Merged: Willy ATCO's get 4 weeks holiday, meanwhile CAGRO At Newcastle saves the day! [Archive]

QSK?

11th Dec 2008, 06:52

Ah Dick, Dick, Dick:ugh::

Why is it that everytime you get on a bandwagon, I immediately experience a very strong compulsion to go and check every one of your assertions to make sure we are in fact comparing "apples with apples"?

Firstly, as crisper has alluded to, the CAGRS at Newcastle is not replacing ATC; it is only being provided outside the operating hours of the RAAF aerodrome control (ADC) service. Previously, the CAGRS was being provided by RAAF personnel outside the hours of the ADC service; now its being provided by "white shirters" instead of "blue shirters". So, what's the difference?:confused:

Secondly, during the RAAF standown period last year it is my understanding that there was NO CAGRS provided at Willytown at all so the airport operated on CTAF(R) procedures only. Surely the provision of a CAGRS this year is an improvement by CASA on what was available at Willytown last year, and all preceding years.:D

Thirdly, Willytown has more risk mitigators in place than either Broome or Ayers Rock Airports to supplement the safe dellivery of CAGRS. And just to make sure we are all not sidetracked by your emotional skewed comparisons, it is interesting to note that in the last year:

- Broome CAGRS has safely handled 5,217 scheduled aircraft movements (on 11 hours coverage per day); while

- Ayers Rock CAGRS has handled 4,374 scheduled movements (on 7 hour coverage per day).

Compare the above figures against the estimated annual 4,488 scheduled aircraft movements that will occur OUTSIDE of RAAF control tower hours at Willytown. It would appear to me that the CAGRS at Newcastle would be quite capable of safely handling this number of scheduled aircraft movements, particularly considering that these movements will be spread over 16 hours of CAGRS coverage per day (longer than Broome or Ayers Rock). It should also be noted that the Broome and Ayers Rock CAGRS units, in addition to their scheduled movements, also process a considerable amount of non-scheduled traffic movements that most likely will not be a feature of the Willytown CAGRS operation due to the 6 per hour cap. So, it is difficult to support your contention that the level of risk to passengers at Willytown would be any worse than the risk to passengers flying into/out of Broome and Ayers Rock.

Finally, with respect to your comment at the beginning of this thread:
So all the GA planes with young families aboard, but without a transponder, that in the past have been able to transit the coastal lane on weekends will now be forced onto the inland lane where it's not possible to do a safe forced landing . Again, Dick, this is more sensationalist bulldust from you that is not represented by the facts. :=If you were to read your NOTAMS carefully, you will note that the coastal route still remains available to VFR flights; in fact a VFR aircraft can even fly directly over the top of Willytown during the standown period if they're so inclined. :ok:

(My father used to tell me that if water drips on stone long enough, eventually it will make an impression. I live in hope)

GaryGnu

11th Dec 2008, 06:53

Bloggs,

It will be a CTAF (R) but that is still Class G airspace. As far as I know Transponders are only required in A,C and E airspace in Aus, as per this (http://www.casa.gov.au/rules/miscinst/0316_98.htm)

Has there been an instrument published to specifically require transponders be carried and operated in that airspace? If so where?

Dick,

That is positive news if true.

As to the criteria, there is now a published procedure requiring risk and cost/benefit analyses when deciding on Airspace classification. See the Australian Airspace Policy Statement 2007.

Dick Smith

11th Dec 2008, 07:05

QSK, The difference is that the blue shirters will have a radar display and proper equipment- the system that was to come in had a CAGRO on the civilian side of the 'drome with no radar display.

By the way, the reason for the TRA was to bring in a mandatory transponder requirement.

Ex FSO GRIFFO

11th Dec 2008, 07:56

Hi Dick,
Ref;

"and then changed after I resigned so that only ex AsA or ex ADF employees could make money from them."

As an ex CAGRO as well as ex FSO, I feel that the criteria for personnel selection, was so that only 'suitably' qualified persons would be utilised to perform this responsible function.

During the course of my employ as a CAGRO, I did have a couple of 'wannabees' who wanted to have a look, but they were neither qualified nor, in my opinion, 'suitable'.
i.e. NIL Aviation qualifications and certainly not MET Observer qualified.

Ex AsA and ex ADF employees have these qualifications.

I mean, you'd want a competent service, wouldn't you?

And yes, I was paid for the job - and I earned it. An 11 hr day, solo.

I made MUCH more as an FSO....:cool:

Cheers.

Brap

11th Dec 2008, 10:40

How does Ambidji and CASA justify employing non local CAGROs at Williamtown particularly when the area of responsibility extends to 20nm?:confused::uhoh::rolleyes:

sprocket check

11th Dec 2008, 11:13

Why is this necessary at all? I flew down from PMQ earlier this year, everyone in Williamtown was in church I think cause it was Sunday, so no ATC, I made all the usual calls, resulting in appropriate ID and separation from RPT coming and going, everyone happy. What's so hard? Even if ACT, it is not rocket science to go coastal route, or is there an issue in getting clearance?

sc

btw:

CERTIFIED AIR/GROUND RADIO OPERATORS (CA/GRO)
Newcastle, NSW Australia, The Australian

AMBIDJI CERTIFIED AIR/GROUND RADIO OPERATORS CA/GRO Ambidji provides third party Certified Air/Ground Radio Services CA/GRS to Australian airport operators. Ambidji is seeking expressions of interest from former Flight Service or ATC officers to work as Certified Air/Ground Radio Operators CA/GRO on a contract basis at Newcastle Williamtown Airport.

Binoculars

11th Dec 2008, 13:25

Dick, I am fascinated by your simple trust that provision of TSAD radar will be a useful tool. Do you honestly expect AsA to approve its use by unqualified personnel? In my last few years at Mackay we were provided with a TSAD display, partly, I like to think, because of an incident I was personally involved in involving a breakdown of separation between an RPT aircraft and a private aircraft, an incident that would NEVER have occurred if TSAD had been available at the time.

In those few years it seemed that the main emphasis of the powers that be was to ensure that nobody used it for anything to do with separation without a specific radar control rating. Let me give you an example. I was involved in another incident involving two RPT acft taking avoiding action on final. The final blame was correctly sheeted home to me because I neglected to obtain a readback of a requirement to extend downwind, so I'm not trying to excuse myself from anything.

However, in the course of the investigation I was taken to task for using the TSAD as a tool of separation. Not in the incident concerned, but an earlier situation ten miles south where I had appplied vertical separation to the incoming RPT with an outbound helicopter until sighting had been achieved. Because I gave the RPT a position reference of the helicopter (12 o'clock, one mile passing left to right) I was apparently using the TSAD illegally. Oddly enough I was operating under the assumption that's exactly what the display was there for. Apparently not. It seems I was using it for separation. It was about that time I decided I had to get out.

In terms of an actual separation tool, we're not talking radar vectoring or anything else here, I'm talking functions as basic as observed opposite direction passing. In such a case we had to ask the Brisbane Centre controller, often an area controller with five minutes experience, to tell us what we as rated procedural approach controllers could plainly see for ourselves, that the two aircraft concerned had in fact passed. Time wasted, and utterly absurd. I've retired now and don't make a habit of visiting the tower but as far as I know this situation remains.

Now it's vaguely possible that we agree on something, a rare situation indeed, because I suspect you would see this as being a ludicrous state of a affairs as well. Perhaps you could lend your weight to something useful like having this limitation removed?

In the meantime, I'll be fascinated to hear what powers a non-ATC CAGRO will have in relation to a TSAD radar. I suspect the answer will be buggerall, in fact I'd be surprised if it is allowed to be switched on.

Dick Smith

11th Dec 2008, 18:07

I do agree with you. I will work to have this changed.

Now off to appear on Sunrise about Willy- to thank the ADF people -after all they did not cause the problem.

max1

11th Dec 2008, 20:10

Maybe Joel Fitzgibbons is nervous, he does live round that way.

max1

11th Dec 2008, 20:16

GaryGnu,
I understand the airspace is being Notamed as a TRA (Temporary Restricted Area) during certain hours over the Willy XMas stand down period.

Chief galah

11th Dec 2008, 20:48

This is a typical example of knee jerking by this incompetent bunch of muppets.

I seems to me if the military are going to run the show, using the radar, as Dick is crowing about, then they might as well provide the full separation service.

The current NOTAM for YWLM says

"THIS AIRSPACE IS NOT CONTROLLED AIRSPACE...THEREFORE CLEARANCE TO ENTER AND OPERATE WITHIN THE AIRSPACE IS NOT REQUIRED."

and

"CONTROLLING AUTHORITY: NEWCASTLE AIRPORTS LIMITED"

That's got to be confusing.

Dick Smith

11th Dec 2008, 20:50

Capn Bloggs,

The no tower scenario is being driven by airlines reducing cost. If they can get rid of the terminal charge they can increase their profits. Surely you understand that.

For example the safety study into Williamtown shows that to activate a D tower over certain periods would cost about $480,000 per year. Obviously, by not activating the tower the airlines save $480,000 and that money ends up in their bottom line as extra profits.

Of course, the problem is the extra chance of an accident but then they will all run for cover, blame someone else - the airline management will say that wasn’t their decision not to have the tower.

Lookleft

12th Dec 2008, 02:19

Have to agree with you on this one Dick. The cost of the Tower is the reason the airlines don't insist on it. Airservices,CASA and the airlines are testing a 3rd worlds best practice system purely on the basis of cost and not for safety. The traffic volumes at Willy and at Avalon require a Tower but unfortunately, as aviation history has demonstrated, change only comes on the back of disaster. The funding of the Tower should not rest solely on the airlines however and should be shared between all the users i.e: the owners, the Federal Government, State Government,Councils and passengers and even Department of Defense.

Plazbot

12th Dec 2008, 06:56

I think pretty much everybody is with you on this one Dick. Get to it.

sms777

12th Dec 2008, 08:13

Are you guys telling me on a public forum that the ADF is going on holidays for 4 WEEKS?
Who in the hell is going to defend the country in case Indonesia decides that they want to send more refugees legally to our land.
There is only four Liberties left to scramble out of YSBK with pilots only speaking Indian and no valid shooters license.
God help Australia.... I better go to Bali for a holiday!

goodkopp

12th Dec 2008, 08:41

Let's not let facts get in the way of the story here. Last time I'm checked, the sign out the front of the airfield in question was 'RAAF Base Williamtown'. It is only really due to the military's good grace that civil aircraft are in fact able to land there and not down at Belmont (and an A320 down there would be interesting!!) The RAAF ATC members provide cover from 0600 to 2200 during weekdays - a 16 hour period each day, AND they provide CAGRS coverage on weekends. As I am pretty sure the Hornet flyboys don't work on weekends, the military ATC are covering things purely for the civilian traffic at these times. And yes, they are stretched like you wouldn't believe - with large leave bills racked up. So what sort of movements are they expecting over the next 4 weeks? On average, about 40 aircraft over the 16 hour period each day, give or take. That is ~2.5 movements an hour, hardly saturation with no military movements. And what was in place? The defence force (not CASA or AsA) had put a contract in place to provide the same service that they do currently on the weekends - just in a white shirt not a blue one - so that the RAAF ATCs could actually take a well earned break. So I imagine it was with great delight that they heard today that the minister had ordered them back to work over Christmas - and had they tuned in to Sunrise this morning would have been disgusted at the audacity of Dick Smith 'thanking' them for coming in from Christmas leave. I imagine the contract will still need to be paid out due to the late cancellation, and the families of the Air Traffic Officers will be happy that their loved ones are away AGAIN over Christmas. I bet they are happy when someone asks them why the Navy is taking 2 months off yet they are working right through!! The interview this morning really did remind me of Chicken Little - once again Dick, the sky is not falling and all the hysteria you create in the general population with your one sided arguments don't help the people actually trying to provide capability.

Gundog01

12th Dec 2008, 09:00

goodkopp :D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Dick

Believe it or not RAAF ATC is stretched to the absolute max. 130 or 150 Pers dosent matter it is not enough to provide all the services at joint user airfields plus all Mil controlled airfields. GND and ACD combined all over the place. People maxing out crew duty day after day. These people need there time off just like every perosn has earn't their Xmas break. But i'm sure they appreciate your thanks on behalf of peple travelling on jetstar/virgin who really dont know or care about how they get where they are going as long as they aren't late:ugh:.

Standard OPS (correct me if i'm wrong) is for Wily to revert to CTAF(R) when RAAF ATC close each day. It seems to me that you are getting more than has been otherwise available during standdown periods.

Dick i will begin with the following caveat. I am sure you have worked hard in the past to build your vast electronics and consumers goods empire (and thank Jack from your townsvile Store for his exceptional customer service) but perhaps you need to take the position of someone who isn't self funded and is working each day for a living trying to get by. 48 weeks per year. Not flying family and friends and grand kids along the coast for a joy ride. Some one working for half what they could get in Civvie street. And think about how you would feek about getting called back from your Xmas leave to appease objections of a minority.

Curious isn't it that no-one from J* of Virgin have objected to the safety implications. And surely they have the greatest amount to loose in the event of an incident..... reputation, compensation, government and regulator srcutiny????

10 standard drinks consumed

The military will be there during the busy Christmas period and that's what we wanted."

Just found this gem od Dick flyer website. How things change from your usual posts about bagging military ATC. Just goes to show you dont know what you want but as long as it agitats the status qou.

mostlytossas

12th Dec 2008, 09:10

"Only due to the miltary's good grace civil aircraft can land there"!!!
And I assume you also include the use of the airspace around it. Who do you think pays for it in the first place? Mug tax payer that's who. If the military want to demand and control great tracks of the Australian continent then they can staff it too and allow the owners of this same "airspace" use of it whenever operationally possible. Either that or hand it back to civil use and even reduce their holding to just a few nm like in most european countries. While it maybe unfortunate that some controllers have to work over Christmas....hello what do you think essential services do on civy street each and every year. I know working for the military has its drawbacks like generally lower wages but they get advantages too like free medical,subsidised housing,early pension age,no chance of redundancy in a recession and so on.

ruby tuesday

12th Dec 2008, 09:20

Well said goodkoop
It's unbelievable that one man, an 'Aviation Activist' can cause someone like the Minister of Defence to cave in over this matter - what message does this send to the paid experts at CASA, Albanese etc. Does Dick have something over the Minister?

To quote Dick himself "I have not been Chairman of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), nor responsible for aviation safety, for over nine years," said Dick Smith.

Crikey - Dick Smith: Please stop asking me about Qantas! - Dick Smith: Please stop asking me about Qantas! (http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20081009-Dick-Smith.html)

So if thats the case butt out and let the real experts get on with it .

What you have done will probably lead to more blue shirt operators resigning due to cancelled leave and that just adds to the shortage - or is that the plan so that ASA can try to infiltrate defence bases?

Greedo

12th Dec 2008, 09:39

Great News! - Two federal ministers have been pushed into a situation were they have acquiesced to a single individual with a better PR (spin) department than the DoD or CASA.

It's amazing to me that a few aussie flags on fake vegemite will buy you such political clout.

Dick,

I've got some issues with all of this.

Firstly, I doubt that the poor Willy controllers that just has their xmas leave cancelled, and are at home expaining to the family why they can't go home for xmas to see their family on the other side of the country, will find much comfort in your words from your website:
Special thanks to the Airforce Controllers who will be providing this service for Christmas. Are these the same controllers that you berated over the airways for not giving you a clearance (VFR transit), becasue they were separating you from an aircraft (IFR RPT) on final, as required by law?

Additionally, you continue to highlight your inability to grasp the concept of ATC qualifications:

I thought there were about 300 atc's in the RAAF.

