Flightwatch – 27 VHF outlets being closed

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Aussie027, while I agree with a lot of what you are saying, I want to clarify one thing. I don't advocate speaking your mind on the radio. We are all professionals and as such should conduct ourselves that way no matter what situation we are forced into.

What I would suggest is that rather than going without weather due to radio congestion you wait till there is a pause on the radio and politely make the request. If told to standby, then standby. If told that is not available then request an alternative frequency where that service will be available. If none is forthcoming then there is always the possiblilty of filing a report as this is now a serious safety issue.

Bottom line, don't argue on the radio, as while that may get your point across, you may end up causing something bad to happen with someone else, and that is not what anyone wants. After all it is not the ATCOs fault that he is left to carry the can from other peoples visions of affordable safety.

[Sunfish]

I've only ever used Flightwatch once - and when I did, I really needed it.

I left Kerang VFR for Melbourne at about 1300 when YMEN and YMMB were still closed by Fog, with enough fuel to divert to Bendigo or Ballarat, or even back to Kerang if necessary.

Decision point was Mangalore and when I overflew, Flightwatch told me they were just open.

Now what chance have I got of getting this information out of a busy Melbourne Radar frequency???? Absolute zilch! And especially when you start adding in the non english speakers you are simply asking for trouble!

Professionals please take note, as a simple VFR pilot with no ACRS, HF and god knows what else, this is a promise.......

If, through lack of timely and relevant weather or safety information through AsA, I feel that my safety and that of my companions, has been, or is compromised during flight, then I'm busting your carefully crafted system of regulation wide open.

That means: Flight through controlled airspace, unplanned landings by light aircraft at what ever airport is available - and that includes YMMB and YMAV.

Expect to see very large commercial aircraft not getting clearances or having to divert as a result of VFR traffic (altitude unverified) getting in your way as they poke about trying to get themselves sorted with no help available.

This is not a threat, its whats going to happen, I watched an Emirates 777(?) burn a stack of fuel a few months ago thanks to "VFR traffic" the wrong side of the West Gate bridge, expect much more of this, and the costs incurred by just one diversion, and the subsequent investigation, report and perhaps legal proceedings, will dwarf AsA 's savings.

Bear in mind that with the one frequency, a non english speaking student in trouble is going to blanket the entire Melbourne basin and no one is going to get any clearance for anything.

And here is the threat AsA, if you start acting as if my life as a private pilot is somehow worth less than someone travelling in an airliner, then I assure you you are going to pay for it....and a first step will be a sudden lack of the
cooperation and the give and take that currently makes the system work (for example, getting out of someone's way and passing information, Wx etc.), the second step will be that I won't be "requesting" weather or change of details, I'll be requiring it.

To put it another way, why the **** should I carry a radio, or even bother to switch it on if there is no point in talking to anyone?

I'm 100% behind Dick.

[rep]

100% agree with you Dick. What a joke.

[Pundit]

Dick,

I have just watched your interview in Ch7 Sunrise. Congratulations.

Where are all the organisations / bodies that are supposed to be safety focussed - AIPA, AFAP, CAOetc, RAAA, Gapan, ASFA, HAA, Qantas, QantasLink, Jetstar, Virgin, Rex, RFDS etc. etc. Isn't their silence golden

I have never really looked at the AsA Board, but you are right Dick, I can understand why they don't understand........






Nick Burton Taylor, AM BEc(Syd) FCA, FFIN, FAICD, ASIA


Chairman
Mr Burton Taylor was appointed to the Board on 28 January 2005 and his current term expires on 27 January 2008.
Mr Burton Taylor is a farmer living at Boorowa, NSW, with an extensive career as a professional director with a broad background in accounting, agriculture, aviation, commerce and small business.
Mr Burton Taylor is currently Chairman of the Australian Agricultural Company Ltd and the Country Education Foundation of Australia, a Director of Hamilton James and Bruce Ltd and a member of Rabo Bank Board of Advice.





Christine Goode, PSM

Deputy Chair
Ms Goode was appointed to the Board on 28 January 2005 and her current term expires on 30 April 2009.
Ms Goode has extensive public sector experience in transport, communications and executive management, working at Federal Department Deputy Secretary and Chief Executive Officer levels.
Ms Goode is currently a member of the ACT Public Trustee Investment Advisory Board.




