One year of the new Government

[Dick Smith]

In this morning papers there are almost rave reviews about the first year of the Rudd Government. Generally it appears they have become more popular and the Opposition less so. We all know the problems with the last Government in relation to aviation – virtually no vision and no reform at all other than the damage done by the sell off of the secondary airports.

Perhaps we could get some comment on what the new Government has done in the last 12 months for aviation. I do not know of any real solid achievements, but perhaps there are some in the pipeline, does anyone know of this? Let’s have some rational comment on this without any personal attacks.

[Gingerbread]

Dick,

Will be no doubt be pleanty to comment on when the Minister's aviation green paper comes down on Tuesday December 2nd.

Until then, it would simply be opinion.

Regards Ginger

[Skystar320]

Dick,

If the government run's the economy as it is now [estimated to be in a deficit of $1billion] I'd hate to see what they do for aviation.

Three more years to get a better government in I'd say. It takes a year from having billion's of excess to running the country at a loss :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[bilbert]

Well we did have the Senate Inquiry into CASA under the new government. That was an achievment, I mean the inquiry actually happened. Didn't it? This lot is all PR spin Thats what gets pollies elected, not substance.

[grrowler]

Skystar,

Trying to give all the credit for the excess to the previous government (during global boom when even Bush could make an economy look good) and all the blame for any deficit to the current government (during basically a global recession), is extremely unintelligent and politically biased.

Blaming the current government for anything that happened in the late 80's is equally so.

[Baileys]

So far it seems there has been a lot of talk but not a lot of action in most areas, aviation included.

[dude65]

Yep

Got to agree with Baileys comment.

Seems to be plenty of giveaways,handouts, overseas trips ets. but not a hell of a lot of substance. K-Rudds interest in any particular issue has a mandatory requirement of a televison crew being involved as well.

Somehow I don't think saving GA is high on the to do list.

[Skystar320]

Trying to give all the credit for the excess to the previous government (during global boom when even Bush could make an economy look good) and all the blame for any deficit to the current government (during basically a global recession), is extremely unintelligent and politically biased.

Not really, compared to know giving the handouts left right and centre.... The government has been in how many months? Already the deficit is [government] is $1billion. pfffttttt

[grrowler]

Skystar, the government is spending in an attempt to stimulate the economy, which has stopped along with the rest of the world. This is in line with what most other world governments are doing and is supported by most financial "gurus". If you want to blame them for the deficit, why not give them credit for bringing down interest rates:rolleyes:

[lowerlobe]

direct.no.speed.....Well said and the subject of politics is going to be nothing more than the usual rhetoric from either camp and supposition...

Anyone with any intelligence would understand you can't blame the Rudd government for the current mess.If when their term is up there is something more concrete to object to would be fair but at the moment it would only be the usual rubbish...

Although I imagine Skystar320 would not object to the interest rates when he wants to buy something.He probably gets a lot of time to look in the shop windows as a police pushbike rider in Perth...

As Gingerbread said we will have to wait until the release of the Aviation report on 2nd Dec to see what the state of play is...

[Flyingblind]

Thanks for the heads up about 2 Dec.

Will await the papers release with some enthusiasm.

Anybody know where i read/download it?

[Gingerbread]

Expect it will be available to download from:

www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/index.aspx (http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/index.aspx)

But unlikely to be bedtime reading. :uhoh:

[Skystar320]

Why I very much applaude the reduction in interest rate, let me point out that the RBA has got nothing to do with the government.

[I'm on a fixed interest rate anyhow]

RBA are a stand alone entity and lower / raise interest rates as they see fit given the current market.

The government can spend money, which they are, on pointless things to 'stimulate' the market again. Although this is fine, shouldnt they really be doing something 'good' for the economy? Somehow I dont see international trips on 'economic turnaround' agenda?

Lowerlobe if you still want to try and Ridicule me in front on pprune your more than happy to send me a PM.

[teresa green]

All froth and bubble. Where are the computers for every student, the hospitals are stuffed still, the indiginous people are still living in a shattered society, work choices still here, broadband not fixed, nobody bothering about the slaughter of whales anymore, pensioners slowly going onto a starvation diet, ditto war veterans, ok its only a year, and a hard one, but if you can give carmakers $4 billion, perhaps, you could be a little generous towards other causes as well. As for Aviation, it, like many other industries will be left to fend for itself in the present climate, and I suspect Rudd wishes to God he hadn't won the darn thing, and let Howard and Costello deal with the shambles we all now live in, he could then have come along in four years time when its all over as our "saviour". But hey we said "sorry" and signed ourselves up for Kyoto (which is useless as T$ts on a bull) and if you don't mind all your money being tied up (like I have now) and your super in a spiral dive, we still have the sun, sea and sand and hopefully your health, so I guess we just keep on keeping on, and pray for better times ahead. :sad:

[lowerlobe]

The government can spend money, which they are, on pointless things to 'stimulate' the market again. Although this is fine, shouldnt they really be doing something 'good' for the economy?
Skystar320....If the government is doing something to stimulate the market in these difficult times then it's far from pointless isn't it?

