I am going to cop a lot of flack here and am fully prepared to answer any of the critics that want to label me as unpatriotic or nitpicking but as an active (and financially concerned) member of the GA fraternity in this country, I have every right to ask and every right to expect an honest and accurate answer to these questions.
Wollongong aerodrome has a weight restriction for aircraft operating from this field. 1. Why does HARS receive an exemption to these restrictions whenever the Connie flys? especially when the aircraft is 10 times over the recommended weight for this airfield?
On every occasion that the Connie flys from this airfield, the field is closed and inspected for damage to the flight strip. So far, the damage to the airstrip has been extreme to say the least and has cost council (the community) over $50,000 to repair in the past 2 years. The damage is in the form of surface breakage and impact damage from landing with surface breakage being recorded as deep as 5 inches in places. There is also considerable damage caused whenever this aircraft conducts any 180 degree turns on the strip. This is serious, regular damage that could (and probably will) lead to a landing gear failure eventually, especially during the dynamic loads associated with landings. With the close proximity of housing (less than 100 metres in places) to the runway extremities, the resulting accident could have devastating consequences.
2. How often has HARS reported these landing incidents to the ATSB as required by the Regs?
3. When Shell Harbour Council issues HARS with the waiver to operate this grossly overweight aircraft from its field, does it realise that it also shares the majority of the liabilities for their operations during such occasions?
4. Do Councils insurers know that they are being placed in this rather ominous position of liability? and do the community know that on the say-so of 1 individual council officer, their continued viability and financial well-being is in serious jeopardy by allowing this over-weight aircraft to operate with a waiver of the safety requirements?
Council continues to claim, through their Mayor and certain council officers, that the upgrading of the airfield will see a major airline conducting RPT operations from Wollongong airfield. This is wrong and has no truth to it at all. Council does not have 1 airline remotely interested in servicing this region. This whole sordid little story is about making lots of money for one or two interested parties who are set to get quite rich with the upgrade.
5. How does HARS maintain their right to continue operating the Connie from Wollongong after the upgrade when the proposed upgrade does not bring the airfield up to the required standard for the continued operation of the Connie anyhow?
In the interest of safety, to not only the flying public but also to the people who choose to live next to this airport, it really is about time that CASA and the ATSB take a serious look at the implications of this aircraft’s continued operation from Wollongong airport. It is not acceptable for everyone to just bury their heads in the sand and hope this issue will go away because sadly it won’t.
Must also add, that evidently CASA may have eventually been forced into action on the operation of these aircraft and moves are afoot as we speak to have their operations serious curtailed and in some cases, even grounded indefinately.
