazard to an aircraft under control, the controller has complete discretion to take such action as considered necessary to maintain the safety of the aircraft under radar control. This may comprise of:
a. traffic information; or
b. controller initiated traffic avoidance advice; or
c. a safety alert.
Note the phraseology for a “safety alert” comes under the MATS Paragraph 5.1.13.6 as follows:
When a controller is aware that an aircraft is in unsafe proximity to another aircraft, a safety alert shall be issued as follows:
“(Callsign) TRAFFIC ALERT (position of traffic if time permits) [SUGGEST] TURN LEFT / RIGHT (specific heading, if appropriate), and / or [SUGGEST] CLIMB / DESCEND (specific altitude if appropriate), IMMEDIATELY.”
It is clear that the air traffic controller, if following the correct training, could have prevented the planes getting so close together so that a collision warning in the Virgin plane was not triggered.
This is the procedure used throughout the world in Class E airspace. It is almost identical to the “safety alert” listed in the pilot/controller glossary of the FAA approved Airman’s Information Manual (AIM).
Does anyone know why it was not used here? Surely the reason can’t be that the Lancair was not an “unknown” aircraft?
By the way, what has Airservices done to help general aviation? On a previous thread there was a list of the enormous changes that air traffic controllers have had to cope with in relation to RVSM etc, and every change increases the profits of the major airlines – which are already making tens of millions of dollars.
I note there is nothing listed that helps general aviation. That is what I am on about. I believe there are thousands of small aviation businesses that could be assisted by having an efficient airspace system. Yes, there are other savings that need to be made but at least this is a start.
I see nothing but selfishness from Airservices as they are only interested in the people they make profits from. They will go to the most extraordinary efforts to please these major airlines, while poor general aviation – being weak and unrepresented – is screwed.
I will stand up for them.