You say that these moves are 'fine' but then say "shouldn't they be doing something 'good'....If helping the economy is not good then what is it?

Do you see the contradiction in your post?

It is good to see a Liberal supporter not blaming the Rudd government for the interest rate drop because any number of Liberal supporters blamed them when the interest rates went up....

Skystar,I'm not trying to ridicule you in my post because in another of your posts you said you were a Mountain bike Perth based policeman......nothing at all to ridicule about that.My Grandfather was in the NSW mounted police actually as well as a number of friends serving in the Police force at the moment..

[Skystar320]

Lowerlobe its an example of both good / bad scene. Government spending money should stimulate the economy - should! if spent on the right things

But, you should agree aswell the money they are spending should be directed at more constructive ways i.e why not give the money to say states to spend on the health system, Perth certainly need's it.

I dont go for either party, the interest rates are made up with the RBA with no help from either government. Its what RBA believes should happen at that time on what the economy is looking like.

It will be interesting to see at christmas time if people spend big, like last year is only certainly going to inflame the 'current economic situation' I would have thought softly softly approach is better.

Then again, I'm not government, I can only mention what I believe should be the best way. :ok::ok:

[Skystar320]

the hospitals are stuffed still

Exactly.

Yet I still cannot understand why they threw the $4billion at the car making industry, but the government knows best!

[Zoomy]

Sure they have, (getting back to the original question), they have injected money into QF and probably other airlines by way of countless airfares overseas.

Let's see who's on the next trip:

Mr Rudd
Mr Swann
My advisor
Your advisor
My media rep
Your media rep
The cameraman/woman
The audioman/woman
My wife
Your Wife
My writer
Your writer
The coffee maker
The hair stylist
The makeup artist
4 X good office staff ( to be decided by way of contest)

18 X Buisness class/1st class airfares anyone care to say how much?

[Skystar320]

Alas Zoomy, excellent.

[lowerlobe]

As I said before Skystar this is not yet another Labour/Liberal argument fest...

I agree that the health system is in desperate need of life saving treatment.However, that is not going to happen overnight and is a complex issue for not only the Federal Government but the States as well.

As far as packages to stimulate the economy are concerned and as needy as they are I don't think spending money on the hospitals will get the market turned around.Unless of course you are in the business of bandages,syringes and so on...

As far as having a cheap shot at the travels of the PM you have a short term memory problem with Johnny....I could write pages on that but this is not the place for that...

By the way Skystar320....You did not say why you thought my post was intended to ridicule you.

You are a Perth city mounted policeman aren't you?

[Skystar320]

I agree with your lowerlobe that this thread shouldnt be labor / Liberal thread better off suited to jetblast they are each bad as another.

The stimulate package should benefit all us, hopefully... But concentrating on the health systems can benefit all of us, doesnt just boil down to bandaids & needles.

Let's see if the Rudd Government can come up with anything exciting / new / good for the aviation sector, which I feel also will not happen.

As taking a cheap shot of the PM travels?? I'm just laughing at Zoomy's responce

I reiterative my point, all governments are the same, do one thing do the other way.

[flyinggit]

Seeing as I am a little green when it comes to aviation matters regarding it's health would $4 Billion injected into aviation have the same effect/benifits as the auto industry considering that by reading what's amongst these pages the aviation industry is in much trouble also?


Flinggit.

[Air Ace]

How impudent and mischievous to suggest the Rudd Government and in particular the Minister for Transport has not taken a leading, proactive role in aviation reform, revitalising CASA and ASA and fostered airlines and general aviation in Australia! :mad:

The Rudd Government and present Minister has taken the following action in respect to aviation:













Compared to the Howard Government Ministers parlous intiiatives:









I don't understand why you don't acknowledge and appreciate the incentives and benefits initiated by the Rudd Government!! :=


P.S. Any inside information on who will replace the present Director of CASA?