David Forsyth, BE (Aero), GradDip, FRAeS

Mr Forsyth was appointed to the Board on 28 January 2005 and his current term expires on 27 January 2008. He is Chairman of the Board Safety & Environment Committee.
Mr Forsyth is an aeronautical engineer with over 30 years experience in airline operations and aviation engineering. He is a former Qantas Airways Executive General Manager responsible for flight operations, engineering and maintenance and previously General Manager, Qantas Regional Airlines covering four wholly-owned subsidiaries to 47 destinations Australia-wide.
Mr Forsyth is a Board Member of Aviation Australia, the Royal Flying Doctor Service of Australia (South Eastern Section) and President of the Royal Aeronautical Society Australian Division.




Robert Maher, AM, BA (ANU)

Mr Maher was appointed to the Board on 8 August 2006 and his current term expires on 7 August 2009.
Mr Maher is a graduate of the Royal Military College, Duntroon and the Australian National University in Canberra. He served with the Australian Army in Singapore, Malaysia and Vietnam. For the past decade Mr Maher provided consulting advice to investment banks and to the commercial defence sector. He has wide experience in both the public and private sectors and has extensive knowledge of Australia's economic, business, political and legislative structure.
Mr Maher is a director of Brooker Consulting Company Pty Ltd.




Henk Meertens, BArch

Mr Meertens was appointed to the Board on 28 January 2005 and his current term expires on 27 January 2008.
An architect, Mr Meertens has been actively involved in recreational and sport aviation for 25 years and has logged over 3000 hours flying time in gliders. Mr Meertens was President of the Australian Sport Aviation Confederation from 1996 to 2004 and he has represented the Australian sport and recreational aviation industry at international level and on a number of national forums and committees including Civil Aviation Safety Authority Regulatory Reviews.
Mr Meertens is a director of Rhibrae Pty Ltd, Wesky Pty Ltd and Cudgegong Soaring Pty Ltd.




Roxley McLennan, AO, AVM (Rtd)



Air Vice-Marshal Roxley McLennan retired from the Royal Australian Air Force in March 2006, after a distinguished military career that culminated in him serving as Deputy Chief of Air Force. He was appointed to the Board on 1 May 2006 and his current term expires on 30 April 2009.
Roxley has over 6,000 flying hours, the majority being on C130 Hercules aircraft in operational, check and training roles. He is committed to the vision of a single, national air traffic management system for Australia.
Roxley is Chief Executive of the South Australian Government’s Defence Unit.




Alice Williams, BComm, CFA, FAICD, FCPA

Ms Williams was appointed to the Board on 28 January 2005 and her current term expires on 27 January 2008. She is Chair of the Board Audit Committee.
Ms Williams has over 20 years of senior management and Board level experience in corporate and Government sectors and investment banking, specialising in strategy and policy development, corporate advisory and funds management, competition policy and regulation. Ms Williams has also been a consultant to domestic and international airlines.
Ms Williams is a Director of Strategic Analytics (Australia) Pty Ltd, State Trustees Limited and State Trustees Financial Services Limited, VLine Passenger Corporation, Guild Insurance & Financial Services Holding Limited, Telstra Sale Company Limited, and is a Commissioner of the Victorian Competition and Efficiency Commission.



Gerry McGowan

Mr McGowan was appointed to the Board on 23 August 2007 and his current term expires on 22 August 2010.
Mr McGowan is a former executive of TNT and Mayne Nickless. He launched Impulse Airlines, Australia's third airline in 1992 which was acquired by Qantas in 2001. Currently Gerry is Executive Chairman of CBD Energy, Executive Chairman of TRW Holdings Pty Limited and Executive Chairman of Pacific Aviation Pty Limited.



Greg Russell

Mr Russell was appointed Airservices Australia Chief Executive Officer on 19 July 2005.
Mr Russell was Chief Operating Officer at Athens International Airport until June 2005 and from 1999 to 2003 Director, Aviation Sydney Airport Corporation. Prior to that he was an executive with regional operator Hazelton Airlines for six years and became General Manager of the company. He has also held a range of management positions in private companies and Government organisations.
Mr Russell is Chairman of Airservices Australia’s wholly-owned subsidiary Airservices Pacific Incorporated.

[max1]

Peuce wrote this in regard to un rated controllers giving breaks on night shifts. By changing scenarios it equally applies to this thread, and this is what makes the controllers angry.
Quote- 'They have all their eyes dotted and their tees crossed.

You are confusing working conditions with safety & operational outcomes.

They would have done all their safety cases, hazids and would have contingency plans in place. They have fatigue management systems and policies in place. Point to one thing that they are doing that is illegal. I'm sure even the one man doggo has been covered off. They aren't silly.