Lets say 20 for Townsville and 50 for Darwin- wouldn't there be at least one available to work even part time at Williamtown?That's the equivelant of saying:

"Ladies and Gentlemen, the captain has fallen ill from the fish. I know this is a 747, but has anyone on board got a PPL?"

Different locations and different control positions require different qualifications. It takes at least several weeks, if not months to qualify for each individual ATC position. The current situation with AsA and TIBA can attest to that.

I'm also a bit miffed by your contention that:
I don't want them to be released to do CAGRO work- I want ATC at 50,000 movement, 1 million PAX airports.So you want ATC, and are not happy with a CAGRO? How is it then that you are now 'ecstatic' by the prospect of CAGRO with the assistance of a Radar display? The two are dramatically different.

You may well argue the greatest good for the greatest number has been achieved (short of actual ATS and not CAGRO) but can I remind you who the losers are. Military ATC who work at a military base (not joint user) being told to do a job, with no notice, that is realistically well below their qualifications and outside their job description, for no military purpose whatsoever. Additionally, they are being called in to replace appropriately qualified individuals that would have provided a appropriately endorsed service (CAGRO) in line with a CASA investigation into the situation.

It may cost only 43cents per passenger to pay for ATC over the christmas break and weekends when military are taking a well earned break (i.e. having a life), but that money will never see the pockets of the poor folks that are (currently) doing the work! There is no such thing as overtime, etc, for a military member. Add this to the locational instability and inequivalant pay to their civilian counterparts, is it any wonder that they are leaving in droves.

You stated that "Novocastrians are not stupid. They know that radar is one of the most important tools to ensure air safety." and yet I don't hear of you fighting for every other CA/GRS operation in australia to have access to a radar dispay. What's with the lack of consistancy on this?

After watching the '25 years of holding a YWLM' thread from the sidelines this year, my guess is that you hve specifically targeted YWLM ATC in some form of payback. How close is that to the mark...honestly?

C-change

12th Dec 2008, 09:50

I wonder if those that are happy that the RAAF will now provide CAGRS over Christmas, stopped and thought for a moment, that these people who were about to start their holidays TODAY, had their leave cancelled.

Just another great benefit of being a Defence Force member I guess. I'm glad its not me telling the family that they are not going home to see Nan and Pop for X-mas.

That means they will have to take leave some time next year. Probably wont be approved due to lack of staff after the next wave of Asa recruiting happens.
That means less staff, who are already tired, who didn't get a break at Christmas, will be even more tired when the RAAF traffic starts up again on Jan 12.

THATS REAL SAFE ISN'T IT !!!!!!!

While it maybe unfortunate that some controllers have to work over Christmas....hello what do you think essential services do on civy street each and every year.

You don't mind when its a war, natural disaster etc, or when given a bit more notice, but the day you start your leave, come on.

RAAF ATC, at an RAAF BASE (not joint user) is not an essential service on civy street.

Dont anyone complain next year when what's left of RAAF ATC, up and leave. People can only handle being shat on for so long.

ruby tuesday

12th Dec 2008, 09:57

Unfortunately Greedo you won't get a slot on Sunrise like good old Dick so its only his distorted side of the story - although you make more sense...

Greedo

12th Dec 2008, 10:08

mostlytossas...

While it maybe unfortunate that some controllers have to work over Christmas....hello what do you think essential services do on civy street each and every year.You sure are brave saying that type of garbage from behind your psuedonym.

You never will know or understand the sacrifices that these individuals have made for your right to sit there and espouse stupidity.

Go and say that to a Darwin, Townsville, Baghdad, Solomon Is, Balad, East Timor, Somalia, etc. controller that has not only worked over xmas, but has done it thousands of miles away from home..goose.

mostlytossas

12th Dec 2008, 10:43

Geedo..Just what sacrifices have the ATC's made for me at Willy? To my knowledge they control aircraft at a "military airport" in coastal NSW which though is "technically" a military airport is really these days a joint user. Check out newcastle airports web site and see the dozens of RPT flights every week. I have nothing against the RAAF personel personally but if they want to keep it as a RAAF controlled airport then they have to be prepared to staff it. Either that or give it over to civil controllers to operate and move the RAAF base elsewhere as the Newcastle region is only going to get bigger and busier, you or me or anyone else is not going to change that fact.
As for those that say they will leave the RAAF as it is all too hard well do it then. But consider this, by this time next year unemployment is likely to be 10% and you would quiet likely be joining them without the military guarantee of full employment.

Dick Smith

12th Dec 2008, 10:48

CASA were given 12 Months notice by the RAAF that a service would not be provided this Christmas.

It is their fault that Military people had to be called in at the last moment.

Just because CASA is incompetent -does that mean passengers lives should be placed at extra risk?

I have made it very clear during all interviews that the problem was caused by CASA - not the military. Thats why I have thanked the military for correcting a safety problem that they did not create.

An airport that has over 1 million pax per year and 50 k movements with large jets should have an ATC service to cover the peak period in my view. If the ATC service at Tamworth or Camden is open at Christmas why not Newcastle?

Their are a number of airports in Australia that have CAGRO's that should have ATC. I will be doing something about this - just watch.

I do not blame the military controllers for the outdated procedures at Williamtown - I blame the leadership in Canberra that has not allowed modern procedures such as "target resolution" to be introduced.

The safety criteria for establishing risk must not be based in whether or not someone wants to work during the holiday period.

An AsA operated ATC tower could have been organised in the 12 month period- just as previously happened at the Bathurst races. Even if civil controllers were employed at market rates ( ie enough to get them to take the jobs) the cost per passenger would probably be less than $2 - well worth it to stay alive!

Why should airline passengers be forced to take extra risk because of the slackness of those in the CASA OAR to get a tower going in the 12 month period available?

peuce

12th Dec 2008, 20:26

Dick,

.... then, equally, why should the RAAF Controllers be the bunnies who fix up the problems caused by CASA (according to you) ?

Why didn't CASA "force" ASA to provide staff?

Because they obviously calculated that a civilian CAGRO would be sufficient.

The question remains, why did the Minister override CASA's decision?

The answer ... EITHER... CASA got it wrong, therefore heads should roll ... OR .. for political expediency .... then why have CASA ... just let the Minister (or Dick) make all the decisions.

Either way ... its a monumental disgrace all round.

The only ones coming out of this unscathed are the RAAF.

Dick Smith

12th Dec 2008, 21:21

CASA did get it wrong. Byron told me 12 months ago that he would not allow the airport to operate over the Christmas period without ATC. He told me and other members of the Aviation Task Force that the airlines had been informed of this decision.

This decision then required a competent person at CASA to make it clear to the airport operator that Airlines would not be allowed to operate into Williamtown in the peak Christmas period without ATC. This did not happen.

Its clear that the airport operator was told that CASA would water down the decision if everyone procrastinated until there was no time to organise a civilian ATC service. After all CASA was allowing Avalon to operate with 1.5million PAX per year without even a UNICOM- let alone a CAGRO or Class D.

This is exactly what happened.

Many Airline pilots have contacted me with thanks for what has happened. Of course these thanks should go to the Minister for intervening and to the ADF people who are manning the tower with the A/G service - not perfect but better than nothing!

The reason CASA did not "force" AsA to provide staff and ATC is obvious. CASA at the present time is a weak disfunctional organisation that never stands up to anyone powerful. Just look at what is happening with AsA and TIBA at the present time.

I agree that the RAAF is not to blame however they were the only ones who could save the day at the last moment I commend them for this.

max1

12th Dec 2008, 22:37

ASA could not provide the staff for Willy over Xmas.But they should. ASA cannot provide the staff for their own operations.

Civil controllers will be trying to keep airspace open over Xmas (we don't get stand down periods) and good luck to the RAAFies on a break I say.

ASA non-operational staff will be taking their Xmas break as usual. TFN will write his usual New Year message hoping that everyone had a good break and has come back well rested, because he doesn't understand that the techs, firies, Ausfic,ATC, etc are at work 24/7/ 365.

ASA have @3000 staff, 480 (@1 in 6) work in the Alan Woods Building in Canberra, they knock off over Xmas and funnily they are not missed. We had 360 in Canberra (the Aviation centre of the world) in 2002 and have reduced the number of controllers and increased the office staff. TFNs world finishes at his office door.

BTW the notams for Willy have them starting the zone at 2100 UTC (8am local), and they do a good job.

the wizard of auz

12th Dec 2008, 23:15

Why all the whohaa. get a couple of guys (and gals) of the religions that don't celebrate xmas and offer those lads (and ladesses) the work during that period.
no sacrifices being made then as its just another working day for them.:ok:

Dick Smith

12th Dec 2008, 23:44

AsA had 12 months notice to get controllers for Willy. They did nothing because they knew CASA OAR would always re write the safety case to say ATC was not required. A bit like the Wheat Board bureaucrats would re write the invoices to show no commission was being paid.

The reason there is such huge problems in AsA re staffing is that the AsA management know that CASA will take no action- they will even manipulate figures to hide the facts- again like the Wheat Board.

Why are they doing this ? Just as the Wheat Board people thought they were helping our farmers, the CASA people think they are helping the Airlines lower their costs. What other reason could there be?

Re the so called safety case, rather than CASA using the proven FAA establishment formula for class D towers, which we used for 10 years they have "invented" a new formula which is based on subjective opinions and has never been tested or validated. See the legal letter to CASA on the Newcastle thread on my dicksmithflyer website to get details on this.

This allows the Office of Airspace Regulation to manipulate the figures to appease those who don't want to pay for adequate ATC staff levels.

Peter Cromarty , the head of the OAR, hails from the UK CAA and he well knows that in the UK no jet airline is approved to operate without a local ATC tower. I wonder what pressure has been put on him from above that forces him to support the dangerous and risky approach he is taking?

Alan Joyce comes from Ireland, where the Irish CAA requires a tower for all Airline ops, yet he supports 1.5 million pax at Avalon with no Tower!

No doubt the Royal Commission after the inevitable airline accident will uncover all of this. Fortunately we will know who to hold accountable -including the people in the Department who have done nothing or even supported some of the 'non-action' that has taken place.

ruby tuesday

13th Dec 2008, 01:11

Dick - take note there are NOT 50,000 civil movements a year at Willy - 1m pax yes!
See the numbers quoted previously on the thread and stop giving fictitious data - also check your stats - Dec and Jan are a long way from peak periods at Willy....

Ex FSO GRIFFO

13th Dec 2008, 01:44

Hi Dick,

Your Quote,

"Their are a number of airports in Australia that have CAGRO's that should have ATC. I will be doing something about this - just watch."

Care to elaborate on which ones??

Some of these I think have been 'hammered' to death in previous posts - mostly around the VERY expensive costs of the set-up e.g. Suitably rated staff, transfers costs, housing, the NUMBER of staff on duty at any one time vs the ONE now, etc etc not to mention the building of a 'suitable' tower and equipping same....

And all of this to be paid for by........

Ah Well!!:confused::confused:

(I tell ya mate, the ole' AFIZ was the most efficient way to manage those places....CAGRO is 'next best thing'...IMHO)

:)

morno

13th Dec 2008, 02:42

Dick,
You sure do write some rubbish, and come up with some rubbish. But sheesh, this Willytown one is the of the biggest bits of rubbish I have ever seen.

Get over it!

If you want to do something good for aviation, stop trying to make Australia like the United States (I thought you were all for our products being Australian, why is Aviation so different?), and go and hassle Bankstown Airport or something like that.

morno

garudadude

13th Dec 2008, 02:43

Mostlytossas:
As for those that say they will leave the RAAF as it is all too hard well do it then. But consider this, by this time next year unemployment is likely to be 10% and you would quiet likely be joining them without the military guarantee of full employment.

Nice wind-up.... or I hope so.

Sitting in a TWR at Baghdad for 12hrs straight, 42degrees in the shade and anyone with a bbgun taking potshots at them isn't too hard, but cancelling your leave to appease Dick Smith (of all people) is a bit of a kick in the balls / falcon punch.

Nothing like an armchair hero to tell the commissioned officers of our military that they're welcome to cease their underpaid commitment to National Service.

How about some respect?

What do you do on ANZAC day? Take a digger out for Teppanyaki??

Dick Smith

13th Dec 2008, 03:19

Ruby, I did not say all the movements were civil.

The CASA Williamtown Aeronautical Study of Feb 2008 shows on page 11 that "total current movements"- table 4.2 are 51,991.

The study is on my web site.

Morno, Don't you want ATC at Williamtown? Why?

Dick Smith

13th Dec 2008, 03:30

Griffo, I can,t see why a NAS style class D tower would cost much more than a CAGRO.

They also provide a traffic info service between IFR and VFR- just like a CAGRO and the old AFIZ but also provide a runway separation service.

I would prefer a NAS class D service from a currently rated controller any day over an old retired FSO! Then again that's just my opinion.

mostlytossas

13th Dec 2008, 04:07

Garudaude...I have every respect for the military being a Legacy kid from the 60's but that has nothing to do with Willy ATC. Incidentally my father and his 3 brothers all served in WW2 my dad in Nth Africa at El Alamien. All 4 of them were dead before they made 50yrs old. Due to the war? Who knows but odd isn't it as the youngest brother who was too young to enlist and the sister are still alive today in their 80's. As for me no I've never enlisted but could have in Vietnam as I was in the last call up raffle before Whitlam came to power and abolished it. And as for our troops in Iraq I want them home, not getting shot at to please politicians since gone thank god, based on a lie of WMD.
So what do you think Anzac day and rememberance day mean to me ********? Teppanyaki indeed!

peuce

13th Dec 2008, 04:36

Dick,

You can be very frustrating sometimes ...

"...I can,t see why a NAS style class D tower would cost much more than a CAGRO.
..."

Shirley, you must be joking !

Let's just start at item 1: .... what do you think the salary differences are?

As for your patronising ...

" ...I would prefer a NAS class D service from a currently rated controller any day over an old retired FSO!..."

First ...If they were retired, they're wouldn't be employed as CAGROs
Second ... are they old? what are the current CAGRO's ages?
Third ... What are the average ages of current Regional Tower staff?
Fourth ... Aren't the CAGROS rated to perform their duties?

So, to summarise ... in your perfect terminal area utopia ...

You can't be retired ... fair enough
You can't be an ex FSO ...
You have to be "young" ... whatever that is
You have to be a Controller ... fair enough, but who pays ... and how much?

I can see a re-write of the documents and some culling of more than a few old crusty Controllers coming up !

Gundog01

13th Dec 2008, 05:56

in the UK no jet airline is approved to operate without a local ATC tower.
Dick you seem to have forgotten that Britain is a tiny spec of land compared to Australia. They probably only need half a dozen major airports to get everyone within 45mins of an airport. Australian airports are spread over thousands of kilomteres. It simply isn't feasible to have a tower at every aerodrome where jet traffic and RPT operates.

CTAF(R) certainly isn't safe enough either IMHO.

As far as Willy town goes, i hope the glorious defence minister will take time on Xmas and new years day to pay a visit to and perhaps cut some turkey for the defence people who have had their hard earned leave cancelled and will be working to support civilian OPS.

morno

13th Dec 2008, 06:23

Dick,
Sure, I do want ATC at Williamtown. However, if they can survive on weekends without it, why can't they go without it for a couple of weeks over Christmas?

Your arguements are full of holes, and have no cold hard facts. So far everyone has been able to point out defects in your arguement.

The only reason you've won is because you've gone on that stupid Sunrise show, and the uneducated public have believed every word you've said. If the Minister for Defence didn't do anything, then everyone would be asking him why, all based on the incorrect facts that you've gone on about on National TV.

morno

max1

13th Dec 2008, 09:10

morno,

"Dick,
Sure, I do want ATC at Williamtown. However, if they can survive on weekends without it, why can't they go without it for a couple of weeks over Christmas"

You'll find due to an increase in traffic Willy zone HAS been opening over the weekends.(Check the Notams) The RPT traffic is really ramping up. You should check your facts.

