Although the Air Force Chief takes umbrage to certain inferences and methodology in the ATSB report he doesn't shirk the issue when it comes to the recommendation
'AR-2012-034-SR-014':
Safety issue description
There was a disproportionate rate of loss of separation incidents which leads to a higher risk of collision in military terminal area airspace in general and all airspace around Darwin and Williamtown in particular. Furthermore, loss of separation incidents in military airspace more commonly involved contributing air traffic controller actions relative to equivalent civil airspace occurrences.
Response to safety issue by Department of Defence
The Department of Defence takes all losses of separation and losses of separation assurance seriously and investigates all incidents to identify causes and areas that can be improved in order to mitigate against further occurrences. To reduce the potential for separation occurrences, Defence are reviewing the implementation of the traffic management plans at Darwin, Townsville, and Williamtown to improve the effect of strategic separation techniques. These reviews will also be used to highlight any current airspace constructs that inhibit the controller’s ability to provide optimum separation assurance. Defence has also recently published an internal capability improvement plan that focuses on increasing experience levels at Defence air traffic locations. To improve our ability to respond to potential losses of separation, Defence has enhanced the School of Air Traffic Control simulator packages to provide greater exposure to compromised separation occurrences, with the trainee being assessed on their ability to apply compromised separation recovery. Defence has also added both theoretical and practical assessment to local training packages regarding scanning for possible losses of separation and applying compromised separation recovery techniques when required.
ATSB comment in response
The ATSB acknowledges the intended action by the Department of Defence, but considers that a broader review of Defence ATC processes and risk controls should be undertaken, including analysis of ATS related occurrence data, training, staffing and ATS infrastructure to ensure the reasons for the disproportionate risk of loss of separation incidents, and the relative higher level of controller actions contributing to these occurrences, are well understood and any additional appropriate action can be taken to minimise future risk. As such, the ATSB is issuing the following recommendation.
Recommendation
Action organisation:Department of DefenceAction number:AR-2012-034-SR-014Date:18 October 2013Action status:Released
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau recommends that the Department of Defence undertake a review of all processes and risk controls in place to reduce both the disproportionate risk of loss of separation incidents in military terminal area airspace in general and all airspace around Darwin and Williamtown in particular, and the relatively more common contributing air traffic controller actions.
In fact the last paragraph of the Oz Aviation mag article would appear to show that the air force boffins are already onto it:
Notwithstanding the sharp defence of the RAAF’s performance, Brown has committed to a review of air traffic management plans and airspace design for RAAF Bases Darwin, Townsville and Williamtown. These three bases integrate a large number of military and civil aircraft types, and the review “will ensure military airspace is more error resistant”.
That is because they know that there is one (and only one) thing that the ATSB can trump them on and that is the issuance of a safety recommendation....whereas Fort Fumble on the other hand...well the jury is still out on that one???
AR-2012-034-SR-015 
:
Safety issue description
Regulatory oversight processes for military air traffic services do not provide independent assessment and assurance as to the safety of civilian aircraft operations.
Response to safety issue by Civil Aviation Safety Authority
The Report appears to predicate on the assumption that CASA should have oversight authority in respect of military air traffic services when civil traffic is present. However, no evidence or arguments are presented to support this as the most appropriate option.
In the past, CASA has participated in Defence surveillance of military air traffic services. We have every intention of continuing to do so in the future. The Report fails to acknowledge that activity or the effective benefits it has produced.
The ATSB [draft] recommendation …. does not appear to take into consideration the benefit of joint work (such as that described in the bullet point above) that Airservices Australia (AsA), the Department of Defence (DoD) and CASA could undertake, without the need for CASA to assume formal oversight of DoD air traffic services.
ATSB comment in response
The ATSB acknowledges that CASA does have a standing invitation to attend operational evaluations of military ATC units conducted by the military ANSP's auditors, and have participated and plan to continue to participate in these. Such cooperation is important, but CASA remains limited in the level of influence it has over military ATS in relation to the safety of civilian aircraft using military airspace. This ATSB investigation concluded that civilian aircraft have a disproportionate rate of loss of separation incidents which leads to a higher risk of collision in military terminal area airspace in general and all airspace around Darwin and Williamtown in particular. As the function of CASA is that of maintaining, enhancing and promoting civil aviation safety in Australia, the results of this investigation suggest that CASA’s influence is not as effective as it could be when it comes to the safety of civilian aircraft, including passenger transport aircraft, in military controlled airspace and some level of independent assessment and assurance as to the safety of civil aircraft operations at DoD airports by CASA is warranted. As a result, the ATSB is issuing the following recommendation.
Recommendation
Action organisation:Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Action number:AR-2012-034-SR-015
Date:18 October 2013
Action status: Released
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau recommends that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority should review the results of this report and determine whether its current level of involvement with Military air traffic services (ATS) is sufficient to assure itself that the safety of civil aircraft operations while under Military ATS control is adequate.
Whether we get an adequate response from FF we'll just have to wait and see
But there is no doubt that they now have to get on with it, within a set time frame...
Hmm...it also makes for an interesting scenario in regards to the Minister wanting to see if Richmond could possibly act as an interim civil airport while the 2nd Sydney Airport saga gets sorted...
...let's see Cost/Benefit & Safety Risk Analysis
