Substantial $1.1 Million Per Annum for OneSKY Consultant

[Dick Smith]

Documents that are in the hands of the media and some politicians claim that the Airservices OneSKY project is paying an ex-RAAF test pilot (including the Nomad) and previous Manager of the Hawker De Havilland Australian Aviation College $1.1 million per annum as a lead negotiator and private consultant. Mr Bradford must be pretty good at his job!

[fujii]

Does he have any Air Traffic Control experience? After all ATC will be the user. BOHICA.

[LeadSled]

Folks,
Should not the Chairman of Airservices look into this, after all, it does seen rather a lot of money for a consultant.
Sir Angus, over to you!!
Tootle pip!!

[Howabout]

Extraordinary, if true.

I remember a Bradford. Good bloke, good pilot; but if he's the same, then I doubt his credentials to consult at $1.1 mill when it comes to a next gen ATC system.

Can I do the same job for a few free coffees, $30k to subsidise my pension, plus a free car-park?

I'd say that I have a damned sight more experience in ATM systems.

I do not often agree with you Leady, but that's a very fair call

[Dick Smith]

Why would AsA have to employ an outside party to negotiate the deal?

Is there a lack of suitable skills within the organisation?

Appears there may have been an additional contractor involved being paid over $500,000 PA

[Lead Balloon]

Chickenfeed, compared with the tens of millions that Thales will likely extract in out-of-scope work.

This is merely the most recent attempt to combine the civilian and ADF ATC systems. http://www.defence.gov.au/news/raafnews/editions/4811/topstories/story16.htm

The structural problem is that the project should not be run by either Defence or Airservices. It should be run by someone who knows what they're doing.

[Dick Smith]

And they are purchasing OneSky for the existing half wound back 1950s airspace system.

One day AsA will be forced to have their en route controllors provide a proper Class E separation service for IFR aircraft as per the Governments NAS policy.

Surely the new ATC system should be purchased with this in mind. I wonder if Mr Bradford has been properly informed. I bet not.

Are the Military charged to fly in the AsA en route system? Or is it still a barter system with no actual accounts or charging done.?

[The name is Porter]

Nice little ex-RAAF club we've got going here, eh, eh!

[Howabout]

You see, Dick, this is but one of the problems with your arguments. You raise a valid point as to competency and consultancy costs and then go off at a tangent to pursue one, or several, hobby-horses all the time. To wit:

Are the Military charged to fly in the AsA en route system? Or is it still a barter system with no actual accounts or charging done.?

You want NAS, supposedly in totality, but you cherry-pick the bits you want. You want the 'super-friendly US system,' but you conveniently ignore the reality.

One straight answer, Dick. Does the US airspace system you want to import holus-bolus charge the US military??

You can't have it both ways, and a simple yes or no will do. If you can't answer 'yes,' then your arguments fail in respect of NAS. For a bright bloke, you leave holes that a bus could drive through. Same for Leady.

I am sure you will agree.

Finally, Porter, it's not about ex-RAAF, it's about competence to do the job no matter the background. Personally, I do not agree that the (alleged) appointee has the skills to consult on modern ATM systems. But that's just my take.

[Dick Smith]

Of course I cherry pick the best. That's what I have always done with some success.

[Howabout]

So, Dick; am I left with nothing other than to conclude that you don't actually want NAS, despite all of your traffic to the contrary?

Am I forced to conclude that you want a hybrid called DSAS, despite your advocacy that goes back to 11/1. Advocacy that has caused such division through the agony of AS 2000, Son of AS 2000, NAS and your ongoing campaign of cherry-picking by your own admission?

Sorry, Dick, but I just don't understand how the 'logic-circuit' works. On the one hand you want NAS; and on the other you don't.

Please explain.

[le Pingouin]

And I'm still waiting for evidence of the miraculous separation standards they use in the US and Canada outside surveillance coverage.

[Dick Smith]

I have never believed we should have every IFR approach in a minimum of class E airspace as per the USA.

Look at the NAS as approved by John Anderson.

A place like Bourke clearly does not need class E. A place like Ballina does.

Copy the best I always say!

[Dick Smith]

Le Ping. I couldn't be bothered to make the effort to get the info when you don't even post under your real and honest name!

What are you hiding?

[le Pingouin]

You're the one making claims of miraculous separation standards and want us to take your word for it.

And now you resort to an ad hominem attack to avoid doing so. Really? What are you hiding?

[ANZAV8or]

Last I checked, everyone, excspt Dick, including the mods posted under made up names. Just saying.