[boofta]

Rudd has signed the Kyoto protocol, the planet is now safe.
Otherwise I can't think of anything else he's done.
A revolution in spin,crap, and promises by the Labour Messiah.
Whats frightening is the similarities to the Obama campaign
and the same thoughtless suckers bought it.
How about the public starts a War/ Revolution against
politicians using terms like War and Revolution in conning
the electorate.
People want hope and change but Rudd will be overseas
on another world saving mission, what happened to the
Health, Education, Poverty etc. REVOLUTIONS Mr.Rudd?
Or the WAR on all the other bull**** you promised?
It's okay folks Julia is on the job, getting even redder
highlights put through her hair while the Messiah is away.
God help us

[4Greens]

Perhaps it is best to forget the political party strife and for the aviation industry to concentrate on persuading all and sundry that we need a Minister for Aviation. The present incumbent has too many different issues on his plate to have time to concentrate on aviation. If this can be achieved then true reform would have a chance.

[Slugfest]

This can be easily summed up by considering the Flightwatch VHF review that was instigated because of Dick Smith and handed down Feb 2008.

ooops, sorry, correction,

The review is yet to be delivered and will not see the light of day until at least Feb 2009.:*:mad:

The Gov has done nothing and Dick Smith has not said a word in follow up.:ugh:

Both are pathetic.:mad:

Mean while, ATC are distracted from separating aricraft to provide flightwatch services and the discrete flightwatch VHF system is in no mans land.

Good effort from all concerned really.:rolleyes:

[barrybeebone]

I agree Rudd has done zero for aviation in the first 12 months. Once the policy discussion paper is released, it will take another 12 months before any decisions are made (standby for many new threads on this site to debate the issues) and then the Government will begin to implement the decisions in their last year of power before the election...and alas...few decisions will be made because they will be considered too controversial in an election year.....call me cynical or call me realistic!

[DutchRoll]

I note when mouthing off at Rudd's travel history you are conspicuously silent on Howard's travel history, boofta. An example of how quickly this type of discussion gets hijacked by partisan politics. BTW, in the news this morning, Howard has cost taxpayers $400,000 since leaving office. Any opinion on that boofta?

You essentially have a choice:

1. Have a xenophobic PM who stays within Australia and never meets world leaders to discuss anything unless they happen to stop by here. Then see Australia relegated to "Australia? Who? Where the heck is that? Do they really matter?" status even more than it is already.

2. Have a PM who actually does go abroad to discuss an appropriate response to such minor nuisances as an entire global economic meltdown with the people who matter, and show that Australia needs to be included in the response too.

I think I'd prefer the latter, within reason. All National leaders travel quite a bit. We need to build a bridge and get over it.

On Aviation:

I know we are pilots, Australian pilots, and therefore by default the most important group of individuals anywhere in the world, and that attention needs to be turned to us - entirely us - right now. This very minute. However I would think that the last 12 months has seen enough on the Federal Government plate to allow them a bit of leeway before turning their attention to aviation matters.

I'd be content to wait for the aviation report before passing judgement (which goes against all my pilot instincts to pass judgement on anything and everything, immediately).

[Dick Smith]

Slugfest, in relation to the Flightwatch VHF review you state:

The review is yet to be delivered and will not see the light of day until at least Feb 2009.

The Gov has done nothing and Dick Smith has not said a word in follow up.

I may not have said anything on PPRuNe but I have certainly been in touch with the authorities in relation to this. For example, on 15 September 2008 I sent a letter to the Minister which mentioned that Airservices had decided to participate in an external review and stated:

I understand this study has now been completed. Can you advise when it will be released?

I point out that other modern aviation countries of similar geographic size to Australia (namely, the United States and Canada) have a separate Flight Service/Flightwatch system. I believe Australia is a wealthy country and we can afford to have the same.

When weather conditions are good (which they tend to have been in the last couple of years) there is less need for a separate Flightwatch. However once conditions turn again, there will be a safety need for this. If it has been dismantled there could be real problems.

The Minister replied saying:

I am advised that the external review of Flightwatch is nearing completion and that once the government aviation agencies have had an opportunity to consider the consultant’s report, Airservices Australia will provide an advise to the industry regarding the outcomes and the consultation process that may accompany any proposed changes to the service and its delivery.

But don’t hold your breath for a decision.

[Barkly1992]

It's not about YOU - and YOU - and YOU.

It's about leading the country during a time of almost unprecedented international and financial turmoil created by previous administrations from around the world and unfetted free enterprise and greed.

The major issues we confront are questions of priorities - international relationships, economic stability, education and health etc are far more important than some rather smaller aspects of the aviation industry. In fact one could argue that we need to spend effort and money of our port, road and rail infrastructures before aviation.

Now I'll go and flush my head down the loo!