Dick Smith

13th Dec 2008, 10:37

Morno, Just a small point, the decision was made by the defence minister before I went on Sunrise. It was probably the factual statements I made on ABC radio Newcastle that swung the argument.

Here's a factual statement - no other country in the world has an airport with the traffic mix of Williamtown operating without ATC.

You may say "who cares" Well I do!

TRA's are for risky activities like airshows - not to protect airline passengers.

max1

13th Dec 2008, 11:04

I have been stating it will be a TRA during certain hours for a few days now.Do you lot read Notams?

When Canberra can't be covered due lack of ATCs they make it a TRA, they (CASA and ASA) obviously believe Williamtown falls under the same criteria as Canberra i.e. if we can't provide control services it justifies TRA 'status' due to traffic.

ToA

13th Dec 2008, 20:32

Congratulations Dick,
Of all the stupid things you’ve said and done over the years, this is the one that’s put you safely in the realm of Mr Men in my eyes, and energised me at least enough to enter the realm of “long time lurker, first time writer”.
You have to understand something, to Joe Public Australian you speak with authority and knowledge and when you say something about air travel safety in this country those people think that you’re speaking gospel truth. Unlike those of us working within both the military and civilian air traffic industries (who realise that you speak on behalf of multi-millionaire private pilot air adventurers…all seven of you) these people believe everything you say. Your words carry power so for the love of all things with holes in them please please please remember to engage brain before putting mouth in gear.
Newcastle airport is NOT Newcastle Airport, it is Royal Australian Air Force Base Williamtown. Newcastle doesn’t have a civilian airport. Those RPT operators that fly in and out do so (or at least should do so) with the full understanding that they are operating under the good graces of the Australian Defence Force who are (or at least were until you opened your mouth on national radio and tv) under no obligation to even allow them to traverse the airspace, let alone land on the runway and drop civilians off or pick them up.
Forget about CASA obligations for civil aerodrome control or RPT services, none of that matters.
The fifth line of the ERSA entry for Williamtown (note please that the only Newcastle entry in the ERSA is for a heliport) states: “AD OPR RAAF”. This airport belongaraaf even more than Tindal, who share joint ops with the Katherine Town Council for crying out loud! It belongs to the RAAF and they have the good graces to let civilians use it. You want to blame anybody, blame the Newcastle city council for not realising that they have sufficient demand in and out of their fair city to warrant a full civilian aerodrome. In fact, further investigation of the ERSA entry shows us (Chapter: LTR Verse: 4) that any civil ops must be in accordance with CAO 20.17 which in summary states that unless the weather is really crap you do what the military tell you to do.
So what have your blustering , backyard lawyer antics and showboating achieved (besides getting me to stay up after a doggo to write and post this)? You have managed to ensure that a group of RAAF ATCs (who are even more overworked in some instances than their civilian counterparts at the moment because they don’t have access to unlimited single sick days if they’re feeling off) who were probably counting down the days to their rostered Christmas leave are now obliged to sit in their dead tower, on an empty base, through the middle of summer waiting for their 62 movements on a weekday and 45 movements on a weekend (source: Newcastle Airport online Scheds) of RPT aircraft, plus whatever itinerant bugsmashers decided to joy-hop around that neck of the woods, happy that they could fly a few sets of touch and goes without suddenly finding a Hornet on their backsides.
As a service brat for my entire youth with an Air Force Dad working logistics and planning I recall the Christmases and Birthdays that passed without his presence. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not going for the sympathy vote here because to a kid that’s just the way things are. Sometimes Dad (or Mum) is there, and sometimes they’re not. But at least you knew that when they weren’t there they were doing something cool like working to defend the country or provide aid to others or (on one memorable occasion) fly a bunch of stranded Aussies back home when Qantas decided they couldn’t. You took it in stride.
But I can’t even begin to imagine how I’d feel if I found out that I blew out birthday candles or unwrapped Christmas presents without Dad because some hyped up private pilot who didn’t know when to wind his neck in had used his unearned sway to make him do unrequired busy-work when he could have been at home.
And then you had the audacity to thank these people! Like they had a choice! That’s like breaking somebody’s legs by yanking the carpet out from under them, and then thanking them in the hospital bed for not wearing out your front lawn by jogging up and down on it.
You’re not a hero. You’re not a consultant. And you’ve been out of the administrative side of things long enough now to not even be an expert. You are a private pilot who bays at the moon. Congratulations. You may be the first civilian in history to have ordered around a country’s armed forces without first seizing the capital in a well-televised coup. I for one hope that for every partner, or lover, family member or child that misses their YWLM RAAF controller this Christmas you cop a nice dose of CAT or windshear on finals.

Dick Smith

13th Dec 2008, 21:16

Toa, but what about the safety of the travelling public-possibly even your loved one's who may be flying into Williamtown over Christmas?

Are you suggesting that because Newcastle Airport Limited, or CASA, or someone, has been negligent that no one should say anything about it?

I note that you do not say it is safe to operate Newcastle Airport without ATC - just that RAAF personnel should not have had to take over after errors by others.

Do you realise I have received many emails from airline pilots who fly into the airport thanking me for my action? They are prohibited by their company from speaking out.

I do appreciate how the lives of the RAAF ATC,s have been effected by the Ministers decision. I,m sorry but I could see no other alternative to my action.

Most importantly, Temporary Restricted Areas were never designed for this use ie in place for a month.The ones used for TIBA are normally only in place for hours.

Starts with P

13th Dec 2008, 21:33

ToA (assuming you are not a troll....)

You are at lease the second person who, on their first and only post, somehow draw a parallel between providing a safe and essential service and the bravery of Service personnel.

The facts are simply that the RAAF allow civilian ops into Williamtown. With that agreement comes responsibility. They were responsible and told CASA they would not be providing a service over Christmas 12 months ago.

CASA responded (kind of), and not CASA's response is being seen as unacceptable by some in the industry.

As a result, the DoD have decided to bring most of the service back to assist with the safety of the traveling public.

But to blame Dick for bring this issue forward and basically calling him a ADF-hater because the RAAFies won't be home is ridiculous.

We all know who's fault this is, and it's not the RAAFs and it's not Dicks.

Dick Smith

13th Dec 2008, 22:25

A most important point is that the RAAF refused to allow civilian controllers in their tower to provide the service. If allowed this could have been organised in the 12 month period.

One of the reasons given by the RAAF was that "warranty" would no longer apply to the equipment if AsA controllers were allowed in the tower. I kid you not- have a look at the FEB 2008 CASA Aeronautical Study on the Newcastle thread on dicksmithflyer.

mostlytossas

13th Dec 2008, 22:40

Toa, You have to be a fool with comments like that. "Williamtown belongs to the RAAF". No it doesn't it belongs my friend to the Australian Government on behalf of the Australian Taxpayer who allow the RAAF use of it as a base. It can and may be taken away any time the Government of the day chooses. That same Government has told the RAAF civil operations are to be conducted at Willy due to the growing needs of the area. Whether you or anyone else like that idea get over it as it is a fact. The RAAF do not allow operations due to there "good grace" they have been ordered to. The same goes with Tindal which you seem to also have a problem with, and any other Military facility that the Government may decide it wants back/joint user.
Now that it is a "joint user" airport (even if still technically military) without GA (that will change in time is my guess) and has high capacity RPT on regular operations it requires ATC. I don't care who provides this civil or military but if the RAAF want to keep control to themselves as you appear to, then they have to staff it. Otherwise Dick is right on this one CASA and AsA should have got controllers in there and in my view leave them there permanently,and make it an official joint user airport.
As for your trite about working over Christmas well I'm sorry too but it is no different to any other essential service on civvie street.
Now before I'm bombarded with replies about how I'm being protected etc please read post#76 I think my family has given enough for awhile thanks certainly enough for me to voice my opinion.

Gundog01

13th Dec 2008, 23:18

CASA and AsA should have got controllers in there and in my view leave them there permanently,and make it an official joint user airport.

Tossa Educate yourself. No joint user airport has any Civilian control element. Townsville, military controllers, Darwin military controllers, Tindal military controllers.

Now that it is a "joint user" airport (even if still technically military) without GA (that will change in time is my guess)

Who really cares about technicalities hey, lob in there with your Cessna and see what sort of response you will get from CASA and the RAAF. HOT TIP: GA will never be at Willytown. Thats what Cessnock, Maitland and Aeropelican are for.

max1

13th Dec 2008, 23:45

Gundog1,
Why not have some civilian contractors in these towers?
Nowra does. Is there a real problem having some civvies in there?
They could operate solo when there is no military flying i.e. over the Christmas shutdown period.
I know quite a few civillian controllers who would jump at the chance to work part-time down Newcastle way.

mostlytossas

13th Dec 2008, 23:50

Oh we are getting pedantic..Joint user as in both civil and military aircraft with their own facilities using same runways ie Canberra, Wagga as well as the military controlled ones. Now the important bit. Will Darwin and Townsville be shutting down ATC over Christmas? No then why Willy? Don't tell me it is due to traffic amounts they all have many high capacity RPT movements.
"Willy will never have GA" maybe?
Schofields and Hoxton Park will never close.

Gundog01

14th Dec 2008, 01:10

Will Darwin and Townsville be shutting down ATC over Christmas? No then why Willy?

The answer to that is simple. >90% of the movements at Townsville and Darin are not Military at all. The majority at Willytown are military.

ASA have managed to staff two International Airports with RAAF (=Government=tax payer funded) controllers. Clearly it is in ASA's best interests to make sure things remain that way. I assume the airport charges from these two facilities are funneled back to the ASA bottom line in some form.

Howabout

14th Dec 2008, 02:33

GD, I don't think it works that way. Airservices can't charge (or at least I believe they can't) for services they don't provide. So, if you use Darwin or Townsville, they can't hit you with an avcharge for, say, an approach or tower service. However, I think there may be some factoring in of charges for use of the aids, eg ILS, which I think are civil-owned.

What you pay is a charge for use of the movement areas, tarmac and terminal, which goes to the civil operator of the facilities. I understand that this is then divied-up and a portion returned to the RAAF for maintenance of the movement areas.

This was explained to me long ago, so maybe someone with more up to date info could confirm/refute my understanding of the way they do it at the joint users.

That said, I am pretty sure that Airservices don't pocket the money for services they don't provide.

ToA

14th Dec 2008, 02:38

Ok first off with the apologies.
My previous email was indeed written in a heated moment post night shift and the brain it came from was not firing on all cylinders. The phrasing did indeed come across disturbingly troll-like and I accept that wishes of turbulence on folk, however frustrating I may find them, are neither helpful nor a great introduction.
So for those specific aspects of the email I apologise.

However, my main point still stands. Williamtown does NOT belong to civilian or general aviation fliers. It is a military airbase. Saying that it belongs to the taxpayer and claiming that somehow entitles joe public and jane passenger to use it is the same as stating that since the ASIO building is a government building funded by the taxpayer we should all be able to kick back in its cafeteria for lunch. Try spouting that line while you push past desk security and see how far it gets you.

Whether we like it or not, the Australian military does indeed have carte blanche control over both some aerodromes and certain sections of airspace, which is why the FUA negotiations have been so delicate and careful and extended. Quite simply, they are under no obligation whatsoever to release anything to civilian use, as much as that may pain the rest of us, and should be free to operate their facilities as they see fit.

The problem is simply that Newcastle does not have a civilian aerodrome. Whatever the reasons are behind the increased traffic levels of RPT and GA aircraft into and out of RAAF Willytown reaching their current numbers is irrelevant (...hmm, not sure that sentence makes perfect sense...but you see what I mean).

Basically we have been allowed to play in the neighbour's pool, in fact they even went so far as to install a lifeguard for us. And now we're having a temper tantrum because they've had the temerity to want to take a break over Christmas? It's not even as if they've locked up the pool (which they are unfortunately entitled to do), they've just stopped watching us dive off the board.

At least they thought they were allowed to dictate the way their own pool was used. As it turns out though, we've managed to bully them back into cancelling their holiday and (to push an already overly stretched metaphor to its limits) sit in their little lifeguard chair while the rest of the family relaxes at the beach.

I just don't think this is a proud moment for GA and RPT in Australia

ToA

14th Dec 2008, 02:53

An additional apology to "tossas" and others that believe me to be an RAAF apologist. This isn't the case. My background is civvy-side. But I approach it with a pragmatism borne of experience in dealing with civvy/military airspace liaison.
My problem here isn't even really the specific issues of Newcastle civvy aviation.
It's the concern that one private citizen is able to redirect Defence Force resources by blustering loudly enough in the popular press.
No the current situation with Willytown is not ideal. The lack of a civilian presence in a city large enough to support 60+ RPT movements per day (plus any number of GA movements) is something that should be rectified.
However, as the vocal amongst us have pointed out, this has hardly been sneaking up on us. We've all had 12 months notice of the pending problem, and even if we waited for some solution, surely we must have realised by the middle of the year that no serious remedy was being undertaken?
Eleventh hour knee-jerks just don't seem particularly helpful to me.

POST SUBMISSION EDIT: My first reply to this thread was held pending approval, so the "an additional apology" bit might seem strange. We'll see if it gets through, and if not I'll try again.

C-change

14th Dec 2008, 03:50

A couple of points.

1. YWLM is there as a fighter base. Its been there since WWII. End of story.

2. Newcastle Airport operates because DoD allows them to and realises the economic benefit to all. A condition of growth in 98 was 6 RPT moves per hour (B190 & JA31/32). Haven't seen it renegotiated anywhere.

3. Reason it is NOT JOINT USER is because four squadrons are based at Willy. Sure, you can move it but how many BILLIONS do you want to spend. If those bloody expensive jets ($12K p/hr) are not given priority, the bill for training (paid by mostlytossas) goes up and then you all whinge about Defence wasting money, but you also want the best knucks in the world !!!

4. Also back in 98 a plan was developed for a civilian airport to be built on Kooragang Is. It didn't happen due cost, as Stockton bridge had to go.

5. RAAF Twrs use ADATS and AsA uses TAAATs. They are two very different ATC computer sytems and it takes time to learn how to use them correctly (months, not days). You just can't jump form a B737 to A380 because your a pilot. Also, if defence let non-trained personnel utilise the equipment and something broke, guess what happens, see you in court boys,not to mention unions. Plus more CTAF because RAAF can't use their equipment because the supplier will not fix it. Its a legal issue, you all know how it works.

6. WLM is moving towards 7 day ops just like TVL but it requires staff and time. TVL has 30 staff for 7 day ops but WLM had 20 and 5 left in late 2008. Do the maths. RAAF and AsA are both having staff problems.

THE MAIN POINT IS;
people have forgetton that whilst CARGS (better than CTAF-R) will now be manned by RAAF ATC staff over X-mas. These same staff will also have to resume full ATC servcies on 12 Jan. That will mean all the usual RPT, plus the refreshed fighter pilots getting back up to speed after a four week break.

All of this traffic will be controlled by some very tired and fatigued controllers in 2009.

How does this improve aviation safety?

Did the minister or anyone else conduct an AVRM (Aviation risk management) on this?

I bet if someone did there would be plenty of highly likelys' and catastrophic's in it.

Sometimes people become so focused in what they are trying to acheive, that they forget to take a step back and look at the big picture.

peuce

14th Dec 2008, 04:47

C-Change .... makes sense to me!

Howabout ... freudian(fraudian) slip perhaps?

