TIBA Procedures - Timely refresher

[FabulousBakerBoy]

TIBA Procedures (AIP Reference) (http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/publications/current/aip/gen/33124.pdf)

Have noticed this is getting common each day in Australia now.

Where are all the Air Traffic Controllers? On holidays or something? (Do nav-charges get refunded?)

Have also noticed that many (like me) are just not familiar with TIBA, so thought I would post the link in the interests of survival.


GEN (25 NOV 04)
5. TRAFFIC INFORMATION BROADCAST BY AIRCRAFT
(TIBA)
5.1 TIBA Procedures
5.1.1 TIBA procedures are intended to permit reports and relevant
supplementary information of an advisory nature to be transmitted
by pilots for the information of pilots of other aircraft in the vicinity.
5.2 Frequency
5.2.1 Aircraft must maintain a listening watch on the appropriate TIBA
frequency (128.95MHZ, at or above FL200; 126.35MHZ below
FL200). Where VHF is used for air-ground communications with
ATS and an aircraft has two serviceable VHF sets, one must be
tuned to the appropriate ATS frequency and the other to the TIBA
frequency.
5.3 Listening Watch
5.3.1 A listening watch must be maintained on the TIBA frequency 10
minutes before entering the designated airspace until leaving this
airspace. For an aircraft taking off from an aerodrome located
within 10 minutes flying time of that airspace, listening watch must
start as soon as practicable after take-off.
5.4 Time of Broadcasts
5.4.1 Broadcasts must be made:
a. 10 minutes before entering the designated airspace or, for an
aircraft taking off from an aerodrome located with 10 minutes
flying time of the airspace, as soon as practicable after take-off;
b. 10 minutes prior to crossing a reporting point;
c. 10 minutes prior to crossing or joining an ATS contingency
route;
d. at 20 minute intervals between distant reporting points;
e. 2 to 5 minutes, where possible, before a change in flight level;
f. at the time of a change in flight level; and
g. at any other time considered necessary by the pilot.
5.5 Acknowledgement of Broadcasts
5.5.1 Broadcasts should not be acknowledged unless a potential
collision risk exists.
Index ENR TOC AD TOC GEN TOC
GEN (25 NOV 04)
5.6 Changes of Cruising Level
5.6.1 Cruising level changes should not be made within the designated
airspace, unless considered necessary by pilots to avoid traffic
conflicts, for weather avoidance or for other valid operational
reasons.
5.6.2 When changes to cruising level are unavoidable, all available
aircraft lighting which would improve the visual detection of the
aircraft must be displayed while changing levels.
5.6.3 When a change of level is anticipated or initiated, a change of level
report must be made. When the new level is reached, a report
advising that the aircraft is maintaining the new level must be
made.
5.7 Collision Avoidance
5.7.1 If, on receipt of a traffic information broadcast from another
aircraft, a pilot decides that immediate action is necessary to avoid
an imminent collision risk to the aircraft, and this cannot be
achieved in accordance with the right of way provisions or TCAS
resolution, the pilot should:
a. unless an alternative manoeuvre appears more appropriate,
immediately descend 1000FT if above FL290, or 500FT if at or
below FL290;
b. display all available aircraft lighting which would improve the
visual detection of the aircraft;
c. as soon as possible, reply to the broadcast advising action
being taken;
d. notify the action taken on the appropriate TIBA frequency; and
e. as soon as practicable, resume normal flight level, notifying the
action on the appropriate TIBA frequency.
5.8 Position Reporting
5.8.1 Normal position reporting procedures should be continued at all
times, regardless of any action taken to initiate or acknowledge a
traffic information broadcast.
5.8.2 A position report must be made on the next CTA/FIA frequency 15
minutes prior to leaving airspace in which TIBA procedures apply
to obtain a clearance or re-establish SARWATCH on the
appropriate ATS frequency.

[Hempy]

As ML Centre is, to use Airservices own figures, around 20 ATC's short of minimum staffing requirements, and because management are on a strict "productivity" contract, this will become even more common (in southern district anyway). Managers who blow out their overtime budgets don't get paid a bonus, and even when they do call out an emergency replacement/overtime shift for a controller who has called in sick for example, the chances are the person they are callling has already worked 8 or 9 shifts in a row and will tell them to shove it. Its a catch 22, no staff, lots of overtime, increasing absenteeism, more overtime. The ultimate result is TIBA/restricted airspace

[FabulousBakerBoy]

You are joking aren't you?