[GFPT]

One thing that the Rudd goverment has done is take away the Air service charge subsidy's for regional Aviation. It was only a token amount in "Big Picture" terms, but I have been told it will have a significant effect on regional airlines. :(

[teresa green]

Dutchroll, as you are aware,especially if you fly up the track, we are simply a greasespot on the world map, and most people would still think for all his postering, that he is still Nev from Austria. Re your complaint about what Howard has cost so far, please add the sums of Whitlam, Keating and Hawke (and their missus's) to the taxpayers acct. At least most of the former Liberal Leaders have the decency to snuff off this mortal coil and save us a few bob. Right now most of you should be more concerned that Dixon and friends are planning to push 10,yes 10,A/C up against the fence. (If you can believe the ABC). There has to be some truth in it as I have a friend who has a wool business and supplies Ski Gear etc to OS travellers. His business has dropped 65% over the last three months, due to cancellations for travel, (most say they will go to Asia instead or just stay home for holidays this year, and bearing in mind most of these people had a buck (or did) things really are starting to look grim. I would personally prefer to see a very experienced Captain up the front,not that fool Swan, even Tanner would be better, and now Ms Gillard (who always reminds me of a turtle without a shell) is bringing the unions back in, (NSW is a perfect example of what happens when the unions have too much say) Expect some heavy turbulence over the next few months.:*

[ozaub]

Get the OZ situation in perspective folks. Read the posts on “UK Chancellor makes moves to kill off the rest aviation industry” in the “Airlines, Airports & Routes” forum. Especially let me quote from #17 by SHORTFINALFRED

“Well, at least it makes it explicit - ALL of the UK is screwed.
My predictions: FTSE = 3000 or less, Property = off from historic highs by up to 60%, unemployment above four million, the Pound at 85 Euro cents and USD $1.20 and rioting in the streets as inflation from import costs lets rip and salaries, benefits and incomes stagnate before declining under the weight of massive tax hikes. Another UK high street bank fails and most of the retail banking industry is de-facto nationalised (even more than now).
Airlines = BMI Baby, Jet2, and perhaps Flybe all gone in 2 years. Air Southwest, Monarch, and Loganair possibly gone as well. Virgin Atlantic merged with BMI into Lufthansa as a kind of "son of BMI" with vast capacity reductions and redundancies. 2000+ UK pilots seek work. There isnt any, nor will there be for years, if ever. New "Green Taxes" kill off UK aviation for ever.
Long-term the UK is a basket case with no oil, no skill base, no high value manufacturing, and no hope. Look for the seventies brain drain to restart with, this time, no reversal and no renaissance for perhaps decades.”

[Howabout]

I understand this study has now been completed. Can you advise when it will be released?

I point out that other modern aviation countries of similar geographic size to Australia (namely, the United States and Canada) have a separate Flight Service/Flightwatch system. I believe Australia is a wealthy country and we can afford to have the same.

When weather conditions are good (which they tend to have been in the last couple of years) there is less need for a separate Flightwatch. However once conditions turn again, there will be a safety need for this. If it has been dismantled there could be real problems.

Sorry Dick, but I don't know how to do that snazzy highlight thing.

Isn't this at odds with what you did as CAA boss? We couldn't afford it, so we had to can it.

I'm just having problems getting my head around what your position actually is. Maybe I'd support your position, but I just don't see a consistent line. On the one hand, we get rid of Flight Service and, on the other hand, it's best practice in other advanced aviation countries.

I think a reply on this point would really serve to clarify where you are coming from for a lot of us.

[Arnold E]

Hmmmm, I was thinking the same thing, care to enlighten us Dick?:rolleyes:

[apache]

I may not have said anything on PPRuNe but I have certainly been in touch with the authorities in relation to this


well... this IS a turn up for the books! you raise EVERY OTHER ONE OF YOUR AGENDAS here.... don't respond to reasonable and/or direct questions given to you, use horrific accidents with no concluded investigations, as well as SCAREMONGERING in the press to further YOUR ideals.... yet have said nothing on pprune about something like this?

My response to you, Dick, is that you have said NOTHING here, because in my opinion, it does not helpm your cause.
to all who actually believed the promises made by KRUDD before being elected.... are you serious? did you HONESTLY believe that he would follow thru on them? did you honestly think that he could keep the economy in surplus?
JH may NOT have been the best, but he had the better team backing him at least.