[Dick Smith]

There are no miraculous separation standards in the USA ,Canada and France - all countries that have non radar terminal airspace to low levels- typically 700' agl.

Just sensible standards that more closely reflect what Aussie pilots now do in practice in class G.

Under AMATS the low level terminal class E was coming in at certain airports in 1993. You and others have been telling us for over 20 years that it won't work and you have prevented any trial or demo.

But you will eventually fail and when Ballina gets going successfully no doubt you will drift into obscurity .

ANZA no problems with made up names if you don't want to have any real effectiveness. Nothing to stop posters using their real names when they have self belief in what they are saying!

[ANZAV8or]

Nothing at all stopping them. Apart from wanting a job in an industry where agitators are frowned upon and where whistle blowers are moved on. You ought to know how it is in the charter shops and schools. Get yourself a rep on here and you're done. Not to mention those who are still loyal employees of small, or big, companies who could lose their jobs if they are deemed to be talking on their companies behalf or against their company.

[Dick Smith]

Good point and I stand corrected.

I havnt worked for anyone since I started DSE at 25.

That's given me the freedom to say things without the threat of damaging my career.

I apologise.

[ANZAV8or]

Thanks Dick. That's big of you.

[sunnySA]

I must say you make nice muesli, can you make larger packets as this should be more economical for me. Also, I prefer to shop at Woolies to buy my DS muesli because I have to bend to get them from the bottom shelf.

[Dick Smith]

Slight thread drift. Amazing there have been so few comments on this issue.

Looks as if no major concern re the large $1.1 m amount!

[maui]

Dick. In all your years in Business, Aviation, and Life, have you not learned that the quality of product, be it real or intellectual, is directly proportional to the amount paid.


You just need to look to our leaders to see the value of that truism.


Maui

[le Pingouin]

Dick, given the lack of any additional information how is anyone meant to judge what is unreasonable or otherwise? We can say "geez that's a lot" but who knows what he's actually doing for the money.

[Howabout]

And therein lies the problem, Ping.

Despite Dick going off on one of his inevitable tangents, which tends to just muddy the bloody water, the original question related to transparency, value for the taxpayer dollar, and the associated competency to deliver.

Dick drives me mad - he raises a valid question, then can't resist piggybacking another NAS barrow that deflates, dilutes, and diverts from, the thrust of the original argument.

[hiwaytohell]

Looks as if no major concern re the large $1.1 m amount!

Also amazing the propensity for ex military people when they end up in senior management roles to appoint ex military consultants and advisors...

[Dick Smith]

Airservices seems to have become quite a secretive organisation.

When I was Chairman of CAA I made sure there were no secrets as we were a monopoly government owned service provider and safety regulator.

Secrets tend to leak if people are unhappy which is possibly what has happened this time.

[The name is Porter]

Finally, Porter, it's not about ex-RAAF, it's about competence to do the job no matter the background. Personally, I do not agree that the (alleged) appointee has the skills to consult on modern ATM systems. But that's just my take.

So how'd he get the gig then?

[le Pingouin]

I think you'll find increased secrecy is very common in all government entities these days, not just Airservices. It's what happens when you turn them into pseudo businesses.

[Howabout]

No idea, Porter, as regards:

So how'd he get the gig then?

That's what I would like to know. I think that we may be in 'violent agreement' on that basic point.

But, unlike those that slag just because someone is ex-mil, I'd like to see the justification in respect of quals to do the job and what the TORs are for this alleged consultancy.

You see, Porter, all too often on this forum the argument that someone is ex-RAAF constitutes (flawed) justification in itself to put the boot in. Burning 'witches' comes to mind.

I just would like to see transparency. Including the assertion from Dick that the used-tyre man referred to. To wit:

Will these documents that are 'in the hands of the media' be revealed anytime soon, or is this just another click-bait banner?

Transparency is a two-way street.

[LeadSled]

Folks,
A link to the documents referred to is to be found on Auntie Pru blog site, and has been available for some days.
Tootle pip!

[Dick Smith]

All the major media identities seem to have the documents. They were obviously widely distributed by the writer.

Interesting that nothing has appeared!

[gerry111]

LeadSled,
Please post the link here as I rather dislike the person that runs the other blog site. And avoid it.

[le Pingouin]

Maybe that's because on the scale of things it's pretty much a non story? Where's the corruption? Someone's been paid a lot of money and......?

You're competing with Liberal Party shenanigans - choppergate, same-sex "branch stacking" and a duped Royal Commissioner. That's this week.

[CaptainMidnight]

Given Onesky is a major project involving Defence & Airservices to the tune of some $600M (if you can believe what you read in The Australian), is paying someone who is responsible for a lead role $1M pa for a few years unusual or unrealistic?

