NAS Has Been Rolled Back
Thread Starter
NAS Has Been Rolled Back
In a victory for commonsense:
"Board Reaches Decision On National Airspace Reform Review
No. 23/04
The Airservices Australia Board agreed to implement airspace safety enhancements from 25 November 2004 that will leave in place about 90 percent of the class E airspace introduced in 2003.
he announcement was made following a Board meeting today where Directors considered final information on the review and also dealt with submissions received from a number of interested parties over the past few days.
Corporation Acting Chairman Air Marshal Les Fisher said the Board determined that airspace surrounding a number of control towers would be upgraded.
“The Board approved the implementation of ‘Option 3’, which involves the addition of Class C airspace above Class D towers, an enhancement of Class C above capital city airports, Class C in the en-route airspace between Sydney and Melbourne, and the re-introduction of Class E corridors between Melbourne/ Mildura and Sydney/ Dubbo.
The Board also requested management investigate as part of an End State Model, how this airspace might be optimised in the future, particularly as technology changes such as the introduction of Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B).
“The decision involves changes to about 10 percent of the current NAS airspace, but introduces significant enhancements to airspace above towered aerodromes protecting airliners.”
“The Board’s most important consideration in this difficult decision-making process has always been safety and the interests of the travelling public”, he said.
“While there maybe some inconvenience placed on general aviation in some E airspace, we can confirm there will be no additional charges associated with these changes.
Air Marshall Fisher said that between now and November a comprehensive industry training and education program including the re-introduction and distribution of radio frequency boundaries on aeronautical charts, and other awareness and educational materials would be completed and distributed.
“Now the Board has finalised its decision, Airservices safety and risk analysis will be made available on the corporation’s website.
“I place on record that this decision was focussed on safety of the travelling public and I congratulate the many people within the corporation and those who assisted in the review process for their assistance and professionalism. This decision finalises the extensive period of review of NAS 2 (b) and will enable the corporation will now direct its attention on continuing the government’s airspace reform program.” Air Marshall Fisher said."
Congratulations to the Board. It should never have been any other way. Now, Dick, here we come on your CTAFs. Put your fingers in your ears and flak jacket on, sunshine...this is gunna hurt.
"Board Reaches Decision On National Airspace Reform Review
No. 23/04
The Airservices Australia Board agreed to implement airspace safety enhancements from 25 November 2004 that will leave in place about 90 percent of the class E airspace introduced in 2003.
he announcement was made following a Board meeting today where Directors considered final information on the review and also dealt with submissions received from a number of interested parties over the past few days.
Corporation Acting Chairman Air Marshal Les Fisher said the Board determined that airspace surrounding a number of control towers would be upgraded.
“The Board approved the implementation of ‘Option 3’, which involves the addition of Class C airspace above Class D towers, an enhancement of Class C above capital city airports, Class C in the en-route airspace between Sydney and Melbourne, and the re-introduction of Class E corridors between Melbourne/ Mildura and Sydney/ Dubbo.
The Board also requested management investigate as part of an End State Model, how this airspace might be optimised in the future, particularly as technology changes such as the introduction of Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B).
“The decision involves changes to about 10 percent of the current NAS airspace, but introduces significant enhancements to airspace above towered aerodromes protecting airliners.”
“The Board’s most important consideration in this difficult decision-making process has always been safety and the interests of the travelling public”, he said.
“While there maybe some inconvenience placed on general aviation in some E airspace, we can confirm there will be no additional charges associated with these changes.
Air Marshall Fisher said that between now and November a comprehensive industry training and education program including the re-introduction and distribution of radio frequency boundaries on aeronautical charts, and other awareness and educational materials would be completed and distributed.
“Now the Board has finalised its decision, Airservices safety and risk analysis will be made available on the corporation’s website.
“I place on record that this decision was focussed on safety of the travelling public and I congratulate the many people within the corporation and those who assisted in the review process for their assistance and professionalism. This decision finalises the extensive period of review of NAS 2 (b) and will enable the corporation will now direct its attention on continuing the government’s airspace reform program.” Air Marshall Fisher said."