" That said, I am pretty sure that Airservices don't pocket the money for services they don't provide. "

Ah ... TIBA? :E

mostlytossas

14th Dec 2008, 05:07

C-change, I assume you are a RAAFie you make sense, that is one of the better posts I have read on the subject. Thanks for that. Don't know if I agree on the legal/ what if it breaks/ supplier won't fix it bit though.
So we are back to square 1.
1.High density RPT need 7day 52weeks /yr ATC.
2. The RAAF don't they knock off for 4weeks each Christmas.(don't tell the Japs it will be Pearl Harbour again)....just joking
So how is this fixed so this doesn't happen again next year without costing billions?
The way I see it either the RAAF has to build up ATC numbers quickly (I note it is intended) or they have to let and train civil ATC's to use the precious military system on non RAAF days ie weekends and Christmas, Easter breaks etc. Though there are still a few non radar towers around the place. What can't be allowed to happen is the just recent senario of "well we are standing down now but you can't come into our tower and use it either"
There are only 2 certain items that will not change in the near future especially if we are in for a recession. There will not be a new civil airport or a new RAAF base.

C-change

14th Dec 2008, 06:22

MT,
Ex RAAFie, 20yrs, got sick of having time off cancelled and missing time with the family. Not trying to sound like a whinger but it got to me in the end and I made a family based decision and left. No regrets.

Re the Legal stuff, here is an example. Can't mention the company name but when the ATC gear was installed a while back, there was an issue with Air con refrigerant gas in the Radar cabins, underneath the Radar heads. In some cabins it wasn't the new Aus Std R104 gas and Defence were not allowed to accept them. Because it wasn't in the contract, the company refused to change it. It ended up in court and took 4 years to sort out. During that 4 yrs, one RAAF base operated without their local radar and relied on surrounding civil radar.

Agree 100% on RPT and ATC, so does all ATC but cannot be done without trained staff. Thats another 50 threads alone but a short version, overseas ATC pay big bucks and Asa staff leave for better pay and conditions. AsA look to RAAF controllers in short term and offer better pay than RAAF (up 45K pa) and better conditions (argueable). RAAF usually unaware of pending departures, due staff not wanting to ruin future career if the return or change mind and management get little notice.

The way I see it either the RAAF has to build up ATC numbers quickly (I note it is intended) or they have to let and train civil ATC's to use the precious military system on non RAAF days ie weekends and Christmas, Easter breaks etc
Yes, they are trying hard to train and retain staff but it takes about two years, with all the training, before you can use someone. Problem is not enough apply, pass testing or make the grade, plus people will always leave for other reasons. That could all change with the current global situation and the job security offered by defence again becomes attractive.

As for AsA staff in the RAAF Twrs, probably never happen for several reasons.
They don't have the staff for their own sectors and AsA Twrs plus AsA make money for the Gov. and would/do charge Defence a fortune for the service.
Security issues, non defence employees having access to Defence establishment. I know people will laugh at this but unless you have dealt with Defence Security people, they will never allow it to happen.
Also Defence want their people to be exposed to military traffic so they are used to operting with them in deployed areas. Iraq, ME etc.

Defence looked at contracting Southern Bases (NWA, ESL, EDN, RIC) to AsA so RAAF ATC could concentrate effort on remaining bases but cost was too high. Southern Bases to be manned by Aust. Public Service ATC, employed by Defence (vacancies recently advertised).

What can't be allowed to happen is the just recent senario of "well we are standing down now but you can't come into our tower and use it either"

They didn't. As Dick pointed out, Casa and others were advised 12 months ago. A solution was found (whilst not liked by all) and changed last minute by the minister. If WLM had all its staff, they would have provided full ATC over X-mas, just like TVL does but without the staff something has to give.

I feel bad for the boys and girls at Willy that just received a red hot poker for X-mas. They also have to watch each others backs next year when the traffic ramps up again.

I'll bet some of them are contemplating a move to AsA and this may have sealed the deal for them with the flow on effect to be less ATC services at Willy. Anyway I hope this helps.

BTW, I for one appreciate the sacrifices your family have made.

No Further Requirements

14th Dec 2008, 06:22

The civvy guys in defence ATC units are Australian Public Service, employed by the Depertment of Defence. I'm pretty sure that means they are covered by the warranty issue. No matter how we look at it, we need more controllers. But they are leaving in droves, and not just for other ATC jobs. I'd guess around 20-30% are either retiring outright, or have moved into another career. It just goes to show how the passion for doing the job has been slowly beaten out of people.

Back to topic, I just hope this is the last time we have to debate this kind of thing about WLM. Again, CASA/ASA/DoD have 12 months to work it out. My money's on another knee-jerk decision approaching Christmas.

Cheers,

NFR.

C-Change - good work mate. Weather's fine here.

Dick Smith

14th Dec 2008, 07:14

I say again, AsA had 12 months to install a tower and employ controllers at market rates. This charge would simply be passed on to the Airport Operator to be on charged to the pax.

AsA did nothing because they new CASA would water down the requirements with a fake safety case at the last moment. This is exactly what happened.

Until we get competent people with ethics and leadership abilities in the CASA OAR we will get nowhere.

This will probably only happen after an accident.

Plazbot

14th Dec 2008, 07:30

Let us be clear that it was CASA that dropped the ball not the RAAF or AsA. Remember who makes the rules these days.

mostlytossas

14th Dec 2008, 08:21

C-Change, Ok well put you've converted me.
I can see we will end up like Dick just said, 2 towers for 1 runway.
Only we still aint got anyone to put in them.
We must be the laughing stock of the western world.
What am I saying? I know we are.Just look at our fast diminishing manufacturing industry. We reduce tarriffs that protect our own then hope everyone else will do the same. Fair Dinkum my old dad would roll over in his grave if he knew what's going on.

Chief galah

14th Dec 2008, 09:08

This debate just shows how screwed up the system now is.

When I worked as a lacky clerk for the great people in DCA Airways Operations Branch (Jack Walsh, Ian Rolley, Ray Soden, Ray Aleaxander, Ray Clarke...etc) in the early 70's, the policy was turbo jet RPT had to have ATC, even if it meant there was only going to be two or four movements a day. Broome and Devonport were projects at the time. The tax payer footed the bill. The expertise to oversee the operation was there. For other reasons, those projects never got up, but Karratha, Albury and Wagga did.

It was over the top in terms of policy, but that's how it was. At least there was a policy.

The difference now is that the vested interests have changed. Dick, I recall, restructured the then CAA, under the banner of "affordable safety". In doing so, we now have the decimated CASA that today does not have the resources to manage the real time need for change.

Airservices have gone the same way, but the difference is that they're profit motivated. They have seen fit to decimate the coal face to put in a highly paid level of management who cannot control planes and who are incapable of managing projects. What happens above them, God only knows.

How does the tune go.......?"............what are they good for! Absolutely NOTHIN' "

What is the CAGRO at AV supposed to achieve. Some wag thinks a third person in the loop may make the difference. Well, in terms of the primary mitigators, they have no influence. They cannot know if an aircraft is on the wrong frequency, or a transponder is not on etc etc. The weather's available on the AWIB, so why are they there? The irony is, those chaps are extremely qualified and experienced ex Tower controllers who could do the full separating job on their heads. Ya gotta laugh.

One can understand why the airlines don't want to pay for the "service" when no-one else is going to. This is Dicks great contradiction. They pay but he (or GA) doesn't.

The legalities of Airservices personnel manning military facilities is all another ball game. No doubt the obstacles can be hurdled, but neither CASA, DoD or AsA have the resources or know how or competence or just plain motivation to do so. AsA certainly doesn't have the controllers to do it anyway.

So, if it ends in a coroners court, the same old whingers, backed by an army of legal buzzards, will still be out there, just as they are now with a current case.

Rant off, have a Merry, Merry Xmas everyone.

max1

14th Dec 2008, 09:24

Listen up, Willy HAVE been operating on weekends for months due to traffic.Check the Notams.
Newcastle(Willy RAAF) are no longer Mon-Fri bankers hours with POETS day on Friday. This crowd work hard.
Throw some civvies in there to help them out.
There are a hell of a lot of us (me included) who would be happy to leave the toxic environment of ASA to work part-time down there to facillitate the provision of services outside Willys' core hours.

C-Change you are correct ASA have dropped the ball, they no longer think of themselves as an Air Nav Service Provider but as a business, the dollar is God.
Future prediction- they are moving towards an upper airspace/lower airspace model.
Upper airspace (separation=dollars) lower airspace(traffic statement=no dollars) they will then ask the government (only shareholder) to subsidise the loss making area (regional).

mostlytossas

14th Dec 2008, 09:46

This is a bit off topic but why is it so hard to recruit ATC trainees?
I mean I would have thought it would be a great job for any school leaver with an interest in aviation. How hard can it be to learn if as I'm led to believe it takes 2 years to train one. It takes 4 years to train an apprentice and even then they are raw just as an ATC'er would be but that's where working with experianced guys come in. I believe you only need HRC to get in as with a trade these days ( the technical trades anyway) and I bet the maths is a lot less.
I always here kids say there are no jobs for school leavers, why can't the powers that be start tapping into that resource?
I would have thought a full time job even on a training wage would beat part time at the supermarket or servo.

Dick Smith

14th Dec 2008, 10:32

Galah, believe it or not , you only need one person to make a decision at CASA so that a tower service is provided.

That one person obviously does not exist.

Put more people on and there will be even less chance of a decision!

ToA

14th Dec 2008, 11:42

Agree with C-Change completely (who put it much more diplomatically than I did with my first rant - once more, apologies for that).
Willy is DOD and its provision of service and allowances for civvy aviation into a military airbase may have actually done more harm than good in the long run, by allowing for the band-aid fix of getting RPT/GA in and out without raising eyebrows or questions.
Why pay for a completely civvy airfield when you have RAAF tarmac you can use and blue-shirted controllers you can talk to? Well maybe because every Chrissie the ADF goes into stand-down mode (or at least it tries to)

I'm also a little unsure about two towers/one airstrip as an answer. That may solve the ATC issue, but not the airfield ownership one. Should the RAAF be mobilised for any reason and Willy goes full operational then DOD can (and is of course fully entitled to) simply close the airfield to all non-military aircraft. Sure it's a worst case scenario, but they sometimes happen.
IMHO the answer is for Newcastle Council to bite the bullet and realise that RPT and GA demand warrants a proper civilian airfield, independent of the vagaries of military responsibility.

As for ATC recruitment. The issue appears (as with all things aviation related) to be made up of many different facets. However the chief of these seem to be:
a) The initial aptitude testing hasn't really changed in content in the last 10-15 years (at least), despite the changes to ATC systems, the removal of old-school flight strip procedural control and a focused move away from the ENROUTE to APPROACH to TOWER ziggarut and towards aptitude streaming (hey if you're great at being a tower controller maybe you shouldn't be forced into the enroute section you can't hack just because that's the way it's always been done)
Short version, the feeling these days is that the testing is too difficult and returning the wrong kind of trainee (course attrition rates are still huge, way over %50)
b) There's simply not the money in it in Australia that there is overseas. Those school-leavers truly serious about a career in ATC scan foreign countries before ever turning to the ASA page, and
c) Even if we suddenly found ten times the number of wiling and able students, ASA simply don't have enough people to train them.

max1

14th Dec 2008, 22:06

ToA,
Bit of thread drift here, but the move away from controllers having exposure to all streams Enroute/Tower/ then Approach had nothing to do with aptitude and everything to do with cutting training costs, saving money.
This has led to a lack of a career path for controllers and further disenchantment with the job.

There are people who have been on the same sectors for 10-20 years. To put it in a flying context. Say Qantas hired a pilot and the pilot found out that to save costs he/she would be a Dash8 FO and will fly SY-CB-SY twice a day , 4 on 2 off.

This pilot after years of service, doing extra in the office, giving up their days off to help out, etc then applies for Command but finds out that due to a lack of F/Os they cannot be released to take up Command training even though they are number 1 on the applicant list.

However number 19 (from outside the organization or currently flying a desk) is the first one that they can release and gets the spot. This is what has been happening at ASA for years.

You get a better type of controller when they have had exposure to all the streams, think about the efficiencies if the Surface Movement Controller(SMC) at Sydney is smart enough to sequence the aircraft to the holding points, or intersection departures so that you get a good mix of Northbound/Southbound/ jet/ turbo props. If the Aerodrome Departures Controller (ADC) is aware of the Radar Departures job that they may be giving them a bunch of headaches depending on how they fire off the mix of departures.

Even in the enroute stream, you can make a difference down the track to another controller if you realise that, of the 2 aircraft you are sending off radar that the leading aircraft who is higher will be wanting descent first but there will be no separarion standard to do this, so you swap the levels of the two aircraft to save a problem down the track. The reason you know this is because you have been the poor scmuck who has been handed this before.

P.S. Where could you put an airport close enough to Newcastle that would allow RPT jet operations, and wouldn't conflict with Willy airspace?

mostlytossas

15th Dec 2008, 04:46

C-Change or Toa, Please tell me this, Willy is a fighter base I know but I believe a training base, right or not? Why does it have to be at Newcastle or has is just always been so why change it?
Why couldn't the entire Raaf base be relocated to Edinburgh as there is plenty of land around it to accomodate the extra infrastructure along with the Orions ( believe me Edinburgh aint busy).
That then allows Willy to become a civil airport.
I know we still need more controllers but that problem we have whatever we do but we won't need to spend billions either as both airports are existing and only need upgrading.
The Raaf are free to do their thing undisturbed.
Newcastle has a proper airport.
Now blow me out the water.........
PS no need to apologise before Toa it is all good healthy debate

Howabout

15th Dec 2008, 05:20

Peuce - A bloody big 'BOOM BOOM!'

Should have occured to me, but didn't.

I've just gotta ask why Dick is devoting so much time to Newcastle with CAGRO, when TIBA scares the crap out of me a hell of a lot more when I'm down the back and don't know whether I'm subject to ATC or survival by russian roulette.

Dick Smith

15th Dec 2008, 05:50

TIBA also scares me greatly. I am doing every thing I can about this behind the scenes. In the case of Newcastle it was obvious that CASA had failed us and public exposure could save the day.

The experts also tell me there is a far greater chance of a mid air below 5000' than above.

Notice Bruce Byrons "spin" press release on my web site.

With a leader like that there will be no chance of fixing the safety problems until after an accident.

Howabout

15th Dec 2008, 06:08

Thanks Dick. The TIBA issue is fraught and, if the stuff I have read is true, it's seems that things are only going to get worse.

C-change

15th Dec 2008, 10:36

Mt,
Willy has two roles. It is a training base but it is also a fully operational fighter base. Without going into too much detail, the squadrons are broken into two training and two operational squadrons, with another operational sqn up in good old Tindal.
It was located there at the end of WWII due to its then room but also its proximity to Syd. Remember we are going back to P51 days. In the same sense today, that fighter base still covers the bulk of the population, within an hour or so flying time. Thats why it will not move anywhere soon. They can be over Syd pretty quickly if need be or as they did in the Comm. games, a sqn was based at ESL and flew CAPS over Melbourne.

Yes, in principle the base could be moved but rightly so, there would be a national outcry. The amount of infrastructure on that base is massive. All the support, maintenance, logistics etc is huge and it would run into 1 or 2 Billion real quick if it was relocated. Remember the Seasprite was just one aircraft type and that cost 1 billion on its own. Nth of that RWY is a little city based around fairly heavy industry. The economic benefit to the Newcastle community is huge and both state and fed gov. realise it. The money a military base brings to the local community is massive. Thats why Hawksbury city council kick up a stink every time there is talk of RIC moving. They want it to stay put just like the councils around Willy do.

Also ( I know this will get some reactions) but why should the tax payer fund a massive relocation of a major fighter base to appease a private corporation ? Lets face it, they don't and didn't spend a cent to build or maintain the base but get the RWYS, lights, ATC (when avbl) for jack **** and make a bucket load of money in the process.