How can you say you are short of controllers because of productivity? You are a bloody service industry! You have to have people to provide the service to get the productivity surely?

For example, why would I as an airline / individual pay you IFR navcharges if you tell me it is TIBA?!

The cost of all that lost revenue makes a mockery of your perceived 'productivity' bonuses doesn't it?

As far as I am concerned get rid of the bloody managers and put someone in the ATC seat.

No bugger really knows what to do when this happens. Is it going to take a mid-air to wake you all up?

[Lodown]

Don't shoot the messenger. He/she is only telling you how it is and not expressing an opinion.

[Hugh Jarse]

FBB,
Like Lodown wrote, its no use giving Hempy a blast. The ATCO's don't determine their establishment numbers. Give Airservices a rocket. They are the ones running(?) the ship:uhoh: You could always refuse to pay the bill if they didn't provide you with the service you paid for.

On another note, I reckon we're gonna see some cancelled services from certain airlines in the not-too-distant future as a shortage of aircrews kicks in. Don't blame the pilots, blame the companies that have devalued the profession so much that people go to other (better paying) industries, rather than learning to fly. I guess we could say similar about air traffic control.

Kick the dog. Eventually it'll bite you on the arse.:ok:

[Icarus2001]

...and what a Hugh Jarse it is!:ok: Boom boom.

You are spot on Hugh. When the dust settles on the Patricks' VB "take over" there must be some expansion planned. CvC did not buy Skywest just to sit on it either.

That is why I started the thread on ATPL numbers. I do not think that there will be enough at the top of the GA tree to fill the seats the way things are going. Unless of course entry requirements are relaxed.

[FabulousBakerBoy]

OK. Fair enough - I wont blame the controllers themelves - truth is they do a good job, better than the third world service levels of our neighbours.

But honestly, who is running the show? Why the hell is a government department manager getting a bonus anyway? It should not be for profit - it should be for safety.

Surely having a bonus system for some ill conceived 'productivity' increase (by whose measure BTW? Not mine chum!) is just a form of profiteering at the expense of a culture of safety or at least chipping away at the safety infrastructure?

If any of my family are involved in an accident as a result of non-availability of an essential safety service because some chair warmer is boosting his paycheck - and I can in some way prove it - I will engage a pro-bono lawyer and go the lot of them. I don't like the litiguous society, but there are some things they respond to.

To think about 6 months to a year ago we were all arguing about the airspace reforms downgrading C to E - and now we are getting G on the high level airways regularly and nobody seems to care?

Maybe I dished out the third world label a bit too quickly!

[Ultralights]

sadly the government, both side dont see the Airservices/casa/ Aviation as a service industry. they see it as a source of revenue! so the managers do their best to make a "profit" on their community services!

i always thought we pay TAX, and crippling amounts of it in NSW, to PAY for these "non profit" community services as these services are part of a modern society!

[boree3]

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news ladies and gentlemen but due to to Air traffic Control shortages we will be making two rather large orbits at cruise level before continuing our flight to Melbourne today. Yes , you heard it here first, it`s only a matter of time before the continual "productivity" enhancements result in the remaining controllers finally throwing in the towel and no longer proping up the system. Most of us are so disillusioned with the continual cutbacks that it`s only a matter of time before somebody gets a large orbit or two a bloody long way prior to top of descent. WHY? because the next sector is too busy and hasn`t had a decent break for more than two hours and has worked 13 days in the last 14. Management refuse to make any attempt to look forwards ( most sectors are a significant % up movement wise year-on year, with no signs of a leveling off ) and are only capable of reviewing last years data.Guess what , last year you didn`t open the console enough so now you lose it.

[blueloo]

Just as a note, i thought the controllers at Sydney this evening around 6.30/7.00pm did a great job with all the cr-p weather. Pretty much allowed us to fly wherever we needed.

Cheers.

[tobzalp]

Blue loo, If you went north that was me and a couple of the other blokes who read here. Cr@p indeed. Got to the point where aircraft were cancelling their requests as it got better in the time it took us to organise it. Pretty poor form but what can you do.

