Scurvy.D.Dog, on 17 November you said:
Having spoken with him this morning about this issue, he has undertaken to spell out here how he sees the future of FW. If it is as suggested, then of course he has my support.
I confirm our discussion. I believe Flightwatch should offer a service similar to the service that is received in North America – i.e. both the USA and Canada. In North America there are many hundreds of VHF RCOs (Remote Communication Outlets) which a pilot can call to talk to an operator who can provide extensive information that is required to maintain and improve air safety.
These outlets are normally manned from the Automated Flight Service Stations – I think there are about 20 of these Automated Stations in the USA alone – and the operator is trained to not only provide the relevant weather and NOTAM information, but also to interpret this information to advise the pilot if the planned flight is recommended.
I am not in any way criticising our people, but I have spoken to a number of our Flight Service Officers, and they have said that they are not trained (nor allowed) to interpret the weather forecast and give advice to pilots. In North America it is completely different – and this is what I would like to see.
Obviously it will be too expensive to cover all airspace with a separate VHF Flightwatch frequency for operation below 5,000 feet. I would imagine that a proper independent review would decide on a figure - i.e. to provide coverage for 80% of flights when above 3,000 feet. This would probably mean that there would be a relatively high number of VHF outlets between Tasmania and Cairns, and also in the major capital cities, with a lesser number in remote areas.
I look at Flightwatch as I would look at the funding of the country fire authorities. That is, there are times when for many years, some consider that the funding is wasted as there are no bushfires to put out. After even a 10 year lag, there is extensive use of the system and it was well worthwhile.
The same situation exists with Flightwatch. When we have extensive dry weather and droughts there is less need for weather information than when the weather conditions change – which they could do at any time.
I see the Flightwatch system being manned from Brisbane, or even a dual system from Brisbane and Melbourne using the people we have now – but with additional training.
What do you think of this?
By the way, my solicitors have answered Airservices – see
here.