Then there is the massive chunk of airspace east of the coast that they use to practice how best to kill each other, whilst head to head at closing speeds greater than 1000kts. They needs lots of room, its close to home in the event of any problems and would be almost impossible to acquire that amount of airspace somewhere else these days without causing a riot. Yes, you could move it all to the NT but we wouldn't have many fighter pilots either. Its not everyones cup of tea up there. EDN could also be used but they would need to travel further to operate over water, which is the majority of there ops.

Mate the list could go for another week but of course it could be done and if the elected ministers said to defence "move it", then it would happen but the cost would be masssive.

In regards to Newcastle Airport, go back 10-15 yrs when todays traffic was first predicted and our Gov. could/should have built a seperate civilain airport to service the Hunter region and we wouldn't have this problem.
Thats now very unlikely to happen and a solution has to be found and it can still work well if resourced properly. There is no reason why another RWY couldn't be built, except for the NIMBY brigade, there are heaps of options.

That alone is another thread on how poorly treated aviation infrastructure is in this country. Have a look at BK, HOX etc. The land is worth money to developers and nothing else.

Anyway enough from me, like you said, good healthy debate.
C

redleader78

15th Dec 2008, 11:25

c change well said.:ok: have nothing to do with the military but the sort of details you provide speaks volumes to me. :D

mostlytossas

15th Dec 2008, 11:41

Ok C-Change thanks for your time and effort you have excelled once again.I have my head around the problem now.I have the feeling what the Minister of Defence should have done is told AsA to either provide ATC for 4 weeks even from a temporary tower like they do at airshows etc or the airport is closed and carried through with it. The public outcry would have got their arses moving. Trouble is the politicians would have taken the blame if the airservice stopped and we can't have that now can we.
The country is stuffed, we are run by a bunch of useless incompetent overpaid wimps.:ugh:

Dick Smith

15th Dec 2008, 21:04

The problem is not with the Minister for Defence but with the CASA Office of Airspace Regulation.

Everyone knew that they would keep producing fake safety cases to allow the airport to operate without ATC - and thats what happened.

Here to Help

16th Dec 2008, 05:33

Question for Dick:

Will the RAAF CAGRO at Williamtown be using the radar display for traffic information purposes? I didn't think that radar was part of the service. Aircraft need to be positively identified if you are going to provide such a service. Brisbane Centre (125.7), who hold the radar ident on IFR aircraft in and out, will not be coordinating at all with the Willy CAGRO.

Dick Smith

16th Dec 2008, 05:51

I was told that the military CAGRO will be looking at a display from the approach radar.

This means if an aircraft gives an incorrect position report or does not give one at all the operator may be able to give a safety alert.

I understand it also has a primary display so non transponder aircraft may be visible on the display.

Also an experienced operator may be able to warn a pilot re a CFIT potential problem, ie why are you at 500' 10 miles out?

Of course it should be proper ATC - but CASA allowed that chance to be missed.

Here to Help

16th Dec 2008, 06:13

Thanks Dick. I'm just trying to figure out how it will work. Without coordination with Brisbane Centre, the operator won't know for sure what transponder codes will be issued to what IFR (or VFR doing Flight Following) aircraft. How will the system couple an aircraft callsign with an aircraft code?

When you speak of CFIT, the underlying assumption is that the mode C altitude readout of the aircraft has been verified. This is why ATC asks a/c to "verify level"/"verifiy altitude". Again, without a positive ident or verification of level, I don't know how a CAGRO can provide the service.

GaryGnu

16th Dec 2008, 08:03

Dick,

I find great irony in your reaction to CASA OAR decisions.
Prior to your monumentally successful (not) NAS policy, Airservices Australia managed airspace internally (I make no comment on how well it did that job).

Post NAS the Department (DOTARS at the time) created a dedicated airspace policy section and publicly stated that never again would they allow someone from outside the Government or bureacracies (i.e. you) to make decisions on airspace policy.

So what did we get, a dedicated airspace policy section inside Airservices (AERU) with associated staff and costs, an explicit Arspace Act (2007) and Australian Airspace Policy Statement (2007) accompanied by a Senate RRAT Committee Inquiry and ulitmately the establishment of a separate section in CASA (OAR).

You should be proud of the lengths the Government went to keep you out of airspace policy. It appears it may not have been as successful as they hoped, but there is no accounting for Ministers' scared of an adverse headline.

Now as I understand it, you take issue with OAR's relativley qualitative risk-based study approach that is applied on a case by case basis. You seem to prefer a straight quantitative approach using establishment and disestablishment criteria.

OARs current approach has its genisis in the AERU. When it came time to discuss CASR Part 71 (remember that - it is no longer due to the creation of the above mentioned apparatii) the use of trigger criteria for the classification of airspace or other levels of service (eg CTAF (R) or CAGRS) was strongly opposed by the GA lobby. They preferred the qualitative risk based approach that AERU were developing. The "heavy" end were in favour of trigger criteria. As it transpired a risk-based, case by case study approach was preferred in the AAPS and used by the OAR.

Who knows what the result would be if the trigger criteria approach was preferred? My guess is that it would not be what you think.

To all,

What is the difference between the situation on December 10th described in the CASA press release:

The procedures being used during the holiday period are an enhancement of those used every weekend at Newcastle when air traffic control is not provided.

Between 13 December 2008 and 10 January 2009 there will be a CASA-certified air-ground radio operator to provide pilots with traffic and other information seven days a week. It will be mandatory for pilots to contact the radio operator and all aircraft must carry and use radar transponders.

and now. Is it merely that the RAAF ATC staff are providing a CAGRS or are they providing ATS in accordance with Class C airspace?

C-change

16th Dec 2008, 09:45

Ref the RAAFATC staff performing CAGRS, yes they can use the radar display and yes ,you will be idientified if your IFR and filed a plan.

Remember they are ATC's using the system they are trained to use day in day out when active.

The ADATS system works the same regardless of the service you are provided. You submit your plan, it is addressed at Ausfic in BN Centre and sent electronically to all relevant ATC units just like an e-mail. Each ATC unit has its own unique address. The computer recevies your plan and when your within a set parameter from the field, your label is displayed on the screen for the controller. The code is generated by each centre 45 mins prior to your departure and is correlated to your SSR return once airborne and a label displayed. All your departures, changes to ETD, nav gear, rego etc, it all comes through into our displays. As you will have been issued a discrete 4 digit code for an IFR flight, the ATC doing Cagrs can still use your label and radar identification will be monitored. There is nothing to stop the RAAF Cagro passing you radar derived traffic info and mode C info. Rememeber they are rated and endorsed controllers performing this task. Also if VFR and you call at Nobbies for eg, you could again be issued a code from the Willy ADATS bin and this can be used. I'm not sure how they will run it but this is done at other units. Its only a couple of clicks on the screen to get a code. Also all Military radars are primary and SSR, so they will see you.

From a controllers point of view most of us don't like doing Cagrs and its actually very difficult not to jump in and control the traffic. Defineately better than CTAF but very frustrating actually when a simple heading or change of level can maintain separation but when doing Cagrs, we are not allowed to control acft, just update the traffic. Personally I would much rather take the airspace and control, it can be less work and traffic is positively separated. My opinion only.

Hope this helps.

For Toa and Mostly tossas, here are acouple of links about Willy.

http://www.maitlandmercury.com.au/news/local/news/general/raaf-put-in-jeopardy/1380063.aspx (http://www.maitlandmercury.com.au/news/local/news/general/raaf-put-in-jeopardy/1380063.aspx) Recent article from Def. Minister

http://cust.idl.com.au/0999000010/paul/raaf.htm (http://cust.idl.com.au/0999000010/paul/raaf.htm) Bit of an old site but good history of the base.

http://www.airforce.gov.au/bases/williamtown.aspx (http://www.airforce.gov.au/bases/williamtown.aspx) RAAF website

http://www.portstephens.nsw.gov.au/files/64910/File/PSCEconomicDevStrategy.pdf (http://www.portstephens.nsw.gov.au/files/64910/File/PSCEconomicDevStrategy.pdf) Port Stephens Shire Council report, have a look at chap 6

Dick Smith

16th Dec 2008, 09:49

If AsA or CASA OAR , or anyone, are going to "invent" a new form of safety study it must be validated. This has not happened.

As Prof. O'Neill has said, "-subjective judgements can be very inaccurate"-

You have te be suspicious of a "safety study" which shows that Williamtown can operate without even a class D tower.

At least the radio operator at Williamtown will now be in the tower and have the assistance of a radar display.

And why would "the Government" want to keep any particular individual out of " airspace policy" - especially an individual who wants the policy set using a strict scientific criteria?

Could it be so those who resist change a catered for? I reckon so!

By " Government, do you mean the "Department" ?

garudadude

16th Dec 2008, 10:05

Mostlytossas,
Your ignorance when it comes to those that defend Australia is astounding. I thought your reply to my last post was pure wind-up material.... I didn't reply because I thought it would show that you actually had me 'hook, line and sinker' for a while there (in the parlance of our times).
'My Dad and Uncles served in WW2, so I'm Mr Military!' Classic!! :ok:
Williamtown is Australia's major Fighter Base as well as the centre for excellence for FAC. It was there first, if you don't like the RAAFies using it, then pony up some tax dollars to put in a parallel rwy.
You can't poach kids from TAFE to become ATC either... the two qualities required are called SA and capacity. You cannot train either, you appear to have neither.
See you at the sushi bar.;)
GD

C-change

16th Dec 2008, 10:45

Dick,
What was the "safety study" that you refer to and do you have a link to it?

I'm curious to see what process was used by CASA and if the resulting fatique for the WILLY Atcos, when all traffic returns, was included in any risk assessment.

crisper

16th Dec 2008, 11:24

As Prof. O'Neill has said, "-subjective judgements can be very inaccurate"-
yeah Dick.... have a good hard look at that

peuce

16th Dec 2008, 21:29

Silly question time ....

So, the Willy Controllers have been recalled to provide a CAGRO service from their exisiting Controller Workstations, using their exisiting Radar Displays ...

Why aren't they just providing their normal Control function ?

Dick Smith

16th Dec 2008, 21:32

Here is an interesting point. I have always understood that when the military do some training at Avalon – even in a King Air - they pay to have the tower manned. That is, they don’t want to fly around without controlled airspace.

I also understand it is the same with the C-17 when flying at tower airports – they either man the tower, or pay to have it manned.

Does anyone know the military regs in relation to this? Are they based on protecting passenger carrying operations, and if so is there an inconsistency in relation to the Christmas stand down at Williamtown?

By the way, I notice that the NOTAM says the airspace can become active at any time. Is this to become active to protect military transport aircraft?

Dick Smith

16th Dec 2008, 22:17

C-change, have a look at the CASA Williamtown Aeronautical Study February 2008 and Williamtown Review October 2008 reports (see here (http://www.dicksmithflyer.com.au/cat_index_53.php)).

Note that fatigue was not included, and they did not even look at the safety advantages of radar in preventing Controlled Flight Into Terrain accidents.

It is interesting to note that the chart shown on the last page of the October 08 report does not show where the figures came from.

QSK?

16th Dec 2008, 22:24

Dick:

Twice on this thread you have made the following statement (my emphasis):....CASA would water down the requirements with a fake safety case at the last momentThese statements demonstrate how irrational you really can be on occasions and, if I was in charge of CASA, I would seriously consider taking legal action against you for possible defamation as your comments seem to be implying that CASA personnel are intentionally and corruptly abusing their powers and established due process. If these emotional statements are a true reflection of your normal thought processes and maturity, I am staggered that the previous Australlian Government ever saw fit to allow you to hold positions of seniority and influence in the previous CAA and CASA.

There is no doubt that safety cases can, on occasions, be flawed in that they were based on incorrect data or invallid assumptions but, in my experience, they are always conducted with the best of intentions by safety management staff and are NEVER FAKED as there are too many checks and balances within the Government system that prevent this from happening. In any case, Dick, do you honestly believe that anybody inside CASA would seriously put their whole career on line by faking a single safety case on something as insignificant as CAGRS vs ATC at Newcastle? Get real Dick, your comments are a good example of conspiracy theoretics at its worst!

In my personal view, the only flaw that I can see in Australia's aviation safety management processes is that some Government ministers and agencies are still failing to identify Dick Smith as the biggest single threat to the advancement of a safe and affordable aviation environment for Australia.

Dick Smith

17th Dec 2008, 00:10

QSK, you are bringing up some interesting points on a very serious issue.

There is no doubt that safety cases can, on occasions, be flawed in that they were based on incorrect data or invallid assumptions but, in my experience, they are always conducted with the best of intentions by safety management staff and are NEVER FAKED as there are too many checks and balances within the Government system that prevent this from happening.

The same could have been said about the Wheat Board when the bureaucrats were writing fake invoices to hide the secret commissions to Saddam Hussein.

You state:

In any case, Dick, do you honestly believe that anybody inside CASA would seriously put their whole career on line by faking a single safety case on something as insignificant as CAGRS vs ATC at Newcastle?

Yes, I do, in exactly the same way as bureaucrats put their careers on the line so Australia could sell wheat to Iraq. What other explanation could there be?

The reason CASA does not take any action in relation to my statements about fake safety cases is because they know that my comments are true. For example, why don’t they even make a public announcement in relation to this? Bruce Byron put out an announcement in relation to Williamtown being safe under a civil operated air/ground – just before the Minister decided to instruct the military to come back and offer a service using the radar displays.

I’ll give you one proven example of how they fake a safety case. One of the most important safety mitigators given to allow Williamtown to operate without air traffic control over the Christmas period was the fact that general aviation pilots had been educated on how to fly through the airspace outside the hours of Defence operation.

Look at the CASA October 2008 Williamtown Review here (http://www.casa.gov.au/oar/download/williamtown_oct08.pdf). Look at the Executive Summary on page 3. Paragraph 1.4 states:

The controls put in place since the 2007/2008 POS for the hours outside of Defence provided ATC and which were in effect at the time of review included:
b. Defence and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA)
had developed and published, in the AOPA magazine, guidelines
for transiting Williamtown airspace. (My underlining).

As shown in my solicitor’s letter to CASA (see here (http://www.dicksmithflyer.com.au/DS_to_Byron_re_Newcastle.php)), this is a blatant lie.

The only “guidelines” published in the AOPA magazine were in relation to the airspace when it was active and a clearance was required. When this was pointed out to CASA in my solicitor’s letter, they simply stonewalled, did not answer the question, and maintained their safety study was accurate.

I can assure you that these people are going down the same line as those at the Wheat Board. It is really sad and I just hope it will be rectified before a major accident occurs.

mostlytossas

17th Dec 2008, 02:08

QSK You say Government dept's never fake reports? What do you call WMD then 5 odd years later and god knows how many needless lives lost and maimed. Then there is the children overboard, even the Navy were trying to correct the reports but were told to shutup.
Having worked in the public service in a past life I can tell you it goes on all the time. Usually not a blatant lie like the above ( the Howard Govt perfected that ) it usually goes something like this. The Govt decides it would like a certain outcome so it makes that known to the relevant dept's. These public servants then go about doing the govt's bidding by having surveys, consulative meetings,etc with all different interest groups but, and here's the the important bit they keep control and only they know what everyone else proposed. They then formulate a proposal or three, option A,B,C etc with advantages, pro's and con's etc and only put the bits in it that suit their favored outcome. This is then presented to the Govt with the recommendation of option B being accepted for instance, which is of course the result they wanted to start with.
Beutiful aint it? If anyone complains after they say indignantly,but you were all consulted!
Sometimes the Dept's do this themselves and keep the Minister in the dark until the last minute to achieve the desired result too. After all realistically rarely does the minister of the day know much about the Dept he is responsible for or the work they do anyway. Depending on who is in Government at any time the members usually come from farmers, small business, unions, lawyers (heaps of them) or like Downer from father to son.
Most us mere mortals have neither the time to run for office or the inclination. You may laugh but that comedy show Yes Minister is VERY close to the bone and was written by someone with intimate knowledge of how goverment works.

mostlytossas

17th Dec 2008, 02:31

Garudadude...Read my post again. The reason I put you in your box was because of your comments about my respect for the military. I told you I have every respect for them and why. Never claimed to be "Mr Military" far from it. If you had been watching this site for the past few days you would have read of my questions to C-Change and ToA and my appreciation to them for there well informed info.
You sound like your still in nappies ( with a tag like dude you'd have to be) grow up sonny.
Coz right now your still a ********!