Now, consider ... what if the proverbial DOES hit the fan. I can only see the finger pointing at the troops. "But I was too tired after doing lots of overtime Your Honour"... "Did you abide by the employer's Fatigue Managamnent Policy, son?" ... "Ah ... but ..."

That's just one scenario. I'll leave it to you to consider every situation that could go wrong. Then consider what Airservices has in place to cover itself off. Then consider what you have in place to cover yourself off.

Oh, the working conditions .. that's another story ... there are ways to go about getting them re-modelled' End quote.

For ' I was too tired' put in frequency congestion, or high and complex traffic levels due weather. Not too worry, when the investigation is done the controller and pilot will share a hell of a lot more blame than the system. Because the proper hazids, safety cases etc etc were done in the back offices.

[To infinity & beyond]

Well Done Dick!

Congratulations for standing up for aviation and not just taking it lying down like everyone else, airlines included. Why don't they say "NO our PILOTS will need access to that service!!!!"

If you fly VFR or IFR in Australia the Flight Watch Service was just that, a SERVICE. Problem is that AsA couldn't work out how to charge for it so they just got rid of it instead.

We will be stuffed when the drought finally brakes and there is some serious widespread weather to deal and there is simply no one to talk to at the end of the line.

Try teaching students to be proficient and obtaining current information when the ATC don't really want to deal with our requests.

[Sunfish]

Max1 A certain very large oil company tried the same technique when an oil facility blew up - blame the (dead) staff for not following procedures.

Guys, if the system says you have to do something a certain way then do it. Don't fall for the trap of working in a corporate culture that has wonderful systems on paper - but that nobody can follow because of the workload.

If you do you are asking for grief, tell the world about it, blow the whistle.

[Walrus 7]

Dick to sue Airservices?

Dick,

Thanks for the offer of taking on Airservices over the closure of Flightwatch, but it's not really needed. Most of us small plane fliers have been doing without it for some time, and can easily do without it for a long time to come as well.

Firstly, we could rarely raise Flightwatch when we needed them; secondly, most of the important information we need for the safety of the flight can be obtained from AERIS and AWIS sites. The non-weather things we can get from Centre, which they have always been more than happy to give.

My point is that getting Flightwatch back in the same form it left us is a waste of time. It either needs to be upgraded to be of value or closed completely.

Thanks again,

Walrus

[swc]

To infinity & beyond - please don't think that ATC's don't want to help. On the DTI sectors the problem we have is that there is no control over the workload and it can take just one aircraft in difficulty, a frequency problem (all too common), a flight plan amendment or some other non-routine situation to cause havoc. Add to this a weather request or some other type of request that would normally be done through Flightwatch and you can expect the controller to start sounding a little frazzled (please don't take it personally). We pride ourselves on providing a professional and efficient service, but unfortunately those above (multi-layered management) have a tendency to drop us in it leaving us floundering. ATC is struggling with ongoing and long-term staff shortages and a management team that treats us with contempt.
Good on you Dick for taking this on. As a controller I appreciate it, and they sure aren't going to listen to us...

[Dick Smith]

JackoSchitt, you state:

As for saving money on turning off the equipment, I'm told that equipment is going to be handed over to ATC to enable them to do the function in some areas.

If this is so, it is good and mitigates the problem slightly. However, if this equipment is going to be used by ATC, surely the AIP Supplement would have mentioned that the Flightwatch frequencies were now being changed to ATC frequencies. The AIP Supp makes not mention of this at all. It looks to me as if Airservices plans to make a clean sweep of removing all of those frequencies and the transmitters so they cannot be used in any way.

Does anyone have any further information on this?

[Dick Smith]

Walrus 7, thanks for your view regarding Flightwatch. One of the main reasons I am attempting to get Airservices to consult and do a proper cost benefit study is that we will then see just how many people use it, and what value it is.

On this thread you will see that there are many pilots who use Flightwatch and need it for safety.

More to the point, air traffic controllers have now had Flightwatch responsibilities thrust on them, but sometimes when they are very busy they may not be able to cope. Also, the air traffic controllers have not been consulted in relation to this.

I would at least like to see a paper which puts the pros and cons to the industry – especially the controllers and professional pilots.

Possibly there is a case to upgrade Flightwatch so it is more effective. From my experience, I have found that when I use Flightwatch it has always been very effective in giving weather and other information when I cannot obtain it from an AERIS site.

Thanks again for your view.

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

It appears that Airservices are just finishing the job that Dick started when he ran the show. I find it ironic that he is so upset about it now.

[F111]

Dick,
Although I haven't agreed with some of your actions in the past, I'm with you on this one. We need Flightwatch!