[teresa green]

Watch your pidgeon holes with great interest folks, it won't be long before the letters start appearing, you know the ones, about taking all your leave NOW, or even worse the leave without pay, or perhaps even worse, "we have decided you have been seconded to Bangladesh Airlines to fly a Viscount (which is probably older than all of you) for the next 12 months" (read 2 years) believe me, In 40 yrs of flying I have seen it all (AND HAVE BEEN SENT THERE) would you believe Iraq. And a free Hijab for the missus. Seriously, I hope it does not come to this for some of you, but be prepared, batten down the hatches, tear up the credit cards, because it is very unsettling to the whole family, when it happens. It has happened before and will happen again. Ask any QF Skipper over fifty, and he will have a story to tell, about flying around some ar#ehole of a place at QF's wishes, as some young S/O or F/O (they only pick on the young bucks as they won't argue) and can't afford to leave. I truly hope I am wrong.:(

[Dick Smith]

Howabout and Arnold E, I find this incredibly frustrating. I have been involved in airspace reform since 1991. Everything I have ever been involved in is in writing or on video. The AMATS changes which I introduced in 1991 showed quite clearly that there would be a separate Flightwatch system in Australia as per the United States. Airspace 2000 showed quite clearly there would be a separate Flightwatch service. The NAS – copying the US system – clearly meant there would be a separate Flight Service/Flightwatch system.

I have never changed on this, I have been totally consistent.

Apache, no, it is not “a turn up for the books.” There are lots of issues I get involved in which I do not bring up on PPRuNe. As you know, I clearly brought up the fact that Flightwatch was going to be abolished by Airservices. I then waited for the results of the “independent” inquiry.

Once I received an answer I was going to post it on PPRuNe. What is the use of giving every detail of every letter when it can be months before an answer is given – and maybe not ever?

The reason I have said nothing is that I don’t yet have a reply from Airservices. It is as simple as that.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

"separating aricraft"

I see yr typing is still the same............:p:p:} (Yeah, I'm HARSH I know..)

HOWABOUT - well spotted and commented on!!
One would wonder, wouldn't one, about how come this 'wealthy country' got rid of this 'Flight Service' thingy in the first place.

Mr Albanese should be made aware that AsA returns a profit to Govt, therefore is able to afford "World's Best Practice".... :}:}

[Howabout]

Griffo,

I don't mean any disrespect to Dick, but find the answers don't always address the question.

I am still at a loss to understand what his position is. The question was asked about Flight Service and the answer was confined to Flight Watch.

Some time back I asked another question with regard to Dick's assertions that we have a 'duplicated' air traffic control system and asked what his definition of 'duplicated' is. From my perspective, 'duplicated' would mean the two control authorities provide services in the same airspace, which isn't the case. Hence, my question as to a definition of what Dick means by 'duplicated' with respect to ATC.

Unless I missed it, last time I looked I still didn't have an answer.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

G'Day 'Howabout',

NAH! And I don't reckon you will either.

e.g. "I find this incredibly frustrating. I have been involved in airspace reform since 1991." End of Quote.

But NOT end of story, or stories..... Still can't get 'IT' right....

Dick's 'Flight Watch' had three VHF freqs in WA, and THOSE were left only because they were superfluous to ATC requirements at THOSE particular sites. e.g. Argyle, Port Hedland and Kalamunda (Perth) if I remember correctly.
3 VHF Freqs for the whole of WA - SHISH!! And look at where they were.

Now, I have to pose the question - How could a meaningful Flight Watch 'Service' be provided with THAT?

Its all 'water under the bridge' now, but the B/S never stops.
Here we have the current AsA ATC charging and providing Multi Million $ profits to the Govt - which is really a tax after all, on the airspace users, the public - thru the airlines and the airfares etc and they cannot even provide adequate staffing, T & C's to retain same, and forward planning to train more as the age factor increases. They close navaid facilities - Mt McQuoid VOR for one - etc etc ALL in the name of ideaology - make more $'s.

How are we going to train IFR pilots to use these aids?
Ok, we all use GPS. Great! But, without WAAS - NOT so great!!
And whatever happened to the great ADSB?? Cheaper then radar heads and as effective....Well?? Where is it??

Ah, Not all of this is Dick's fault, but I do belive the first I heard of the term 'affordable safety' was when.......and the culture has grown like "Topsy".

Well, that's my answer for now.

Cheers, and Best Regards to ALL.......:ok::ok:.

[Howabout]

Thanks Griffo - I just remember better times and regret that we lost so much on the altar of economic rationalism.

[Slugfest]

Poo tin alphabet airspace and make it "controlled" and "uncontrolled" (aka OCTA)

Reduce controlled airspace to the absolute min required to service btn capital cities and some major regional dromes.

Enable ADSB all levels and mandate carriage of equip - ASA provide VH- acft fitout for free.

Provide separation service between all acft in controlled airspace.

Have appropriately paid ATCs staff the controlled airspace; min CTA = min ATC. IE, LET ATC SEPARATE ACFT!