Willoz269

17th Dec 2008, 03:29

People, get some perspective here...we started talking about the federal arm of aviation and we ended up with Iraq's trade agreement and Weapons of Mass Destruction????

They have nothing to do with CASA....it may be part of the government as far as legislation in general, but it is an independant arm....or are we going to say that the head of CAA all those years back was paid for by the Labor government of the time, when he retrenched nearly 4,000 employees?? (can't remember the exact figure)....no, nothing to do with it.

To say that the department blatantly falsifies the reports is irresponsible and of an obvious self-serving agenda. I happen to know quite a few people who work very hard towards the safety of the aviation in this country, and I take offence on their behalf. They rely on the ground work of experts to make a decision....and Dick, we are talking about real experts here....you should know how no 2 experts have the same opinion!

Dick Smith

17th Dec 2008, 03:55

Mostlytossas, thanks for the explanation of how the system works. I can see the scenario in relation to Williamtown.

First of all, Bruce Byron announces to the aviation Taskforce (which I was a member of) that he would not be allowing Williamtown to operate over the 08/09 Christmas break without air traffic control. Presumably the military then tell the Department that they are not going to operate the service and won’t cooperate with Airservices in any way.

Then Airservices Australia tells the Department that they won’t be providing a service there as they are not allowed to man the military tower.

Rather than someone showing some leadership and resolving this quite childish issue, the next step takes place. It would be a question like this, “Would it be possible to re-do the safety case again to see if Williamtown can be operated over the Christmas period without any air traffic control at all?” (Wink wink).

The CASA Office of Airspace Regulation produces a new safety case, which (amazingly) shows that air traffic control is not necessary there at all. No doubt the bureaucrats involved believe they are doing the “right thing” just as the bureaucrats in the Wheat Board thought they were doing the right thing by Australian farmers.

If this is not the correct scenario, you would wonder why the Minister or Bruce Byron, or Mike Taylor (the head of the Department) did not issue a simple press release explaining how Dick Smith is wrong, that the safety case is not a fake and explaining how they were able to justify not having air traffic control at the busiest and riskiest time of the year.

Of course they remained silent as the Wheat Board bureaucrats remained silent.

The sad thing is that the airline passengers were never asked to be involved. I bet if they were allowed to decide whether they should pay 50 cents per ticket extra for full air traffic control, that they would have said yes.

Are we to wait for a horrendous accident before these problems are fixed?

It is interesting that the dishonesty with the Wheat Board was only exposed by the United Nations. I suppose we will have to wait for a Royal Commission after an accident before a similar situation is exposed within the aviation bureaucracy.

Dick Smith

17th Dec 2008, 04:13

Willoz269, you say that it is irresponsible to claim that the “Department blatantly falsifies the reports.” It wasn’t actually the Department I was complaining about, it was the CASA Office of Airspace Regulation.

I too know of lots of capable people who worked towards the safety of aviation in this country and they are certainly being let down by the “ground work of experts.”

For example, I have written a number of times to Shane Carmody, the Deputy CEO of CASA, asking him why these new subjective safety cases have not been validated. Rather than answer me, he simply stonewalls and doesn’t mention anything about validation at all.

I’m not a scientist but I have been reliably told by scientific experts that if you are going to invent a new way of looking at risk, you have to make sure that your system works and has been validated. CASA refuses to do this and will not even explain why they believe validation is unnecessary.

Bruce Byron once said to me in relation to the people doing these new subjective safety cases, “Dick, these people have got religion.” I think by that he meant that they had a fundamentalist view of their own correctness and they could see no need for anyone to check whether their system was correct or not. I agree with Bruce Byron on this.

Gundog01

17th Dec 2008, 05:15

Here is an interesting point. I have always understood that when the military do some training at Avalon – even in a King Air - they pay to have the tower manned. That is, they don’t want to fly around without controlled airspace.

I also understand it is the same with the C-17 when flying at tower airports – they either man the tower, or pay to have it manned.

Rubbish Dick. Now you are just making stuff up to support your feeble case (whatever it is, it seems to be lost amongst your anti-establishment ramblings). Not that how RAAF Kingairs or C-17s has anything to do with the current situation at Williamtown. No where is anything written in defence guidlines or procedures about paying to man towers and not operating unless in controlled airspace.

Stop making up BS.

Dick Smith

17th Dec 2008, 05:28

So why did the military pay to have the tower manned at Avalon when they did their King Air training there?

mostlytossas

17th Dec 2008, 05:43

Dick, My post on how Dept's get the outcome they want was more general and not specific to aviation as I worked in the Public Works on Water Supplies, Gaols, major constructions etc but the scenario you describe wouldn't have been far off the mark.
That's why I said yesterday the minister should have stuck to his guns and backed his dept (RAAF). If he had said the Raaf controllers are standing down for 4weeks due to their need for R&R and unless AsA take over for that period then the airport is closed. Because I am not going to allow any undue risk to occur or have any blame aimed at the RAAF should things go horribly wrong blah,blah, and so on.
I reckon it would have taken about a day with the lobbying power the airlines like Qantas has for a temporary tower to be installed as, like you say is done at Bathurst.

Dick Smith

17th Dec 2008, 06:28

Mostly, I believe you are 100% correct.

The problem is that it would be known that CASA would roll over easily to prevent any controversy. Watch "Yes Minister" to undersand why.

One day CASA will stick to an objective safety criteria- then this type of capture will go away!

Green on, Go!

17th Dec 2008, 09:49

If this is not the correct scenario, you would wonder why the Minister or Bruce Byron, or Mike Taylor (the head of the Department) did not issue a simple press release explaining how Dick Smith is wrong, that the safety case is not a fake and explaining how they were able to justify not having air traffic control at the busiest and riskiest time of the year.

My Bolding.

Are the resident military flying squadrons not observing the Period of Operational Standby? They would normally break for the same period as the ATCOs were looking to.

Have Newcastle Airport applied for and received a temporary exemption from the 6 RPT moves per hour agreement?

If locally-based military flying is significantly reduced or not existent, Newcastle Airport Ltd is only allowed to permit the agreed amount of RPT moves and GA operations are restricted as usual, then how can this statement be true?

Dick, notwithstanding your original assertions, when you say things like this, that given the above are not likely to be correct, it goes to your credibility. If this statement is erroneous, how can I and others in the industry be sure that the rest of your rhetoric is factual?

ToA

17th Dec 2008, 09:56

Okay, so what we've got so far is:

Newcastle's only RPT capable airfield is owned and manned by Defence Force Air Traffic Controllers. The ADF have provided a service to civilians that have allowed the daily movements of the airfield to reach 50+ RPT per weekday, plus whatever GA traffic can get clearance. This airfield is in fact a military fighter training school, not dual control, not partial lease, it is Australia's Miramar. At Christmas time the pilots go home on school holidays, as such the primary reason for controllers, ground crew, refuellers et al on the ADF paycheck no longer exists. They state that they will also be going home.

And suddenly a single GA pilot in the ear of the media launches a scare campaign stating that it's not safe for people to operate there who have no right to be there in the first place. It's like complaining about the lack of race marshalls and ambulances at Bathurst in the off race season to look after the hoons and tour buses.

It doesn't matter whether CASA say that it's safe to fly in there or not. It doesn't matter that RPT have suddenly found themselves in a situation where they've scheduled multiple flights per day and don't have anybody to talk to. It doesn't matter that an entire city suddenly finds that it's effectively cut off from the outside world.
It's not their airport!
The Royal Australian Air Force helps out and, instead of benefiting from it, they're suddenly penalised.

That's what I'm talking about, not some big government conspiracy that's supposedly been put in place by Sir Humphreys to actively endanger the lives of its citizens. True evil is not lurking in the heart of parliament house and it's ridiculously paranoid and childish to think otherwise. I can accept wilful negligence and ignorance, but Dick seems to be pushing active, murderous-hearted, moustache twirling evil and that's ridiculous.

The only thing that amazes me is that the Minister of Defence, when faced with the situation, caved in and recalled his staff instead of doing what I would have done and said "You know, you're right. It's not safe without controllers. We won't be a party to dangerous flight practices. For the entire period of the Christmas break Royal Australian Air Force base Williamtown is hereby an active restricted zone." One knee jerk reaction for another.

As for another airfield, if you don't want to build one, how about expanding and linking Maitland? Sure it still falls under military restricted airspace, but at least it's not in a down-to-ground section.

After post edit: Whoops. Okay obviously Willytown isn't owned by RAAF Controllers, unless the military has gotten way more socialist than I realised. :O

ToA

17th Dec 2008, 10:03

lol, so now the venting (healthy debate) part is off my chest.

Agreed with several points in the preceding discussion.

1) Defence/government shouldn't foot the bill for an alternate aerodrome. the NIMBY syndrome impacts on defence time and again but surely in this instance the 'we were here first' argument has got to be seen as the winning one.

2) It would be interesting to find out whether or not ADF ever did get in touch with CASA, ASA or the airlines to let them know that there was likely to be an issue with Willytown when it went into close-down.

Out of curiosity, does anybody know what happened this time last year?

Dick Smith

17th Dec 2008, 10:06

Green, Because Dec & Jan are the peak thunderstorm time at Willy from the official BOM figures and it stands to reason that the Christmas hols are the peak time for itinerant VFR flights through the area.

I have a property on the coast and the Christmas period is by far the busiest for overflying VFR aircraft.

Read the safety case- it even mentions the problem of IFR Airline aircraft with "do it yourself" holding when a big CB was over the aerodrome.

ToA, last year the RAAF provided controllers in the tower to provide an A/G service with the assistance of a radar display. They advised Byron over a year ago that they would provide no service this year. That's what the whole issue is about.

ToA

17th Dec 2008, 10:25

Wait what?

The reason CASA does not take any action in relation to my statements about fake safety cases is because they know that my comments are true.

So the entire attempt to endanger human lives at Newcastle, and wilfully ignore the concerned statements of a member of the public is because that member of the public is you Dick? They know that people's lives are in danger and they do nothing because you're the one telling them that?

Just so I can be sure, I want to ask this one simple question.

Do you genuinely believe that an entire government department, or even just it's spokespeople and internal decision makers, would consciously choose to risk the death of innocent people and all the pain, heartache and legal action that would follow just so they can say they pulled one over on you?

mostlytossas

17th Dec 2008, 12:10

Perhaps the following analogy will put some perspective of what the problem is.
Lets say there is a 20 story building being constructed. The bottom 19 stories are all up to the outer glazing being completed so quite safe to work inside. The top floor is still open to the elements and then the scaffolders knock off for 4 weeks leave. No safety rails,kickboards,screens nothing. The project manager says "she'll be right carry on regardless" to all the other building trades. I'll tell you what would happen. Within the hour Safework SA (safety regulator in SA but each state has one) would be on site and close off all access to the 20th floor and order all work to cease untill such time safety rails etc are installed. Workers on the site would have to work on other floors or be on full pay in the smoko hut until work can be found for them. The builder would probably be fined. The unions would be in full agreement to what the safety regulator had done.
CASA is the aviation safety regulator yet did nothing when the controllers (scaffolders) left the site. Worse than that, they conspired with the builder (airlines/AsA) to keep the 20th floor (Willy) working.
The union (I assume the AFAP) sat idlely by without a whimper.
The reason they get away with it and no one gets prosecuted/fined is because CASA and AsA are both government instrumentalities and the crown cannot prosecute itself.

max1

17th Dec 2008, 14:02

Willy needs a separation service over the stand-down period.
TRA has not worked. Penetrations today. Education has not worked.
Fingers and toes crossed.

C-change

18th Dec 2008, 21:19

Dick,
Thanks for the link. Had a read and yes the last page in the CASA report is a strange little graph and I don't know what process they used to determine it but I don't know if people have manipulated data to reach a pre-determined outcome. Maybe they did but I can't tell.

What was interesting was the comments from the CAGRS people (non RAAF) who evalutated the traffic over several weekends and found it to be less than traffic at other Cagrs locations around Oz. Also comments from RAAF ATC management stating, that with a loss of 5 staff from the 18 they had in Aug, that they couldn't provide the service without affecting other loactions, ie DAR AND TVL. This would also mean a flow on effect to the full service they could provide in the new year, ie less ATC in 2009. Also, whilst the airlines didn't like the proposal, they were willing to still operate out of Willy over x-mas.

Now don't get me wrong, I like what your trying to acheive and improve avaition safety but it feels like you are trying to bring down those at CASA and the current Willy serves your purpose.

Most of the problems mentioned with Willy, TIBA etc all have one common thing. A critical shortage of ATC within both AsA and Defence.

You could acheive so much more if you helped us out and highlighted this fact to the media and others. Target CASA with this issue if you want and ask them why they haven't had an issue with all the places operating RPT without ATC. Willy, BN & ML centre, YSSY, YMML, the list goes on.

Willy is like so many other places, that if they had the staff they would be there providing an ATC servcie, not some token bull**** thing. Sorry I don't like Cagrs, its a waste of an ATC. We dont mind working weekends etc, its our job but its needs people.

Plug the current gaps in ATC and then we can go on and improve other things within the system but we can't keep trying to get blood from a stone.

mostlytossas

18th Dec 2008, 22:24

And C- Change you have been a little bit naughty. In post 98 you are an ex RAAFie and now with posts121&148 you still are.
That's ok I forgive you as you have made sense and been most helpful.
Have a good Christmas and your fellow controllers as best you can anyway.:)

Dick Smith

18th Dec 2008, 22:59

Ozbusdriver, you state:

Dick, behind the scenes you are burning bridges again.

DO YOU EVER LEARN ANYTHING?

Oz, the problem is that there are no bridges. In the last year or so, those in CASA, Airservices and the Department who were involved in the decision making have allowed no discussion with me at all.

I would certainly like there to be a bridge, however if one side won’t allow one to be built, do you really suggest that the other side should remain silent and just accept what is dished out?

Even when I write nice letters to CASA or Airservices, the answers basically stonewall and don’t address any of the issues. I think the attitude is that if they do this for long enough, I will simply go away. Of course that won’t work. It just motivates me more to try to get the decision making out in the open using good rational and objective judgment, and based on historic experience from all around the world.

OZBUSDRIVER

18th Dec 2008, 23:06

Dick, I am not talking about the CASA.

Dick Smith

18th Dec 2008, 23:21

Oz, my friends at AOPA keep the bridges open and in return are treated like S##T.

Strange times at the moment. Martin Ferguson was very critical of Mr Byron however the new Minister is effusive with his praise of Mr Byron even though over $100m has been spent on the Regulatory Reform Programme with no measurable output.

Could it be that the Government wants no change?

Silly question!

Torres

19th Dec 2008, 01:55

Dick. You are wrong:

"...even though over $100m has been spent on the Regulatory Reform Programme with no measurable output."