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/m-civil-defence-system-to-be-built-by-euro-company/story-e6frg95x-1227240573478)

If the link doesn't work for you, here is an extract from an article earlier this year:

The government will reveal today that European company Thales will build Australia’s new joint defence and civilian air traffic control system at an implementation cost believed to be about $600 million.

[sunnySA]

I think I found the document BUT given that it is marked Board-In-Confidence, then I'll leave if for someone else to post the document.
Could explain why the CFO and CEO have left ASA in recent months.

A return of ASA to the Department must be on the cards ...

[Lead Balloon]

When you add the probabilities of Defence stuffing up a big procurement with the probabilities of Airservices stuffing up a big procurement, you get a high probability. (You remember the Hughes Aircraft case, dontcha Dick? Legal Briefing No. 33 (http://www.ags.gov.au/publications/legal-briefing/br33.htm) )

My prediction is that it will end up costing at least twice $600million and have less than half of the promised functionality. No one will be responsible. A few people will get rich.

Putting shiny gadgets in front of uniformed and ex-uniformed people in government agencies is very dangerous, because they don't care how much the gadgets cost. Defence contractors tendering for a combined Defence/Airservices project is the perfect storm for the beleaguered taxpayer, because most of the key decisions are being made by people who do not care how much (of other people's money) is thrown at the project.

[zac21]

"Nail on the head" comes to mind ,,,,,,:ugh:

[Plazbot]

I'd never seen the Auntie Pru site before. Apart from the occasional homophobic comment and the over use of pet/nic makes it is not a bad read as an opinion piece.

As for the 1.1 million, assuming the chap ends up being successful, that kind of money is a drop in the ocean compared to the potential savings that a properly integrated ATM solution can deliver. Flexible use Airspace, Constant Climb/Descent, Free Routing etc. Step 1 is the ability for the Civil and Military systems to be able to talk to each other or better yet be the same. Step 2 is to negotiate the agreements to play ball. Good luck to him. I would think that no justification is required until the success or otherwise of the consultancy is evident.

[LeadSled]

Please post the link here as I rather dislike the person that runs the other blog site. And avoid it.
Gerry111,
And why do you think I should do that for you, to satisfy of your personal prejudices and predilections.
Put a peg on your nose, a blindfold over your eyes, and hold you breath, you may even survive the experience.
Tootle pip!!

[Lead Balloon]

I'd never seen the Auntie Pru site before. Apart from the occasional homophobic comment and the over use of pet/nic makes it is not a bad read as an opinion piece.I don't think there's any real homophobia among the posters over there. Indications are they're quite the opposite.

There is at least one copromaniac. S/he would almost certainly benefit from a consultation with a good psychiatrist. Sigmund Freud would probably diagnose the person as being stuck in a quite early phase of psycho-sexual development. Identifying the potential causes for this may lead to a resolution of unresolved and supressed problems.

[gerry111]

LeadSled,

I wasn't asking to borrow money off you! :p

[Dick Smith]

Has this ever been confirmed? $1.1 million seems a lot.

Was it for full time work. How many hours a day?

[le Pingouin]

Gotta love it! Dick is going on about $1million when he is wanting to spend a shed load more on introducing low level E and approach services here there and everywhere.

[Robbovic]

Grab the popcorn and beer kids, AsA appearing at the Senate Estimates from 5pm today. Will this be raised? Hope so.
Following Airservices at 7pm will be none other than Dick Smith AC - this should be fun!!

[Lead Balloon]

Conspicuously absent from the list of witnesses are:

- Air Chief Marshal Sir Angus Houston AK, AFC (Ret’d), and

- Air Vice-Marshal Margaret Staib AM, CSC.

(Interestingly, a search for the term "Staib" on the Airservices website returned no results. Airbrushed out of history already, it seems.)

[LeadSled]

Folks,
A bit of thread drift, the AFC (and CSC) always amuse me.
A good mate of mine, who spent his substantive career in the RAAF, always describes his AFC as good behavior badge, 15 years without bending anything seriously or committing an embarrassing bolloxup.
Sorry, Sir Angus, I couldn't help myself.
Tootle pip!!

[LeadSled]

Folks,
Dick certainly had the undivided attention of the Senators for an hour, and he got the message across.
It will be interesting to read the final report.
Tootle pip!!

[Lookleft]

It will be interesting to read the final report.

Thats all it will be. It won't be ground breaking and it won't be a catalyst for change.

[Lead Balloon]

Indeed.

It is suprising how many people still don't realise this stuff is mostly pantomime and posturing.