Congratulations to the Board. It should never have been any other way. Now, Dick, here we come on your CTAFs. Put your fingers in your ears and flak jacket on, sunshine...this is gunna hurt.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sat "Weekend Australian"
Air board ditches Anderson reforms
By Aviation writer Steve Creedy
August 28, 2004
AIRSERVICES Australia's board yesterday voted to wind back the Howard Government's contentious airspace reforms, rejecting an intense lobbying effort to stop the move.
The regulator's decision is an embarrassing blow to Transport Minister John Anderson and a serious setback to airspace campaigner Dick Smith, who originally proposed the US-style system with Mr Anderson's backing.
Mr Smith had spearheaded a campaign to discredit a study that found the changes increased the risk of a mid-air collision at regional airports.
The study also revealed instances at some airports where the risk exceeded tolerable limits.
Airservices Australia commissioned the risk studies earlier this year after an embarrassing admission that the new system was introduced last November without an adequate assessment of the possible danger to the travelling public.
Chairman Les Fisher said last night the decision to scrap the changes was focused on safety.
"The board's most important consideration in this difficult decision-making process has always been the safety and interests of the travelling public," he said.
Noting that the board had dealt with submissions from "interested parties", Air Marshal Fisher said the risk and safety analysis would be made available on the corporation's website.
The board signalled last month that its preferred option included reversing some of the airspace changes over regional airports and extending the controlled airspace over others.
The changes significantly widened the use of "Class E" airspace, in which flight instrument aircraft were separated from each other by air traffic control, but the onus was put on pilots to look out for smaller planes.
Commercial pilots and air traffic controllers warned that the new system increased the risk of mid-air collisions for airliners approaching regional airports.
But private and sports pilots argued the new system was safe and that the Airservices studies were flawed.
Last night's decision means Class E airspace between destinations will be retained.
But Class E airspace over regional airports with towers will be returned to Class C, where all planes are separated from each other by air traffic control. The decision also expands Class C airspace above capital city airports and reintroduces it to airspace between Sydney and Melbourne.
"The decision involves changes to about 10 per cent of the current national airspace system airspace, but introduces significant enhancements to airspace above towered aerodromes, protecting airliners," Air Marshal Fisher said.
He said the decision could involve some inconvenience to small plane pilots but promised they would not be hit with additional charges.
He left the way open for future airspace changes driven by new technology, and promised Airservices Australia would push on with airspace reform.
Australian Federation of Air Pilots executive director Terry O'Connell welcomed the decision as a victory for commonsense.
=========================================
Air board ditches Anderson reforms
By Aviation writer Steve Creedy
August 28, 2004
AIRSERVICES Australia's board yesterday voted to wind back the Howard Government's contentious airspace reforms, rejecting an intense lobbying effort to stop the move.
The regulator's decision is an embarrassing blow to Transport Minister John Anderson and a serious setback to airspace campaigner Dick Smith, who originally proposed the US-style system with Mr Anderson's backing.
Mr Smith had spearheaded a campaign to discredit a study that found the changes increased the risk of a mid-air collision at regional airports.
The study also revealed instances at some airports where the risk exceeded tolerable limits.
Airservices Australia commissioned the risk studies earlier this year after an embarrassing admission that the new system was introduced last November without an adequate assessment of the possible danger to the travelling public.
Chairman Les Fisher said last night the decision to scrap the changes was focused on safety.
"The board's most important consideration in this difficult decision-making process has always been the safety and interests of the travelling public," he said.
Noting that the board had dealt with submissions from "interested parties", Air Marshal Fisher said the risk and safety analysis would be made available on the corporation's website.
The board signalled last month that its preferred option included reversing some of the airspace changes over regional airports and extending the controlled airspace over others.
The changes significantly widened the use of "Class E" airspace, in which flight instrument aircraft were separated from each other by air traffic control, but the onus was put on pilots to look out for smaller planes.
Commercial pilots and air traffic controllers warned that the new system increased the risk of mid-air collisions for airliners approaching regional airports.
But private and sports pilots argued the new system was safe and that the Airservices studies were flawed.
Last night's decision means Class E airspace between destinations will be retained.