It is well, well in excess of $100 mill so far - and that is only what they admit to. I think the last figure I saw some time ago was over $150 mill so the current cost is probably around double your estimate. And you must admit, $200 million up in smoke would even make your eyes water! :{

Twenty years in the making - if they ever sell the film rights to Australia's Regulatory Reform the resulting epoch will be bigger than Ben Hurr!!! :D

I just love this confidence building gem from the last CASA Director in Hansard on 14 February 2005, almost four years ago now:

Mr Byron—I anticipate we would start sending some of them from about the middle of this year. I do not see this delaying the overall program excessively. We have an action item to develop a plan to forward to the minister about when we plan to have them to the minister, and I assume that plan would be done in the next couple of months. I would be hopeful that it would not be long after early 2006 that most of the draft rules are delivered to the minister.

I guess the Government is so ashamed of Australia's regulatory reform performance that they funded the PNG Government to adopt the New Zealand Regulations!

We'll see the caliber of the new CASA Director when we see what he can achieve in expediting Regulatory Reform. :ok:

Sorry for the thread drift! :}

C-change

19th Dec 2008, 05:58

MT,
I'm most definitely still an ex Raafie mate, I got out in 2005 and I'm 100% civilain these days but I still work for defence. Thread #89 and #99 will provide some answers.

mostlytossas

19th Dec 2008, 10:25

C-Change :ok:

ElPerro

19th Dec 2008, 14:57

The ADF have provided a service to civilians that have allowed the daily movements of the airfield to reach 50+ RPT per weekday, plus whatever GA traffic can get clearance. This airfield is in fact a military fighter training school, not dual control, not partial lease, it is Australia's Miramar. At Christmas time the pilots go home on school holidays, as such the primary reason for controllers, ground crew, refuellers et al on the ADF paycheck no longer exists. They state that they will also be going home.

Must be convenient to be at a training base. Knock off and don't come back till Jan. Nothing like logging 8 aircraft moves when you clear an 8 ship training flight (after all that's all they do) to pitch into a circuit. How about moving the training Squadrons that don't ever work over Christmas to a base that no civvies need and move the RAAF aircraft that do the work over Christmas to Williamtown. Shame about the relocation cost.

I'm assuming that since you are implying that ATC knock off when the pilots don't fly that you believe YWLM ATC should man for all other ADF aircraft arrivals and departures? Always amusing "We must man for 1 x F/A-18 with POB 1" then "Sorry, we cannot man for 1 x <name type> POB 120". Given the cost of several assets that fly into YWLM is substantially more than the cost of 1 x F/A-18 can I assume you believe the value of 1 x F/A-18 pilot is more than 120 passengers? I'd really like to hear you take on that.

Care to comment on why you don't man for other ADF moves if your basis is serving the ADF? You only provide a service for the training aircraft based at Williamtown. If you want to claim you are there to serve the RAAF why don't you???

"Pass me a brew"
"8 ship at initial"
"o.k. clear initial and pitch, and clear to land"
phew! Another tough 8 aircraft moves!

Your statement that Defence "shouldn't foot the bill" is ridiculous. The "my my that's a different bucket of money" does nothing but (when implemented) increase the bureaucracy and increase the cost to the tax payer. How about this. Place ASA trained controllers in tower. Move the RAAF controllers to other bases - and provide the service through-out the year. You know you don't need a blue shirt to say "Clear to Land".

You are there to provide Air Traffic Services. You were not specially selected to provide Air Traffic to F/A-18 aircraft. What's next? Don't use an AP-3 for surveillance of approaching illegal immigrants because "that's a military aircraft designed for submarine hunting and they've knocked off for Christmas to enjoy school holidays" (like that would ever happen!). When you actually work in the operational Air Force (rather than as you put it the "training Air Force") you might enjoy finding a clue.

You are here to serve the Australian people. Telling civilian pilot's who want ATC at YWLM "Get bent, I'm only here to serve RAAF training" is neither constructive nor helpful.:=

Interesting: No NOTAM for KNKX (Miramar) advising of no Air Traffic over Christmas... and by the way, if you were trying to make some reference to Top Gun - you should have referred to NAS Fallon. Top Gun moved from Miramar in 1996 - it's now Marine Corp Air Station Miramar. :ugh: (do you think Williamtown has the same facilities as Fallon?)

:hmm: Keep up the good work ToA! Your nation needs you! Been signed off to Ground Freq. solo yet?! :hmm:

P.S. Do you think the rest of the ADF aviation community outside of YWLM believe you provide a service? I personally think that it's not just Dick Smith who thinks your "service" stinks.

BMW-Z4

19th Dec 2008, 19:25

ElPerro.......at last an informed opinion !!!!!!!!!!!!!!???????????

What the :mad: was all that about.

from the lunatic fringe at least.:rolleyes:

C-change

19th Dec 2008, 21:11

ElPerro,
Go back and have a read of my posts #95, 98, 113. If you read them you might learn something about the base.

Then I suggest you go and visit the staff next year (all 13 of them) and actually have a look at what they do. You might be surprised to see how busy it actually is some days.

Once you've done that, come back on here and then you can express your opinion about how easy they have it ( I think you've been watching too much Top Gun ).

You are there to provide Air Traffic Services TO ADF AIRCRAFT AT AN RAAF BASE.

They are in Blue because they can be sent to war, unlike AsA controllers.

BTW all ADF acft are provided ATC if they arrive/depart during published hours but the FA18's are the priority at WLM. Thats no different to AMB, EDN, ESL, PEA, OAK, NWA, RIC, TDL.

TVL and DAR are joint user, thats the difference.

DICK,
You never replied to my post #147, I'd like to hear your thoughts on what I suggested.

max1

20th Dec 2008, 00:28

Dick Smith

20th Dec 2008, 05:22

C Change, re post 147.

I don't believe we will be able to do much about the shortage of ATC's until CASA does it's job properly. The Willy issue gave me a chance to point this out to the media and the Minister.

If CASA keeps manipulating safety cases we will end up with an accident.

Imagine if because of the pilot shortage CASA did one of these fake safety cases and claimed that all RPT up to 30 PAX could operate safely with a single crew member!

We probably would get away with it for a number of years but is the risk worth it?

That's what they did with the Willy safety case.

The reason you cannot understand the strange little graph on the last page of the CASA Oct 08 Willy safety case is because it is a fabrication. Note how there is no information as to where the data came from.

The Department is paranoid about any controversy- they will put every pressure on CASA and AsA to keep any disagreement out of the media. They do this by appeasing everyone they can who they think may kick up a stink.

For example, imagine for a second if CASA had stuck to it's guns and maintained it's requirement that Willy was not going to operate with RPT and without ATC?

The decision could have been leaked to the media and that would have shown a dispute between CASA, AsA and the RAAF. That would never do to our "yes minister" department. Better to cover up the problem by getting CASA to re write the safety study to show that ATC was really not necessary (wink wink).

And thats clearly what happened!

Gundog01

20th Dec 2008, 05:29

Dick

that is the most sensible post i have read of yours on this forum. You actually made sense and some valid points (extremely difficult for me tp say). Request you leave the conspiracy theories and anti-establishment rhetoric on the sidelines and stick to the facts like you last post.

Dick Smith

20th Dec 2008, 05:47

Gundog, thanks.

By the way, anyone who thinks I risk defamation action for claiming that CASA has prepared a fake safety case for Williamtown need have no fear.

I just feel sorry for the good people at CASA who have been led down this path.

Possibly something similar happened at the Wheat Board - and in that case it was not human lives at risk.

Green on, Go!

21st Dec 2008, 01:10

Why not have some civilians at Willy, they do at Nowra (there were moves to put some at Richmond?)
There are alot of controllers who would be more than happy to leave ASA live around Nelsons Bay, Tea Gardens, Hawks Nest (heaven) and go on contract at Willy and provide a service outside of Willies core hours. This would allow flexibilty for the RAAF, we could even become reservists.
Where do I sign.

I believe there are a couple of reasons why there are no civilian (APS) ATCOs employed at Willy:

it's typically not a difficult base to staff, despite the fact that it been fairly consistently in the public eye lately, the ATCOs are the meat in a couple of political sandwiches and the fact that you know you'll work hard there (and struggle to get leave), given the staffing levels. I'm pretty sure plenty of people want to go there, as the traffic is generally pretty good and, as you suggest max, Newcastle/Port Stephens is a nice place to live.

Willy, along with a few of the others, is seen as an important base to develop RAAF ATCOs. The base is kept in blue to retain the experience gained for deployments. Look at the operational deployments that have been undertaken as far back as Somalia to see why.

As you well know max, there aren't enough controllers within AsA or RAAF to go around. The 20 or more RAAFies that have transitioned to AsA this year haven't helped. There are political ramifications associated with adjusting ATS at the joint user bases. RAAF is committed to providing ATS at Oakey and Nowra in support of Army and Navy, respectively. There are capability arguments for continuing to provide services at other bases (eg pilot training at Pearce). Rather than saying, 'Righto (for instance) Amberley, you get no ATS for a couple of years while we redeploy these ATCOs to where they're really needed.', RAAF seems to prefer to trim the very thin layer of fat across all the bases.

The reason that Willy ATCOs appear to only be there for local fast jet ops is largely a staffing issue, I believe. It has been worse in the past when they couldn't even cover what the locals wanted, it's just that Newcastle Airport is supporting more than B1900s and Jetstream 31s now. For El Perro's benefit, it's not RAAF ATCOs who decide that they're there for local jets only. The direction that gets you so tired and emotional comes from a higher level. They probably could have chosen to reduce the intensity of local mil flying and spread ATS over a longer period, however, the local (aircrew) hierarchy clearly didn't go for it.

The APS ATCOs employed by Defence are there for core ATC hours. The job ad in the APS Gazette is looking for ATCOs in order to transition Richmond, East Sale, Edinburgh and Nowra to a wholly APS workforce. I assume those bases were chosen because of the dot points above ie those bases are not a popular posting choice and the RAAF gets better bang for it's buck from a development perspective at the other bases. I guess any surplus blue shirts gained would be posted to Darwin/Townsville/Willy/Pearce etc.

Notwithstanding the legal issues that have been touched on, contract controllers for OOH and weekend work sounds like a great job for a semi-retired controller. Pity I'm too young have a go at it...

garudadude

21st Dec 2008, 01:59

For the record:
Williamtown is not a training base. It is the primary Operational Fighter base for the RAAF. 'Operational ElPerro' must've missed that nugget of info while he was single-handed taking out 35 Taliban from his o'seas post.
There weren't 'school holidays' for the RAAF Fighter boys in 02... (I know this because my bearcat scanner was going ballistic with their comm!) And I imagine that they won't be taking leave whenever their services might be needed in the future.
Elperro, in my books you're up there with mostlytossas. He says in one spread that WLM ATC can resign for all he cares (and taunts them about their inevitable unemployment), then waxes lyrical about how to boost ATC recruitment to fill the obvious shortage of manpower in that role.
Stop embarrassing yourself with comments about the cost of a hornet vs a civvy jet, clearly that is not the issue, and clearly you know very little about Williamtown.
The biggest safety issue at willytown occurs when someone gets his knickers in a knot for being held for 3 minutes at Nobby's, then goes on to rant and rave over the control freq, drowning out any communications from the aircraft that ATC are trying to separate him from. (Demonstrating to us all the true fundamentals of aviation professionalism and airmanship eh Dick!)
The issue is that CASA dropped the ball, ASA are undermanned and that the poor bastards at WLM have picked it up for them.
Instead, why don't you raise a glass the guys and girls who found out 1 day before they planned to go on leave that they needed to cancel flights home, holiday accommodation etc and break it to the missus/hubby/kids that they would be going nowhere other than work for the next 4 weeks.... Merry Christmas!
If you hear WLM ATC whinge about being deployed to the desert, then tell them to 'harden up', 'you're in the military', 'look at me...I'm soooo operational blah, blah' etc. But when it's to cover for beaurocratic failings, let them vent.

max1

21st Dec 2008, 02:02

Green on, Go.

Cheers. I still would love to go though.

C-change

21st Dec 2008, 02:23

Defence realised that having all defence ATC units staffed with uniformed ATC is no longer viable (because they keep leaving) and a decision was made to civilianise some TWRS (not contract) and leave uniforms at others.

The reason used for the Southern Bases (RIC,NWA,ESL,EDN) to go all APS was based on traffic types and density, which then leaves the other bases for uniformed ATC, plus OAK mixed with uniforms and APS. That way uniformed staff get exposure to the traffic and ops that they will encounter when deployed. Simple as that.

Yes, you could have APS in the TWR at Willy (spots would be filled in a heartbeat) but that option was not taken. As Willy is an operational base as well as training, it was decided that it would stay all blue.

Dick,thanks for the reply. If you took that approach more often I think more would support you.

ElPerro

21st Dec 2008, 02:45

There weren't 'school holidays' for the RAAF Fighter boys in 02... (I know this because my bearcat scanner was going ballistic

Bahahaha..

Farm em out to other bases and leave Williamtown for ASA controllers. If the blue suited controllers want to control jets they can take a posting to Tindal.

I'd call Balad or Tarin Kowt an operational base. Williamtown is a training base.

garudadude

21st Dec 2008, 03:22

Gold mate... but I'm not taking the bait!

C-change

21st Dec 2008, 08:08

Elperro,

Williamtown is a training base.

I'm curious. What do you do, or what have you done in life, that allows you to form such an expert opinion about the role of RAAF Williamtown ?

ElPerro

21st Dec 2008, 08:10

Not bait mate, just fact.

Tell me the last move at YWLM related to an Operation in the last 50 years, and I'll bet you that it wasn't a Williamtown based aircraft? You may be able to site one or two in the last fifty years - but they don't justify the extra cost of having RAAF pers manning ATC.

It's a "Raise, Train, Sustain" base. Nothing to do with operations.

I believe the ATC services should be handed over to ASA. As previously mentioned, YWLM won't man outside standard published hours for actual moves related to Operations, so why the need for blue suiters? Hand it over (after all RAAF ATC are so short), move the guys to other bases so that they can man for operational moves such as those performed by the AP-3C's.

ASA are far more flexible and willing to provide a service at short notice for non-scheduled moves. They'll just bill you for it. RAAF ATC just say "No". Hand it over to ASA on a contract until the RAAF gets it numbers back up. It's not like the RAAF needs to man YWLM because they have a bunch of controllers that need to be "Deployable" on short notice.

At least the actual moves related to Operations would be services by ASA as opposed to the RAAF controllers.

Dick Smith,

I'm yet to hear a compelling reason why RAAF pers have to run the tower there. Perhaps responsibility should be transferred to ASA. For out of hours moves ASA appears flexible enough to man for a payment.

I'm curious. What do you do, or what have you done in life, that allows you to form such an expert opinion about the role of RAAF Williamtown ?

To quote the immortal "Beavis and Butthead" - "Dude, if you have to ask, you'll never know." To answer "we need deployable guys" is not relevant at all when the RAAF is so short of controllers. The requirement for the current CE of controllers is not Williamtown specific.

You should answer my questions about why Blue Suiters have to perform the tower / ground job at YWLM rather than question the basis of my knowledge.

You don't utilise any of the classified systems in tower - so there is no need for a defence member to man it. You guys are notorious defence wide (in the aircrew community outside ACG for providing a completely non - existent service for non locally based aircraft. You made your bed - Dick Smith has pointed out the bed you have made - time to lie in it.

How many times have you guys declared MBZ / CTAF whilst a non ACG aircraft is taxiing? You provide nothing to Defence other than clearing the RTS YWLM based aircraft to land.

Mr.Buzzy

21st Dec 2008, 08:15

How about this from Mr.Rudd? "I order you lot to stay the f#$k open!!!!"

Just who does the military work for again? Talk about a freakin' gravy train!!!

Man Willy before it rains metal.........

bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzbbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zz

ElPerro

21st Dec 2008, 08:28

Buzzy,

When they don't have the people they can't man. The solution is to hand it to ASA and move the RAAF controllers to other bases. It would assist the other RAAF bases that are not fully manned.