The bit I work on has gone with no staff 3 times in the last 2 years on night shifts. We don't go TIBA (correct me here) in Oz but declare a temporary restricted area (well my bit does). There was an instance where a certain group nearly went into this situation last week because a manager did not want to set a 'precedent' by paying a person the extra dollars to come in and work a night shift instead of the morning they were rostered for.

It is all about the dollar and the sub 100 IQ retards that are our management are to blame. We staff for best case only and if Thunder Storms roll in we call people on their days off to come and open the closed sectors and hope they will. Don't get me wrong, this only happens pretty much over summer but I was to believe our motto was 'Safety First'. If safety=safety of managers bonuses then we are doing a bang up job.

[A31J]

I wonder if this is an issue for someone to "leak" to the media to take on and beat up..

It may be one way of attracting the attention of public & pollie alike to the nature of ours skys at present

[Hempy]

A21J, I don't know about any media leakage, but it wouldn't make a difference.

The fact is that the Government, always looking to sell a good asset, decided circa 1995 that The Civil Aviation Authority (essentially a public service) would become ASA, a "Government Business Enterprise", turn a good profit, and make all the books look rosey for any prospective buyer (Serco :ugh: etc). Since then, no decision has been made in that organisation without express permission from a bean counter. If it is better for the books to restrict airspace than to call in an ED stand-down, they will restrict the airspace.

Air Traffic Control in this country is no longer about what's best for Airlines/Pilots/Passengers, it's about what's best for the shareholders (read the government).

[Jet_A_Knight]

Tobzalp et al,

Are your management ex-controllers or 'managers' per se?

[tobzalp]

Well they did hold an ATC licence at one stage but very few of them were ever 'controllers'.:cool:

[Duff Man]

blueloo/tobzalp, one bright side to last night was that more water fell in the SY catchment area than the metropolitan area! Yipee!

[matca]

Hey Fab,

Try getting a refund from the ar!eclowns for shutting the airspace down, that would be like getting a refund from the city link thieves in Melbourne for closing the tunnel for maintenance etc. A road that you already own through paying 48.5% tax, 50% fuel tax (sorry it's an excise, not a tax) rego and insurance fees, 10% GST..........The aim of airservices is to turf (privatise) the un-profitable (TMA's and Towers) and keep their cash cow, en-route, they love en-route, makes squillions...... but then again it's an airspace structure that you already own through paying 48.5% tax.............

Try sitting at a console when you're short of staff and you tell one of these idiots up the front to put a notam out saying there may be delays. (just in case, mind you they may not occur) It's just game playing. 'We can't have the industry thinking we aren't efficient' While monitoring the state of their budget for when it comes bonus time. While also inventing projects and mindless re-sectorisation of airspace to also boost their bonus.

There's only a couple of these di#kheads, most of them work pretty hard and have their staff and the industry in mind when making decisions.

[FabulousBakerBoy]

I understand your viewpoint - probably agree , buts its a really simple concept:

You charge me for a service that you dont provide, and then present me with a bill - I ain't paying!

Hey if you want to run the airspace like a third world African state and not charge us, fine! Just don't pretend your the worlds greatest ATS providor with your glossy website and magazine ad's and then charge us for a service that you can't deliver. If I have to take my chances with the competence of my fellow pilots TIBA skills, don't send me a bill for the dubious privelege! (I am probably going to need the money to pay the eventual and consequent increase in my aircraft insurance policies!)

If you work for an airline, especially some of these skin of the teeth profit margin LCC's, you should be telling whoever pays the bill at the end of the sector as well - I reckon Nav Charges would make up a fair whack of operating costs in a LCC. No?

Ergon, Sydney Rail, Telstra etc. have all been forced (after appeal to ACCC by consumers) to refund monies when services could not be provided - the precedent is there - get on board!

The statement about profitable enroute and unprofitable towers is interesting - surely that is just down to accounting practices within the ONE organisation. How easy would it be to reverse the internal beancounting and all of a sudden towers are the profitable ones? It is a total nonsense!

Letters have already gone to AirServices and CC'd to ACCC, DOTARS and that Oxygen thief Anderson. Lets see what the responses are - should be entertaining.