Provide a full and proper FIS (sans TIS) for all acft in CTA and a full FIS (with TIS) for all acft OCTA and expand the VHF FIS coverage. And I don't mean the crap called FIS provided by ATC today.

Have a dedicated service provider for this proper FIS provision and for TIS OCTA.

Provide the ADSB info to that dedicated FIS provider.

THAT ladies and gentlemen would be a world's best practice system unlike this bullsh1t foistered upon us by the bonus chasing, grandstanding, egocentric dweebs that have shaped where we are at.

time for a bex and a lie down....

Slug

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Oh NO!!

NOT just like.....it USED to BE??

CAN'T DO THAT!! But, why not?

Think of the savings in $$$'s, 'resources' and equipment...Not to mention the number of ATC's required....

Might JUST be able to cope with 'future staffing req's'....
:}:eek:

[Pinky the pilot]

Oh NO!!

NOT just like.....it USED to BE??

CAN'T DO THAT!! But, why not?


You know Griffo, I'd kinda like to know why not m'self!:confused:

As I have posted before in various threads over the last few years, way back in 1982 when I started my what was known then as an 'Unrestricted PPL' it was considered poor airmanship to do a navex 'no sar no details.'

Full reporting for VFR was available from Flight Service and they were most efficient, calling you if you were remiss in making position reports outside the plus-or-minus two minute allowance!

I would still like to know why this system was abolished! I have not yet nor do I ever expect to hear, an even halfway reasonable excuse as to why this service was discontinued!

All I have ever heard is the saying ''affordable safety'' which to me is trite, meaningless and in light of what has transpired over the years since,
Bloody offensive!

Rant over and I feel better for it!

[tio540]

Is anyone here better off with the new government?

Yes I know, there is a global crisis. But remember, just weeks ago the PM stated that it would have little effect on Australia. About $20 Billion effect so far, and counting.

[teresa green]

We will be fine, according to Rudd, we have the best cabin on the "Titanic"!:confused:

[DutchRoll]

I think you're probably taking what he said out of context, tio540.

"Little effect" relative to a massive global economic meltdown is "little" in relative terms, although perhaps not to the individual who has seen their super crash through the floor.

What he appears to be saying, which is supported by most economic opinion at the moment, is that Australia is unlikely to go into recession or negative economic growth. This is completely different to what is happening in the US and Europe, which are being hit very hard.

While I understand it doesn't help your super or house price, you would be a lot worse off if you lived elsewhere at the moment.

Am I better off under the new government? Bloody oath I am. My interest payments on my house have dropped substantially but its value has held pretty well. I don't pretend that this is a direct result of Government policy as rates have to come down with the economic slowdown. However it shows that you can't just answer "yes" or "no" to such a question and directly attribute it to the Government. Go on, admit it. It was a politically loaded question, wasn't it? ;)

[Dick Smith]

Pinky the pilot, you ask:

I would still like to know why this system was abolished! I have not yet nor do I ever expect to hear, an even halfway reasonable excuse as to why this service was discontinued!

I will try – seeing I was involved, or some people will say responsible for the decision to remove the duplicated air traffic system that we had.

Before 1991, aircraft flying enroute across Australia generally above FL245 were given an air traffic control service. Aircraft flying enroute below this level were generally given a full position flight information service by flight service personnel. In effect, we had a duplicated high level and low level enroute air traffic system.

When I flew around the world in the helicopter in 1982-1983, I found that no other country had a similar service. More particularly, no country mandated (or even offered) an enroute full position service for VFR traffic. The reason for this was cost.

In Australia, the enroute full position service given by flight service for VFR aircraft was provided at a cost of between $50 million and $100 million per year. The Labor Government had made the decision to go to a user pays system and there was pressure from the airlines to have those reaping the benefit (if there was one) of the low level enroute full position system to pay for it.

This would have been a staggering cost – possibly over $10,000 per VFR aircraft per annum.

After consultation with the industry the Board decided to harmonise internationally and no longer provide a full position service to VFR aircraft when enroute.

There were claims that even though this would result in a major cost saving to the industry, that fatalities would result. It is interesting to note that in the 17 years since 1991, when the full position enroute service for VFR aircraft was removed, there has not been one fatality attributed to the removal, and somewhere between $850 million and $1.7 billion has been saved.

If the old unique Australian full position VFR service had remained, and if the airlines were successful in having the users pay for it, undoubtedly we would have an industry in far more economic damage than it is today – if indeed it still existed.

I personally loved the duplicated system – especially the fact that the flight service at Dubbo would order a taxi for you, make you a cup of coffee, and even file your flight plan.

