PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Airspace Reform – Quiet Reflection
View Single Post
Old 1st Sep 2004, 11:26
  #10 (permalink)  
tsnake
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
VOR,

Your contributions to the debate on airspace have been appreciated and valued.

It is indeed a matter of regret that your topical reflection will fall on barren ground.

Your expression of hope concerning Mr Smith will remain, as Dr Johnson said, a reflection of the triumph of hope over experience.

This is not a slight on you but a recognition that the experience of Australian aviators, policy makers and politicians is that Mr Smith is incapable of co-operating or working with anyone or any organisation that does not accept, unquestioningly, his view of the world.

Few people respond to shouting, bluster, threats, personal attacks, the selective use of information and the arrant deduction so evident in Mr Smith's replies to the various forums on airspace reform that have appeared over the past few months.

Further, your expressed hope that the regulator will publish a risk reference standard will also sadly fall on barren ground.

The regulator simply won't bite the bullet because the only politically acceptable solution that will receive support is zero risk.

The industry knows and understands this to be patently ridiculous and impractical but to an Australian travelling public that has never suffered a jet hull loss and for whom the last major hull loss of any significance was in 1968 (Viscount crash near Port Hedland, WA), to suggest that an acceptable risk, however remote, includes the possibility that they might be killed in an air crash just, to use a very bad pun, won't fly.

Our gutless politicans who, to quote Sir Humphrey, may occasionally take a controversial decision but never a courageous one (the latter being one likely to cost them their place in Parliament), will simply not permit anything else.

What then follows is obvious. The airlines will, quite properly, tell the public how much such a safety regime will cost, and the consequent massive increase in air fares, and remind the politicians of the level of likely job losses in marginal seats in the major cities and the same gutless wonders will quickly avoid making any decision at all.

The result will sadly be more of the same with vast amounts of money wasted, enormous frustration for the industry and decisions about airspace taken without reference to cost benefits, proven risk models and demonstrably scientific data and the operational and commercial requirements of the users.
tsnake is offline