[matca]

Fab,

Agree with you totally about the charges, and the accounting philosophy. You won't get any arguments from most people on that one.

IMO they split the charges between those separate divisions (TWR, TMA and ENROUTE) so they can maximise returns in one area and get rid of the rest, the thing is who's going to buy a privatised area of business that can't make a profit? You'd have to be incredibly stupid! (understand there's a few of these around in this industry).

Back to the philosophy of privatising a safety organisation in the first place, the taxpayer already owns this mob and deserve a level of protection in this industry that isn't dictated by profits etc. Like I say, good luck getting a refund. Just have to ride out this ridiculous philosophy of economic rationalism!

[MrApproach]

Tobzalp is not completely correct when he/she says the managers are ex-ATC's. 90% of the senior managers, those who call the shots on the bonuses for the middle managers, (the ex-ATCs) are accountants.

It's difficult to know whether the middle managers want more controllers, they simply aren't in a position to complain, however I have heard that a line manager (ATC) in one of the Centres has been virtually sacked for refusing to run the Group below it's full complement.

There also seems to be a push to get rid of anyone who has more than two years management experience. Most of the experienced Centre supervisors were given the shove in the last purge and the control tower management have just fired four senior tower team leaders. These people are the ones that grew up in an era when senior controllers did not take any **** from anyone, especially managers. They were responsible for air safety and they took their responsibilities very serously. They are of course being replaced by younger people who are more used to a book based ATC system (MATS is now four times thicker than twenty years ago) and are also used to the concept that "businesses need to be run by professional managers."

You'll have to forgive me but to me a "professional manager" is a dogs body who knows nothing about anything so manages "key performance indicators". Give me a managing professional anytime. Unfortunately they have all left the building.

[clear to land]

Slightly off track, but to the controller working SY Director East late pm on 02/02 a very very big thankyou. The way that you responded to the rapidly changing requests from us, facilitated our maneuvering and helped with wx updates and monitoring of the live firing areas we were near was quite simply OUTSTANDING. Many of us with a window seat, self included, are very quick to criticise SY controllers (yes we know your procedures are politically driven, but you are the human interface!), but your help and professionalism have certainly earned our gratitude. Again Thank You, and feel free to use this when requesting your next pay rise. We all earned our money that afternoon. :D

[FabulousBakerBoy]

Following is an email received from a controller in response to this thread:

Your observations are correct - the reasons for them may not be so clear. And it would also be fair to say that the disruptions have not even begun to begin. AirServices finds itself in a position where it is in Management confusion. A change to the board, many of the previous executive effectively forced out by political persuasion at the highest levels of government, and a ministerial office reacting to perceived threats over the last election period to party survival.

Whilst that is a political observation from afar it has had the direct effect of leaving AirServices completely unaware of it's future and management effectively paralysed to make a decision for fear of being condemned by an erratic minister and his department mandarins, he void of a political antennae, who lacks fortitude to see a decision through to the end. The senior management have in other words been unable to steer the organisation for lack of direction by it's ultimate master.

Money has been disgustingly wasted from AirServices coffers to attend to projects that start and stop erratically - most of them stop gap reactions to the latest lobbying from the various usual suspects. This malaise has filtered down to the rapidly increasing levels and numbers of middle managers, none of whom are willing to make a decision lest they risk becoming the 'patsy' when someone further up the food chain is looking for someone to blame for their latest change of heart.

Result: A lame duck management structure with a myriad of uncoordinated projects, often duplicating each other and trying to implement to achieve competing or diametrically opposed outcomes.

Of course - this costs a lot of money. So the money has to come from somewhere - hmm, how about the operational budget? Yes.

It coincides that due to some near sighted planning with the demographics of the operational Air Traffic Controllers, a huge swag of them have just started retiring, with very few new starts in the pipeline to eventually replace them. And the achieved cost savings is simply to NOT replace them. It is clearly apparent that THIS is the strategy that our massive management and administrative structure (highly paid mind you) has determined to be the solution.

OK, so what is the result of all this? Well simple math will tell you that if traffic is increasing in movements by up to 20% a year in Australia (and it is) and controller numbers in most groups are less and less every month, the remaining controllers are working more hours. And this is the case. So how do controllers work more hours? Well, firstly you compress all the shifts so they are closer together - so instead of working an 8 hours shift say 1200-2000 and coming back to work the next day fully rested at 1000 or 1200, you come back at 0600-1400. Then you do this day after day. And you do it for an extra day. And instead of having two days off after a block of shifts like that, you sometimes just have the one day off.

