NAS on the 730 report Tonight (Wed)

[Ushuaia]

Dick, thanks for your reply. There is a lot in it, so let me get to the heart of the problems.

First, I'm sorry, but people have a low opinion of you, and others, because of the total lack of consultation, collaboration, involvement and input into changes. We are not against change but it must be for the better. When we end up with a less safe system and haven't been involved, then that is what people end up thinking.

You now have Class E airspace in Australia where IFR RPT jets doing groundspeeds of up to 450kt are charging down into the paths of un-notified, uncontrolled, non-speaking VFR lighties. We are expected to see these things or hope their transponders are on or hope that ATC's advise us, ON A WORKLOAD PERMITTING BASIS, of their presence, for US to take avoiding action. That, Dick, is crap. Completely and utterly. The 95% of people flying in Aust skies deserve better. Please explain to me why the other 5% cannot get a clearance, be on the radio like the first 95% and be separated properly? Why cannot the 5% integrate with us instead of being unknown targets?

Ok, we keep going on about the US system. I've been to LAX many times. Let's look at what Class E is the States REALLY MEANS. From Jeppesen, US-8, Enroute: in Class E airspace IFR aircraft are separated from ALL, repeat ALL, aircraft. Yes, ALL. Here IFR is separated from IFR only and just get traffic advisories on VFR, workload permitting. THe latter is the ICAO system which the Americans ARE NOT USING. Now, if I am mistaken, well, tell me so. But that is the info that my airline provides me. That's all I can go on, that's my understanding of the US system. And that's not what we have here in Australia now.

I have no problem with your ideas such as flying lighties over the tops of airports as per the States. Yes, they do that extremely well. But don't forget things like Sydney, for instance, where we have way too much controlled airspace purely so we can share the noise around!! Ok, deal with lanes for lighties better. No problem with that. Great idea. However, do not think I am advocating staying with a system that focuses lighties and jets within 300m of each other. I never suggested that or think that. What I DO have a problem with is a system that puts unknown lighties into the paths of jets and requires TCAS RA's to sort the mess out. TCAS is meant to sort out human mistakes, NOT system design flaws.

I won't comment on other areas of your post - not my area of expertise and it's been ages since I've been to places such as Broome. But Dick, can you not hear us? Work WITH us! We are the one of the major stakeholders. We fly the 95% of airspace users around. We have good ideas. We can see the good aspects of proposed changes and also the problems. Where is the commercial airline input in this latest body - the Aviation Council? Where is such input in the current airspace review team? You keep saying AM Angus Houston is the CPL rep - well, he's a top bloke but he's not a commercial airline pilot. Not good enough.

You should well know - thoughout the operational side of my company people are very concerned about the changes to date and about the further proposed changes. The worry goes right up the chain. However you won't hear them being officially vocal - due to commercial and other strategic reasons. I'll leave that for you to figure out..... But don't delude yourself by thinking the airlines support what we have in Aust now and what is proposed. This is one of the reasons why there has got to be better collaboration amongst ALL parties from the outset, more involvement, a process whereby the stakeholders own the result.

Thanks for reading and listening - I appreciate it.