[Former AusFICer]

The real agenda

Dick,

After reading Pprune for years, this is my first post and it is on a matter that used to be close to my heart. As you can see by my user name I am a former AusFIC staff member having retired a while back. I still keep in touch with a couple of the staff occasionally, and the following is offered for the “debate”.

The real issue is not about saving a mere tuppence on equipment costs. It is about a change in philosophy about delivery of Fight Information Service (FIS) and how that presented an opportunity to cut staff.

The original situation where way back we had a real Flight Service that was to be done away with the role out of AMATS (and much at your own hands) had to be sold with the idea that it was safer to have FIS external to the new TAAATS and ATC environment. So the external FIS evolved from the remains of FS into the “FIS” and ultimately into the Australian Flight Information Centre (AusFIC). It was staffed by about 120 former FSO and ADSO staff at the time.

You say that the concept of NAS requires that pilots have access to safety information in flight from such an external (to the controller) source. This move by Airservices is effectively putting the provision of inflight FIS back into the ATC environment. There has been much discussion that this is really the pure ICAO idea, but I believe that our own Australian system of having FIS parallel to ATC is just like the USA system of having FSS parallel to ATC Centres. And it worked as well as it could. There was simply not enough low level coverage on VHF. There should have been 127 outlets, not just 27.

I am informed that for better or worse, the current ATC Management have seen an opportunity to cut the staff in the AusFIC and THEY HAVE ALREADY DONE SO!

My informant tells me that the decision to cut FIS staffing was taken first, as part of the infamous internal AusFIC Review back in Mar 2005. Apparently the coalface AusFIC staff are on the record (through their union reps) of opposing the review as lacking rigour and having the consequences of reduced safety. Such concerns obviously fell of deaf ears at the time.

I recall that the AusFIC Review was mentioned in several threads on AusFIC, Sartimes, and Flightwatch on Pprune, in the last couple of years but didn't seem to gain much traction.

I'm informed that the target staff cut in the AusFIC review of 19 was sought by an offer of Voluntary Redundancy in September 2006. A full swathe of VRs was obtained and just about all have already departed. I gather that the staff number is down to about just 70 now.

I also understand that AusFIC at the same time as cutting staff from aviation safety services embarked on Marine Safety HF without any dedicated Human Resources for it in Dec 2006. Staff again highlighted the problem of staffing and again has been ignored by Airservices.

I must conclude that the closure of the VHF Frequencies for a few hours in the mornings from 27 Sep (?) 07 was an emergency step because the AusFIC staffing had reached a critical point.

I'm told that it appears that the standalone Flightwatch VHF Service to be HAS transferred/integrated to ATC Low Sectors or otherwise totally abandoned because the AusFIC staff have already been let go. In fact, the remaining 70 staff are working overtime to continue even the current reduced level of services.

The HF service remains but the staffing for that is also reduced because of the requirement for Marine HF service. I understand tha the staff savings in AusFIC through cessation of standalone Flightwatch VHF is effectively only approx 4 Full Time Effective Staff. The cut of 19 has to be absorbed throughout the rest of the AusFIC through efficiency increases or in actual practice – through additional staff overtime!!

I believe that there has been some efficiencies in the Briefing Office, but the notion of the AIP SUP that claimed that delivery of FIS would be more efficient through ATC is simply a fraud and a safety fraud at that. As had been alluded to elsewhere, most of the Frequencies will be transferred to ATC and it is highly likely that this will result in the need for more ATC Consoles and more controllers. All this would cost more than it does now. I believe that because of the systems that AusFIC uses, such as NAIPS and CENSAR permits the Flightwatch officers to be truly efficient when it comes to information requests, Flight Plan Changes and SAR Alerting. The ATC does not have direct access/input to these systems and must relay through either a busy HF Flightwatch operator or another 3rd party.

The bottom line is that working ATCs will be forced to abandon the safety of FIS provision in favour of the higher priority of the Safety of Traffic
Information/Separation when the chips are down (literally). This will put themselves at risk. This needs to be sorted in a real safety analysis.

As far as Industry consultation, from what I can tell, there was none, merely information that the change was to occur. Industry through its lack of attention on this subject will now need to fight a rear guard action. Our political and industrial climate for our flying community works against anyone who complains. Just look at all the issues about pilot wages. Maybe this is the reason that Airservices has got as far as it has on this issue. The climate of the election should not be wasted, though I am not hopeful. I wish you luck in your campaign.

As for the morale of my former colleagues, well – it is at rock bottom. I’ve heard they recently had some internal employee opinion survey thing and the staff are not “engaged”. Perhaps that is why we have not heard much from them. They are beaten already.