Also, instead of having staff to cover two sectors, you only provide staff to cover the sector combined most of the time.

And you reduce the amount of annual leave available each year.

It's really simple - it's just number crunching - I mean that is all there is to it - there are no other effects right?

Well, there are actually. You all remember the Burning the Midnight Oil Report from the Senate (we won't be having any more Senate inquiries now so lets remember what they do).

It all started with the trucking industry, and the number of drivers who were falling asleep and having accidents with other vehicles on the highways. The truck companies blamed the drivers. Eventually the truck companies were successfully prosecuted for forcing their drivers to work tired with undue pressure.

Air Traffic Controllers are currently not protected by ANY legislation to limit their working hours. There is no CAO like pilots have.

The only instrument that individual Air Traffic Controllers have is an appendix to their EBA call Principles of Rostering (POR). And guess what? AirServices from this month are actively trying to get even that stripped from the new EBA currently being negotiated!

What POR says, is that rosters will be designed to meet certain criteria - but the criteria as they stand do not prevent massive fatigue problems even today. For example - for a 7-8 hour shift working traffic, a controller is entitled to a break of... 20 minutes. And a controller can be rostered back to back shifts with only 10 hour breaks.

Of course this only covers rostered shifts - Where the pressure now comes from on the individual controllers is constant overtime. Controllers are constantly called on almost every one of their days off to come in on overtime. (Overtime is paid at 1.5 times normal rate by the way.)

So what is stopping the controller from working constant overtime and being fatigued at the radar screen / control tower? Well, as it stands, their own judgement - and currently the POR appendix to the EBA which does not allow any more than 10 consecutive shifts.

So like the truck drivers, the individual controller is put in the position under pressure of having to say no - I am too tired to work. And not just overtimes shift. You see, whilst CARS/CAOS do not protect the controller in any way with duty time limitations, they DO however require the controller to NOT work if Sick or impaired to fulfill their duties!

So, take a worse case scenario. A controller, called in on overtime, is involved in a serious incident or accident. Is AirServices responsible? (Vicarious Liability aside). Or is the Air Traffic Controller responsible for not calling in Sick or unavailable?

That is the thought process constantly going through controllers bleary minds each time the phone rings now. Or each time they feel genuinely worn out before attending a rostered shift.

And it is a result of, too few staff, inappropriate rosters, and an organisation who intentionally runs it's rosters on constant overtime. Why? Well, what is cheaper - recruiting and training a replacement air traffic controller, or paying an exsting one 1.5 times the hourly rate to plug all the holes in the roster? So that is where the money for all the other crap is coming from.

Remember, even the existing POR that offer some protection are now being pursued by management.

So when you ask about TIBA, and why there are no controllers - they are are either retired (some earlier than planned), too tired to work the overtime, or just don't exist. The other issue now is also, if new people are recruited - WHO is going to train them.

And I am glad to say, that as of 6 momths from now, it will not be me, as I am one of the many walking out the door to retirement.

And I will not be working ANY overtime between now and then.

Your issue is NOT with the Air traffic controllers - it is with accountants running an operational organisation, who care only for their own bonuses and NOT the long term sustainability of their ultimate product - SAFETY. What they do not seem to realise is that, we can not afford to have one faulty 'product'. (If you work for an airline, does it sound familiar?)

TIBA? Get used to it, or start asking some tough questions of your government.

(Just an aside, if you see Air Traffic Controllers stopping work this year, during the EBA process, which I think is likely, they will only be doing it because they are concerned about the working conditions affecting the safety and good name of their profession. The PR department will spin it out as 'overpaid controllers holding the travelling public to ransom', no doubt aided by the friendly media.

I hope you know better than that.)

Thanks ****. Happy retirement - sounds like you will enjoy it.

[Sunfish]

The normal (and dirty and painful) approach to cost cutting is to keep cutting despite the screams of affected staff until there is a perceived drop off in customer satisfaction. At that stage, you stop cutting and add back a little fat.