There was another disadvantage of the duplicated system that people tend to forget. That is, where we had good radar coverage between, say, Melbourne and Cairns, when you were flying below 12,500 feet in enroute airspace, you were forced by law to talk to a flight service officer who was not trained to use radar. In fact, the FSOs were in a different room with paper flight strips and no radar display.

You also state:

All I have ever heard is the saying ''affordable safety'' which to me is trite

It may be trite to you but it is a fact of life. The money spent on aviation safety in Australia has always been limited by what society can afford. This is why we have always had totally different safety standards for aircraft up to 9 passengers, from 9 passengers to 30 passengers, and for 30 passengers and more. An expert in the old Department of Civil Aviation explained to me the reason for these different standards and I thought it was reasonable to explain it to the public.

Remember, this had nothing to do with user pays. These different standards exist throughout the world because it is deemed not sensible to reduce the safety of large aircraft by cross subsidising money to small aircraft in an attempt to make them as safe. In effect, society has decided that you “get what you pay for.”

Yes, we could return to the old system and have every VFR aircraft flying more than 50 miles putting in a full position IFR type flight plan, then calling Flightwatch if not within 2 minutes of a reporting point. The cost would obviously be in the tens of millions per annum, and what would the safety improvement be? I believe it would be immeasurably small and not worth the amount of money that was being spent.

[max1]

We have progressed from not just user pays, but user now pays for ASA to make a profit to return to government (ASAs only shareholder).
The ASA management use this profit motivation to pay their bonuses. This is why we are in the staffing crisis that we are in.

[Ivasrus]

Aviation Policy Green Paper - Flight Path to the Future - December 2008 (http://www.minister.infrastructure.gov.au/aa/releases/2008/April/AA030_2008.htm)

[Flyingblind]

Thanks for the heads up, its a big document and will take a while to read the bits that directly interest me.

Not expecting much mind you.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

"Dear Dick"......

"Yes, we could return to the old system and have every VFR aircraft flying more than 50 miles putting in a full position IFR type flight plan, then calling Flightwatch if not within 2 minutes of a reporting point"...............

And do you know what??

WE COULD 'streamline' this absurd and, in my opinion, 'patronising' statement and revitalise the 'Streamlined' Flight Service that we evolved into in early 1998 - 2000 or so.......prior to our ultimate demise in Dec 2000!

Our numbers were then at the optimum level required to provide the FS Services required.
i.e. No 'Public Service Fat'! Just Good Old Flight Service!

At A S M A L L F R A C T I O N of the COST to the industry as is NOW being charged!

The $'s ....(What were the figures...$92M one year and $102 or $104M the other?)...would simply be reinvested BACK INTO the industry - instead of disappearing into 'Govt Consolidated Revenue'!

Do you realise, that for NO Extra fees, charges etc., other than what is being returned NOW to Govt. as a TAX, a Full FS Type Service could be provided to all aircraft requiring / requesting same, whether it be 'Mandated' or simply 'By Request'!!!???

W'ere a BIG BIG Country....(Read..Remote..)

This would then 'Free Up' Airspace Sectors, and allow Air Traffic Controllers (ATC) to concentrate on the ALL important job of maintaining SEPARATION of ALL aircraft ( BIG ones and not so big ones) in Controlled Airspace (CTA) which would preserve our National Integrity in the world of Commercial Aviation - NOT to mention numerous potential 'Litigation' Claims......

And 'Private' meddlers should leave 'IT' to the Professionals!
This would then ;

Free up
Another ...Undervalued Air Traffic Controller, who, in conjunction with
fellow
Rated Controllers ......who
'nowingly "Prop up" the Current System...By doing unpaid O/T etc
on Rostered Days Off.......(You Know...Days Of Rest - Just like YOU have!!)

Outside Controlled Airspace aircraft could then be handled by....

Utilising Flight Service Officers...who generally require less training and
are therefore 'cheaper' ....read...more Economical....
to employ, to be
The F.I.S Providers to ALL of those Other Aircraft who operate
OUTSIDE of
Controlled Airspace!!

Makes SENSE to me............:}:}

'I'm so Maaad....I juust can't taake it anymmmore!!!!!:}:}:}

[StallBoy]

Dear Dick,
"Pinko and Griffo" are quite right whats wrong with a system that works:ok:. Thanks for explaining that you were trying to "Harmonise" :ugh:our air traffic control system and save money.:eek:
Personally I think when you became a pilot it was the start of some of the darkest times for Australias Air industry.:mad:

[Captain Sherm]

Griffo et al....you've got it right.