But Class E airspace over regional airports with towers will be returned to Class C, where all planes are separated from each other by air traffic control. The decision also expands Class C airspace above capital city airports and reintroduces it to airspace between Sydney and Melbourne.
"The decision involves changes to about 10 per cent of the current national airspace system airspace, but introduces significant enhancements to airspace above towered aerodromes, protecting airliners," Air Marshal Fisher said.
He said the decision could involve some inconvenience to small plane pilots but promised they would not be hit with additional charges.
He left the way open for future airspace changes driven by new technology, and promised Airservices Australia would push on with airspace reform.
Australian Federation of Air Pilots executive director Terry O'Connell welcomed the decision as a victory for commonsense.
=========================================
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not black or white, just subtle shades of grey
The Airservices Australia Board agreed to implement airspace safety enhancements from 25 November 2004 that will leave in place about 90 percent of the class E airspace introduced in 2003.
Australian ATCs like E airspace. E airspace wasn't the problem. The problem with Dickspace was where the E airspace was established. E airspace where high speed, fare paying passenger carrying jets and turbo prop aircraft were on climb or descent mingling with unidentified, unverified, and uncommunicative VFR aircraft.
The Board of AsA has allowed aviation professionals from different areas to devise some modifications to alleviate the safety flaws identified in Dickspace.
Guess what? Only 10% of Dickspace will be touched. Doesn't this say it all. Dick's big song and dance about 10% of NAS! By the sound of his rantings on this forum and others, you'd think that airspace reform and general aviation had been decimated by this decision.
DICK, move on. ADS-B will be here soon. Greater technologies in aircraft communication, identification, tracking and traffic management are occurring as we speak.
Hopefully, in 5 years time, we can look back on all of this and smile (with only a small touch of embarrassment), and quickly change the subject.
DP
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who gets to be on the Board?
Forsyth wasn't replaced, Two others are at the end of their tenures, I hear that one more may march due to confliction of interests.
So the new government will have to come up with at least 3, probably four new bodies... Dick I guess there is still hope for you and your political influencing mates.
I welcome the NAS 2B, Option3, a great deal of commonsence demonstrated. I'm not too convinced about the 10% of change argument. 80% of the NAS class E, i.e. that between F180 and F245 is now effectively not class E, due to the removal of the visual procedures in that area.
Bottle of Rum
Forsyth wasn't replaced, Two others are at the end of their tenures, I hear that one more may march due to confliction of interests.
So the new government will have to come up with at least 3, probably four new bodies... Dick I guess there is still hope for you and your political influencing mates.
I welcome the NAS 2B, Option3, a great deal of commonsence demonstrated. I'm not too convinced about the 10% of change argument. 80% of the NAS class E, i.e. that between F180 and F245 is now effectively not class E, due to the removal of the visual procedures in that area.
Bottle of Rum
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, but they have to have their little face-saving political spin.
Champaign is open!
What's it like to be a THREE-TIME LOSER, Dick? I was taught making mistakes isn't a problem. Repeating them is.
Champaign is open!
What's it like to be a THREE-TIME LOSER, Dick? I was taught making mistakes isn't a problem. Repeating them is.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Back too the hot bits again
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a little question.
If NAS in its current form is so dangerous why have you all continued to fly. Are you hoping any possible events may happen to someone else or have the teething problems been sorted out?
I expect to be abused by the usual culprits but a logical answer would be welcome.
If NAS in its current form is so dangerous why have you all continued to fly. Are you hoping any possible events may happen to someone else or have the teething problems been sorted out?
I expect to be abused by the usual culprits but a logical answer would be welcome.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am no doubt one of your usual suspect Ethel, but I will try to answer sans-abuse.
What choice is there if we all want to put food on the table?
Can I reverse the question?
If Dick and his supporter stand by their claim that NAS is safer than pre-NAS, and NAS is to be wound back, will the pro-Nas supporters now not fly because it is less safe again?
why have you all continued to fly?
What choice is there if we all want to put food on the table?
Can I reverse the question?
If Dick and his supporter stand by their claim that NAS is safer than pre-NAS, and NAS is to be wound back, will the pro-Nas supporters now not fly because it is less safe again?
