Wirraway
12th Aug 2004, 15:22
Fri "The Australian"
Smith defends his air reforms
By Steve Creedy, Aviation writer
August 13, 2004
AVIATOR Dick Smith has come out swinging to protect his airspace reforms, promising to pay his "fair share" of the $2million cost of winding back the changes if they are proved unsafe.
But the former Civil Aviation Safety Authority chairman is betting he hasn't done his dough.
Mr Smith is targeting an Airservices Australia study that found the reforms produced an "intolerable risk" over some regional airports.
Mr Smith believes the risk assessments are wrong and the study is flawed because it does not take into account factors such as the mandatory use of transponders.
He said yesterday that figures showing Hobart could expect five fatalities every 100 years would show that the US should have 535 fatalities above similar airports over 30 years.
"Despite this, my limited research shows that there have been no fatalities in this airspace in the 30-year period in the USA," he said.
"This clearly shows that there is most likely a major inaccuracy in the Airservices calculations."
Airservices yesterday questioned Mr Smith's calculations and said he was comparing "apples with oranges".
But it appears the entrepreneur will be given a chance to pull the report apart in detail.
Federal Transport Minister John Anderson wrote to Mr Smith on Wednesday, saying he saw no reason why the aviator should not have access to the study and subject it to his own experts.
Mr Smith was the founding member of Mr Anderson's Aviation Reform Group and chief engineer of the airspace reforms.
Airservices is due to make a final decision on a proposal to reverse part of the reforms at the end of the month.
The issue has sparked a bitter and divisive debate in the aviation community, with private and sports pilots opposed to the reversal now mounting an 11th-hour campaign against the proposal.
The authority is planning to change class E airspace above certain regional airports to class C.
In class E airspace, the onus is on pilots of larger planes to look out for small planes. In class C they are separated from them by air traffic control.
The Airservices decision was prompted by hazard and cost-benefit analyses of low-level airspace that found the system posed an unacceptable risk that was not sufficiently offset by benefits.
A similar study of en route E class airspace also found modest benefits but said there was little difference in the risk.
Airservices has had the studies reviewed by an outside party and also sent them to CASA.
===========================================
Smith defends his air reforms
By Steve Creedy, Aviation writer
August 13, 2004
AVIATOR Dick Smith has come out swinging to protect his airspace reforms, promising to pay his "fair share" of the $2million cost of winding back the changes if they are proved unsafe.
But the former Civil Aviation Safety Authority chairman is betting he hasn't done his dough.
Mr Smith is targeting an Airservices Australia study that found the reforms produced an "intolerable risk" over some regional airports.
Mr Smith believes the risk assessments are wrong and the study is flawed because it does not take into account factors such as the mandatory use of transponders.
He said yesterday that figures showing Hobart could expect five fatalities every 100 years would show that the US should have 535 fatalities above similar airports over 30 years.
"Despite this, my limited research shows that there have been no fatalities in this airspace in the 30-year period in the USA," he said.
"This clearly shows that there is most likely a major inaccuracy in the Airservices calculations."
Airservices yesterday questioned Mr Smith's calculations and said he was comparing "apples with oranges".
But it appears the entrepreneur will be given a chance to pull the report apart in detail.
Federal Transport Minister John Anderson wrote to Mr Smith on Wednesday, saying he saw no reason why the aviator should not have access to the study and subject it to his own experts.
Mr Smith was the founding member of Mr Anderson's Aviation Reform Group and chief engineer of the airspace reforms.
Airservices is due to make a final decision on a proposal to reverse part of the reforms at the end of the month.
The issue has sparked a bitter and divisive debate in the aviation community, with private and sports pilots opposed to the reversal now mounting an 11th-hour campaign against the proposal.
The authority is planning to change class E airspace above certain regional airports to class C.
In class E airspace, the onus is on pilots of larger planes to look out for small planes. In class C they are separated from them by air traffic control.
The Airservices decision was prompted by hazard and cost-benefit analyses of low-level airspace that found the system posed an unacceptable risk that was not sufficiently offset by benefits.
A similar study of en route E class airspace also found modest benefits but said there was little difference in the risk.
Airservices has had the studies reviewed by an outside party and also sent them to CASA.
===========================================