FSUs were the repository of an awful lot that was good about aviation, not just VFR, but RPT F27 ops for example.

With modern technology there'd still be a great cost effective system. Sadly we'll never know.

As Kennet found out in Victoria, you can piece by piece demolish non-urban infrastructure and you'll never quite know when you've gone too far. Its like saving money by cutting back on the kid's toothpaste. It works but someone in the distant future will have to pay the real bills.

[gupta]

Amen to that Sherm..... just like "privatising" the airports, and the future is with us right now.

[Slugfest]

Dick Smith,

FS NEVER cost the figures you put forward. THOSE figures originated from an industrial agenda of an organisation that was going to purge FS from existence no matter what the damage to ATS because of their un-bridled hatred for non ATC anything.:mad:

YOU fell for that Sh1T hook, line and bloody sinker!:ugh::ugh:

FS cost way less than $22m pa to run and THAT was substantiated by documentation at the time of the debate and hence the stupid numbers your sprout were never spoken of again by ATS management…until now by YOU attempting to re-write history.:mad:

There was never any duplicated system. FS provided a totally different service in totally different airspaces to ATC – but lets not let a nasty fact get in the way of a load of bollocks.:yuk:

Talking about history; AVGAS levy.

Approx $20m pa used to be collected from GA aircraft by this measure.

MOSTLY these types of acft conducted operations OCTA, ie, in FS airspace.

And the AVGAS levy when where exactly??????:hmm::hmm::hmm:

Yep, you guessed it, $18m to GAAP towers and a piss-ant $2m pa to FS.:suspect::suspect:

Griff et al have very good points about short term staffing by utilising a tried and true practice that with updated technology and procedures, could provide an outstanding service at minimal cost and THAT MR smith is a good use of user pays.:D

Why would we want to return to old paper based systems? With the technology avbl today, we could prob design a system that held all acft details and services would be provided once acft were simply IDed by their ADSB signature and a quick route discussion update.

OH, BTW, how much EXACTLY do you pay for SARTIME services and for the on-request FIS service provided by Flightwatch when on your pointless aviation sojourns?

Slug:mad::mad::mad:

[Howabout]

Griffo,

I dips my lid to you and the other guys who took the demise so stoically. It must have hurt like buggery; not because you were into job preservation, but because you saw something that was dear to your soul, and a valuable service, being trashed.

I always remember the meticulousness of the FS guys with respect to SARTIME. Some people don't understand the level of comfort that dedicated people looking out for your welfare provide. Particularly over the E Alligator in a single.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Hey Howabout,

"a valuable service, being trashed.".........

Amen to that! :(:yuk:


And, WHAT has "One Year Of The New Govt." done for the Industry GENERALLY in Australia ? ? ?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

That's it!

Back to you Dick......

ATC in disarray.... (T&C's and staff numbers.....)
NAVAID Closure.... (McQuoid VOR for e.g.)....
WAAS.... (Appears to be classed as 'WAS')
ADSB.... (?)
MORE, not less 'Flightwatch' VHF's ? (3 in the whole of WA, and hundreds of miles apart......)
A H.F. System that actually works?....Until Satellite type VHF Comms are avbl to all....
A G/A POLICY.....Inc. Regional services.....
etc etc :sad: :ugh:

OVAH!

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Good points as always Griffo. My sentiments exactly:ok:

I'd love to say what I think but I'll get banned. To the towelling hat brigade, Thanks guys:ok: You thought you were going to get away with not having to pay for anything. How wrong you were.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

MAKE A SUBMISSION (http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/nap/submissions.aspx)

We have got till 28FEB09 to put in our bit.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

G'Day ' 'OZBUSDRIVER',.....and

Thankyou Sir, for the link and the support.:ok::ok:

[Pinky the pilot]

Well Dick, Thank you for responding to my post. However, I must disagree with your reasoning. The reasons being most eloquently put by
Ex FSO GRIFFO and Slugfest.:ok::ok:

Indeed, they said it far better than I could have hoped to.

Thanks also to Stallboy, Captain Sherm, et al.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

G'Day 'Pinks',.....

Well, today is the 12/12, and NIL response from the author of this thread.

I guess that's the answer then................

Thanks for the thread Dick, and I guess the answer to your question is....

NOT MUCH AT ALL TO SHOW FROM THE 'NEW' GOVT!!

As 'OZBUSDRIVER' has stated, we have till FEB 09 to express ourselves!

Cheers:ok::ok:

Do we really wind up with the Govt we deserve..??:sad::sad:

[tio540]

The cost of the ETS to be announced today. The effect on aviation will be three fold. TAX TAX TAX.