I'm yet to hear a specific reason why RAAF members have to man at YWLM. Sure you need to keep a certain number of controllers current for deployment purposes, but when you don't have those numbers what exactly is the reason for RAAF members to man tower?

Ex FSO GRIFFO

21st Dec 2008, 08:30

Hey 'El P',....

Your quote,
"ASA are far more flexible and willing to provide a service at short notice for non-scheduled moves. They'll just bill you for it"........

I Don't Think So.......
Not this week I think - nor next week, nor the week after....ad infinitum...

Try perusing the thread re ATC STAFF SHORTAGE.:}:}

(This ain't gunna work...??):uhoh::uhoh:

Mr.Buzzy

21st Dec 2008, 08:35

I wouldn't exactly say that ASA are flushed with extra controllers either.

Somebody needs to put their fat performance bonus aside for a moment and start spending some money!

Passenger loads into that beautiful part of the country are soaring so why shouldn't it be serviced by a safe airport?

tic tic tic tic...........

ElPerro

21st Dec 2008, 08:39

FSO Griffith,

Correct, everyone is short. However ASA have been more flexible than the RAAF. Especially when a specific payment is available.

C-change

21st Dec 2008, 09:21

Elperro,

You should answer my questions about why Blue Suiters have to perform the tower / ground job at YWLM rather than question the basis of my knowledge.

I have answered this several times. You can put who ever you like in Willy TWR. I'm only quoting the same reason that was passed to me by management (SRG). Put AsA in there, put APS in there, maybe even Serco, I don't care who does the job personally but that is the reason we have been given. You also seem to have not noticed that AsA have enough staff dramas as it is. They can't man what they currently have. Where are they going to come from, the magic ATC hat ?

Don't forget one critical fact, RAAF are cheaper than Asa. That counts more than ever when Defence need to save 10 billion over 10 years.
Why do you think the Southern Bases stayed APS. Because its cheaper. AsA charge a fortune for the service, have a look at Pea. It ain't cheap.

I'd call Balad or Tarin Kowt an operational base.

Were you aware that RAAF ATC also controlled at Balad ?

As far questioning the basis of your knowledge, lots out there have opinions on things that they know very little about. Wasn't after a dot point summary, just wondering if you had ever been to the place.

You made your bed - Dick Smith has pointed out the bed you have made - time to lie in it.

Actually I didn't make the bed mate, others created the situation we are now in. I like many others out there turn up each day and do my job. I'm not in charge of Oz ATC. Maybe if some of the other FEGS had supported us over the years instead of bitching, we would be in a better state these days.

Are you also saying that when I complete a 9 hour shift for the local units that I then must stay for your arrival, then for the next one and so on. That little bit extra here and there soon adds up. You've landed but then the next one turns up and before you know it an hour has rolled by and then I'm violating rules. Good one. Just like you, I have to do as I'm told. Give us the staff and the means to keep them for a while and we will stay for FLIP hours.

You could also try saying thanks to those that stay and put up with the bull**** !!!!

ElPerro

21st Dec 2008, 10:48

You can put who ever you like in Willy TWR.

Excellent I'm glad you agree that other than price there is no specific reason RAAF controllers are required at YWLM.

Don't forget one critical fact, RAAF are cheaper than Asa No they are not. Haven't you checked lately the full cost of a uniformed member? Why do you think DMO hire "Professional Service Providers" such as Engineers at a rate of $220,000+ . (That's what they pay the companies providing the individual).

Were you aware that RAAF ATC also controlled at Balad ?
Yes I sure was. That's why I used that as an example. That is an operational base. Was controlling at YWLM a requirement to be deployed to Balad? Of course it wasn't. Care to name a single occasion when you contact the local units to ask if they can delay the morning wave in order to facilitate an operational move? Doubt it - CTAF it is.

I like many others out there turn up each day and do my job. I'm not in charge of Oz ATC. I'm not directly having a go at you. I'm just saying your services aren't required in a blue suit.

Maybe if some of the other FEGS had supported us over the years instead of bitching, we would be in a better state these days.
Why would other FEGs support you when you consistently provide no service. Including when you were fully manned.

re you also saying that when I complete a 9 hour shift for the local units that I then must stay for your arrival, then for the next one and so on. That little bit extra here and there soon adds up Try telling the light twins at your base to launch their "waves" at a specified time to provide greater coverage for all. (Mind you - as if they'd let you interrupt their Friday 3pm BBQ and drinks). :hmm:

You could also try saying thanks to those that stay and put up with the bull**** !!!!

Loyalty up and down the chain of command. It appears you don't have the loyalty up. It says a lot about the state of ATC at YWLM when those on the radio pass the buck up the chain.

As I asked: When was the last time you specifically change the FLIP hours for an operational move? You accommodate the operational move when it fits in with the local training flights.

garudadude

21st Dec 2008, 11:50

ElPerrow,

You're a wind-up merchant whether you know it or not.
$220K+ for a SMC or TWR rated kid at WLM... you're smoking crack.
Last OPS out of WLM... 'if you have to ask, you'll never know'.
Why would you have RAAF vs ASA ATC out of WLM.... 'if you have to ask, you'll never know'.
You need to look up the definition of 'fact'. Eg. Chuck Norris can lead a horse to water AND make it drink..... FACT!

BMW-Z4

21st Dec 2008, 17:56

Like most snap decisions by people who think they know everything and actually know very little there are many other considerations why AsA cannot and should not take over ADF ATC. To do Balad as a flyer or as ATC you have to do WLM or OAK etc and if you have to ask why you do not know. To do WLM and other bases there are 'situational' security and OH&S considerations that prevent AsA from doing the job. To do WLM as a joint user base there are specilised knowledge requirements that fall outside of AsA ATC practice and again - if you have to ask you surely do not know. The risk managmeent process for ADF is quite different to AsA (sometimes you have to accept higher risk in ADF [obviously])) for operational purposes. To make changes that try to implement AsA ATC into ADF bases without considering all the facts is why Project Genesis, after all of those attempts and years, failed. Snap decision making isn't quite the vogue of the ADF unlike just about every other area of Oz Aviaton. I doubt that ADF flying would want ADF ATC to be too closeley associated with the mess that AsA has become. Easy to go there and difficult to come back.

ElPerro

21st Dec 2008, 19:10

To do Balad as a flyer or as ATC you have to do WLM or OAK etc and if you have to ask why you do not know.

So to fly into Balad you need to fly into WLM??? Now who's smoking crack?

BMW-Z4

21st Dec 2008, 19:17

Ah ..........so now I understand your confusion.

"Raise, Train, Sustain" is everything to do with operations.:ugh:

ftrplt

21st Dec 2008, 20:52

No they are not. Haven't you checked lately the full cost of a uniformed member? Why do you think DMO hire "Professional Service Providers" such as Engineers at a rate of $220,000+ . (That's what they pay the companies providing the individual).

DMO hire PSP's not because they are cheaper (they aren't) - but because either RAAF cant provide the bodies, doesn't have the expertise and/or experience available for the task; or it is a short term, specific task that cant be done with the DMO workforce available or inneficient / unable to re-deploy staff from other areas.

Gundog01

22nd Dec 2008, 00:27

Tell me the last move at YWLM related to an Operation in the last 50 years,

Not much of an operation but, APEC operation.

ASA are far more flexible and willing to provide a service at short notice for non-scheduled moves. They'll just bill you for it.

However ASA have been more flexible than the RAAF.

They had 12 months to fix the problem over Xmas and couldn't pull it off. RAAF called in with 1 days notice to fill the void. Now who do you think has flexibility??

move the guys to other bases so that they can man for operational moves such as those performed by the AP-3C's.

Good plan. Move controllers to Edn where the 2 or 3 P3's take off and return 10 hours later (cleared for takeoff, cleared to land). Plenty of training value there. How about move ASA, APS to Edn, Ric, ESL and keep the RAAF controllers at Willytown. Would allow more hours of operations at Willy, good for Units and good for Civvies. P3 and Herc Ops are much more similar to Civvie Ops than Hornet, Hawk and FAC Ops.

(sometimes you have to accept higher risk in ADF [obviously])) for operational purposes

What would be the legal implications of ASA, ASP clearing an 8 ship to land with 4-5 jets on the runway at once and something going wrong.

(Mind you - as if they'd let you interrupt their Friday 3pm BBQ and drinks).

Now you are just making your self sound stupid. 2 years spent flying there and not once did i knock off before 4 on a friday. Pull your head in.

C-change

22nd Dec 2008, 00:59

Elperro,
Clearly no one will ever change your mind. Like I said mate, I'm not the boss, I do as I'm told and for the record I don't work at Wlm anymore.

Why would other FEGs support you when you consistently provide no service. Including when you were fully manned.

Which unit has been fully manned, with controllers with all ratings, during the last 15 yrs ? None that I have worked at. A new kid of course with SMC and ACD ratings doesn't help the manning out that much.

You also need to dig a bit deeper on the cost issue. A RAAF Fltlt ATC costs $142K pa with super, med, dental and housing. APS controller is $93K and an FPC Asa controller in SYD is $145K plus super and any overtime AD's etc.

Go and research the bid AsA put in for Ric, it was $5 million PA. AsA charge for the service provided not just the individual wages. Go have a look at the contract for Pea, its on the 44wg site. The cost alone is just to use the Asa machine and their building.
As I asked: When was the last time you specifically change the FLIP hours for an operational move? You accommodate the operational move when it fits in with the local training flights.

It was actually last week, Tue actually, when two of us stayed back after FLIP hours for 3hrs to support a C17 Move. Ring Ausfic if you need to check the Notams. By the way the two staff were APS. We also stayed after hours to vector an arrival for ILS in **** weather the previous Fri.

Anyway I'm on leave and not about to waste anymore time. I'm going fishing, if you want to discuss anything next year, PM me and I'll provide you with my work e-mail and number. Happy to talk about any of the above. Believe it or not, some of us would actually like to improve things.
Merry X-mas.

ElPerro

22nd Dec 2008, 01:13

A RAAF Fltlt ATC costs $142K pa with super, med, dental and housing.That's not correct. A non-specialist (non aircrew / dental / legal etc) (Admin / Log) etc. in Central / North NSW is $152K (that's before any retention bonuses and the like). It's in FINMAN4. Add your $30k bonus and your FLTLT is costing defence $182K It was actually last week, Tue actually, when two of us stayed back after FLIP hours for 3hrs to support a C17 Move That would be the exception rather than the rule. 2 years spent flying there and not once did i knock off before 4 on a friday. Pull your head in. Playing uckers on Friday arvo doesn't count as work!

Gundog01

22nd Dec 2008, 01:39

Playing uckers on Friday arvo doesn't count as work!

Try 2 hour debriefs followed by 2 hours mass briefs Champ.

garudadude

22nd Dec 2008, 02:05

ElPerro, where did you get scrubbed mate? 76 or OCU?

Gundog01

22nd Dec 2008, 02:51

or BFTS/2FTS??

ElPerro

22nd Dec 2008, 22:42

GF5 at BFTS. Apparently my debriefs were not long enough.Now an ATCO at YWLM - see you at the next 3pm BBQ Gundog (Champ).

ruby tuesday

24th Dec 2008, 05:17

Air traffic controllers clear Santa for landing
Posted 5 hours 19 minutes ago
ABC news reports.....

Air Services Australia says it is making preparations for a special flight into Australian air space tonight.

Spokesman Rob Walker says they are expecting Santa late tonight, and staff are ready to track him on radar.

"He's actually going to head down the international dateline before making a big right hand turn and heading across the Pacific towards Australia," he said.

"We're expecting him to make landfall in Australia somewhere after midnight.

"He's not been too precise at this stage obviously letting us know that he needs to keep a little bit of magic and secrecy about what he's doing."

Go on Dick - get on Sunrise and raise doubts over his documentation or something!!!

mostlytossas

24th Dec 2008, 05:33

What was that little outburst all about Ruby? Goodwill to all men and all that huh?:}

ruby tuesday

24th Dec 2008, 09:51

Anyone going under the title Aviation Activist doesn't get much goodwill - a bit like those that chained themselves to the fence at Stansted...

Ex FSO GRIFFO

24th Dec 2008, 13:44

AH Ruby,

The person you speak 'ill' of doesn't really mean 'ill' to the Industry...his heart is actually in the 'best' place.

It is just that it is not actually in the RIGHT place. He just doesn't really comprehend the 'subtleness' of the situation(s). (IMHO...)

In time,... ALL will be revealed..........

(An OLD 'Retired' FSO...) :} :confused:

Klaus Fuchs

25th Dec 2008, 07:14

apparently my debriefs were not long enough

More likely not displaying any evidence of self analysis/critique or prospect of improvement.

Naked_recommiting

29th Dec 2008, 21:38

ElPerro, where did you get scrubbed mate? 76 or OCU?

ElPerro, both of the above mentioned Sqn's are at WLM, just to keep working on your WLM knowledge.

GF5 at BFTS.

ElPerro, it was a hurdle for all of us. The best advice I was given was to sit tight and learn something, and only speak about things you know about (as opposed to confirming the opposite).

Apparently my debriefs were not long enough.

ElPerro, some of us just start the day on a marg.

OZBUSDRIVER

29th Dec 2008, 22:49

Good news, nothing in the papers about incidents at WLM. Then again, why would there be? Any operators had the pleasure of flying thru the airspace give us a heads up on how it is running?

To the guys and girls manning the radio up there:ok: Thanks from the ungrateful for your forced duty.

max1

30th Dec 2008, 08:27

You might enquire of the civil ATCs who have been watching the airspace and giving traffic. Somewhat interesting I am told.

C-change

19th Jan 2009, 09:19

All very quiet with this thread. :zzz:

Now that Willy ATC are back at work, were there any dramas during the stand down whilst Cagrs was provided?

How about Willy controllers? How did it all go?

Anybody else out there, RPT or GA pilots?

I wonder if this will happen again come December 09 ?

zip69

19th Jan 2009, 21:04

Personally i think the CAGRO service was fantastic.:ok::ok::ok:

The guys really knew what they were doing. They were clear, precice and relaxed.

They didn't give you traffic you had already talked to, and only offered advice if necessary.

Runway lights were activated for you and given wind check on final.

No ATC delays, and no idiots trying to kill you!

Cancel the ATC and make the CAGRO perminent I say.:E

QSK?

26th Feb 2009, 04:24

CASA has just released its Post Event Review on the CAGRS services provided by the RAAF at Willy (Go to: Office of Airspace Regulation (http://www.casa.gov.au/oar/index.htm))

Considering that Dick Smith made such a big issue of the fact that radar information would be available to supplement the CAGRS provided by the RAAF controllers whereas it would not be available if NAL provided the CAGRS, it is interesting to note the following comment from CASA:The fact that the Defence CA/GRS operated without a radar display for a quarter of the POS, without any increase in safety incidents or other impacts, indicate that a NAL CA/GRS would have been equally acceptable as a solution over the POSand the other part I like:Reports from the CA/GRS operators indicated that there were seldom more than three aircraft on frequency at any one timeGee, why would you need a radar for that when you consider Broome and Ayers Rock are safety handling many more aircraft per hour on frequency than that?

All of this points to the fact that the move to have the RAAF continue to provide CAGRS was a typical knee jerk reaction from Dick Smith with little regard or respect for the background work done previously by CASA, the RAAF or NAL to ensure CAGRS could be provided safely by NAL's provider - with stakeholder agreement (Yes, Dick stakeholders were consulted). I'm sure the RAAF controllers (and their families) who had their leave cancelled at the last minute would be very thankful for your well considered intervention, Dick, particularly as your ill considered intervention was much ado about nothing.