triadic, I couldn’t agree with you more in relation to the US culture compared to the Australian culture. I’ve been talking about it for over 10 years. When I was Chairman of CAA I arranged a program where Australian controllers regularly visited the USA and many came back to Australia and wrote positive reports. I’ve still got copies of those reports – they are excellent. Virtually every controller came up with ideas on how we could make improvements in Australia. I don’t believe any of these ideas have ever been introduced.
You do not seem to understand that I am not in a position of authority. The only people who have this ability to bring in cultural change are the people who are in positions of authority. Unfortunately there seem to be none who have the courage and leadership abilities to accept that a Government has the right to set policy and then expect that the policy will be followed.
The management of both Airservices and CASA have done everything they can to undermine the Government’s decision to move to the NAS.
I point out that I was in a position of authority when we introduced the AMATS changes. There was resistance to change, however I made sure competent experts were employed. When you consider it is the airspace we have been flying in for the last 13 years with very high levels of safety, and it has now been generally accepted. It shows it was a competent process.
It is simple. You can’t blame me as I have no position of authority and most advice I give to those who do have a position of authority is ignored. From my experience, the management in Airservices and CASA are so insecure with their leadership abilities they are simply not prepared to copy the world’s best practice.
For example, you may know that I have worked for three years to attempt to get US experts out to help with the cultural and training issues. Both CASA and Airservices have done everything they can to make sure this does not happen. Basically the management’s view is “it wasn’t built here”.
A good example of not asking advice is the most ridiculous “design safety cases” which are now taking place at Airservices. They are all based on subjective opinion from people who have made up their minds – just like the Broome study. Andrew Fleming, General Manager Air Traffic Management, was surprised that the USA could not supply a design safety case for their Class E airspace. The facts are simple. The airspace in the USA, including Class E, has evolved over 100 years of experience. You only need a design safety case if you are inventing something. The reason I have always pushed for copying proven systems is that you can readily obtain objective evidence on the safety result you will achieve.
At Airservices, the management gives no leadership at all in relation to the change process. Of course, in a vacuum, you end up with a situation where the least informed “fundamentalists” communicate their fears of change and dictate the agenda.