Its exactly like leaning the mixture on some engines; wait until you hear the roughness and rpm drop, then richen it a little (OK pedants, correct me) for max revs.

If you don't do it this way, most managers reason, you will never know how deep you can cut, and whether you can go further, because all staff scream at any cut at all.

In my humble opinion, the trouble with using this approach at Qantas, CASA, Airservices etc. is that you may get more than you bargain for in terms of a change in "customer satisfaction", like perhaps a large smoking hole in the ground.

At which time will begin the attempted exhonoration of the guilty and the punishment of the innocent.

You want an example? Read about the explosion and fire at Esso's Longford Gas plant. You keep cutting and demand "performance dividends" every year and eventually "Bang".

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Ho HO HO...
Yes, I AM laughing....
I hear on the grape vine that a 'conference' in BN around last June 04, found that the DIRECT/ON THE FLOOR COST for BN ATC's to provide DTI in the BN FIR was in the order of $9 mill.
With overheads, this was projected by the same source to around $30 mill.
So, how much for ML FIR?
How much for both of the FIR's??

So much for the HUGE savings to be gained by getting rid of that FLIGHT SERVICE thing - which started at $100 Mill. Went to $85 Mill or so, then down to ONLY $24 Mill - then down to $?? -yes 'Open Mike' , I remember the figures well. - How much NOW to provide same??

With downtime of ATC's - Overtimes, E/D's etc - and the lower salary packages of FSO's?

So, who NOW to provide the service of DTI more economically / efficiently, - NOT 'on request, when workload permits' - leaving the ATC's to provide their own speciality without the added distractions / stress of their already overcrowded / political / 'managers making a name for themselves' environment?

And, the crunch? WHO now 'wears' this cost??

ENJOY.....
To the industry professionals - I am sorry that the 'industry' you serve, is no longer as professional as you.
Cheers - I've gone fishin'...

[divingduck]

C'mon Griffo,

Dick said that the industry hated FSO's and they all wanted to get rid of them so they could see and avoid themselves without those pesky FSO's getting in the way!

Surely you remember that??

Not to mention the $100,000,000 that getting rid of a couple of hundred FSO's would cost.
This was going to kick start the economy, get GA back into the air, and get Dick his knighthood (:hmm: )

I mean the industry obviously preferrs it's controllers to be a disembodied voice on the other end of the radio, not a real live person over the briefing counter in one of the old outstations.

God forbid that anyone have a service mentality anymore, or even have a bit of local knowledge!! :rolleyes:

Still I guess that is a bit hard when you are controlling someone that is unsure of position in and around Perth, from Melbourne isn't it??

Remember the days when you asked for a couple of pies warmed up with the 30 mile inbound call? Or asked if a taxi/refueller/weather/notams were available when you pulled to a stop on the tarmac?


oh well, soon no one will remember the "Good old days".

:{

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Dear "DD",
I sincerely trust that you did NOT consume same pies....mostly they were used as wheel chocks......

Not to mention that hot coffees were often 'traded' for a current newspaper...

Enjoy...

[Hempy]

oh well, soon no one will remember the "Good old days".

Like that time you fell asleep on the crapper after a heavy night on the turps and the boss had to drive out from town and wake you up because a bank runner reported a comm failure and no one was answering the phone ..... :ouch:

[Ali Bin Somewhere]

'fraid that its just going to get worse and worse.

There are more people heading o/s for better pay/lifestyle/opportunities. With the age profile starting to kick in for approach/tower and a lack of training takeing place due various reasons (including enroute controllers not being released as that would leave the enroute sectors severly short staffed) there is going to be lots of empty shifts across the whole of Aus. People are sick of 9 shifts on 1 off so that the sectors run and lack of acess to rec leave. Thats a big part of the reason I left.

Enjoy the "safe skys" of Aus. If it gets too bad the middle east has lots of jobs for pilots/controllers.:cool:

[Roger Standby]

I could be wrong, but I don't believe TIBA is used these days as defined in AIP. When airspace is closed now due to controller shortages, the airspace becomes restrcited, or TRA. Someone not rated on the airspace will "manage" traffic, but I believe a clearance is still required (hence the charges), even though the level of service provided is not the same. Someone will be listening out for safety reasons, but don't expect much more.