Bluerider777, the external inquiry won’t help in the short term. As has been pointed out a number of times on this thread, virtually all of the Flightwatch staff have already gone – so it wouldn’t have mattered what the Court ordered, there is simply no way of instantly turning the independent system on again. That is the reality of the situation.
The inquiry will take a number of months, but the fact that Airservices has agreed to leave all the equipment in place means that there is a very good chance of re-instating an independent system that is properly thought out, properly managed, and staffed with people who are properly trained.
I think there is a chance now of getting a better result than if this had never happened. I believe this because Airservices had allowed Flightwatch to run down until it was so ineffective, many people didn’t really care if it remained or not.
Now there will be a focus on the type of Flightwatch/Flight Information Service given in other leading aviation countries such as the USA and Canada. In both of these countries the service is fantastic, with trained operators who can actually give weather advice to both IFR and VFR pilot – not just repeat a weather forecast.
We all have to make sure now that this external inquiry is given the correct information. I believe it is very important that we allow all of the facts to come out so a rational decision can be made on this.
If an independent stand alone Flightwatch doesn’t add to safety in a cost effective way, then I will support it being combined with ATC. We would then be quite different to other leading aviation countries, and that is why I think a proper cost benefit study will show that the independent service should not only remain, but should be enhanced.
On the other topic, yes I have checked the thread on unqualified controllers during breaks at night. I’ve also spoken to a number of controllers about this and had a number of emails/private messages on PPRuNe.
The only thing I can suggest is that those concerned try to contact the Airservices Chairman, or a Board member, directly. I would imagine that the Board is exposing itself to grave risk in having non-qualified people manning a sector when the pilots in the controlled airspace have not been told.
As an example, a pilot may need to request a diversion around a Cb at the last moment, but the controller is not at the console, so the remaining person has to say, “Standby.” This could result in the difference between a safe flight and an aircraft being torn apart in turbulence.
Just why Airservices would allow this risky system is beyond me. I know that they are not getting pressure from the Government to constantly improve profits or to reduce staffing levels. The Government (especially the Minister) is paranoid about aviation safety. If someone communicated that additional controllers were needed, it would clearly be supported by the Minister.