As for my own aviation practices, I can tell you that as a baby boomer such as yourself, like you I am enjoying my travels in retirement. However, I will never catch an airline that flies OCTA anymore. I can’t see how our regional Airlines can adequately keep an operational watch over their flights without and effective FIS system to back up their pilots. The heavy metal that I travel on has Datalink, HF Coms, ACARS and dedicated company Flight Following provided by dispatchers with satcoms direct to the pilot.

Lets hope that for just once, the unholy dollar is ignored and commonsense reigns, roll back this move Airservices, recruit staff and spend some of your profit on general aviation.

Dick, if you can do something as an individual, it speaks volumes about how public policy is formed in Australia, (but that is another debate). In this case, I will grant that the benefit will not be for you individually, but for the totally un-empowered in Regional, General and Recreational Aviation. After-all, it was the passion for aviation that brought us all here.

AusFICer

[fixa24]

This could be a world first. Most ATC'ers agreeing with Dick Smith. Write it in the AOJ's people....

[Capt Wally]

........"user pays"........words that has forever changed the aviation industry whether it be for good or bad.
Flying across the world now has become more common than ever & as more & more people travel the costs associated with it increase as technology moves just as fast. Let's work together on this with Dick (who still has influence) & bring about change for safety sake. Remember, we the people own the world & the air above it, let not any one individual or controlling body take that away from us.
Rejoice in the fact that we as Aussies are amongst the best trained & responsible pilots on the planet, that alone may be our last defence.
I thank the guys at the other end of the radio for doing their best in a very trying industry.


Capt Wally :-)

[MACH082]

Im with you on this one also Dick,

I was leaving PH the other week and needed to amend my plan, P&CD advised me my plan didnt have a return leg, some type of glitch through champagne into Naips, so i asked them to ammend my plan, they said stand by, contacted me about 5 mins later telling me to ammend through flightwatch. Couldnt get them on ground with VHF so used HF...

Also what about all the Training aeroplanes in the southwest from JT doing diversion prac, there are swarms of them down there, are they going to be jamming MC with div prac?

What about remote areas in WA where you can't get ATC be in MC or BC on VHF? I could never raise Flightwatch in the Kimberley and often used BC, which at times was pretty busy, imagine if everyone is using ATC instead.

Things to ponder.

[Driscoll]

Dick,

Some former flightwatch frequencies are being transferred to ATC when the sectors are realigned under the ill conceived SDE transition.

[Dick Smith]

Former AusFICer, a most important post. I hope the Airservices Board members read it. I will print out a copy and post it to some of the addresses I have – here’s hoping.

I agree with everything you have said. I know there has been criticism directed at me because of my involvement in AMATS in 1991. I still have the video which went out with AMATS and it showed quite clearly that whilst we were changing the traffic information services to ATC, there would also be two automated Flight Service stations and a Flight Service system in parallel – exactly as per the North American system. Note – that is not just the USA, it is the USA and Canada.

I’m absolutely amazed to read what you have put into this post. I (and many others) would have had no idea that there was a plan to basically change everything to ATC and not have a separate Flightwatch/Flight Information Service system at all.

I point out that virtually everything that you have said in your post is news to me – and will be news to many other people in the industry. For some reason proper consultation has not taken place regarding these changes.

We are a very wealthy country and we can afford to have a duplicated ATC/Flightwatch/Flight Service system. I believe we can afford to have more than the 27 VHF outlets. I also believe that we can afford to have a proper automated Flight Service station where briefing officers are actually trained to give weather advice to pilots – not just quote met reports. This is no criticism of the people who give the briefings now – I find that they are excellent. However they simply do not have the training of their equivalents in the North American System, who will actually advise whether VFR flight is recommended after an interpretation of the forecast.

I am very disappointed to see a vision that I had (as did others – including many Flight Service Officers) being completely abandoned. I fear that it has been abandoned because of ignorance and a lack of vision, not because of any real ulterior motive.

My aim with the changes was to re-allocate the resources so they had the maximum affect for safety. My aim was never to remove all of the resources – that would be ridiculous.

I don’t like the fact that I have to try to do something to stop this as an individual. As you have stated, it is probably the only way to stop this reversal at the present time, and have some proper consultation.
I believe it all goes back to a total lack of leadership in aviation. I’m sure you will agree that the old system was ridiculous – that is, where Flight Service Officers gave traffic information in airspace which was covered by radar, but were not allowed to use the radar. I would have been happy to have the Flight Service Officers trained to use the radar. As it was, the Board decided we would follow the North American system, where the air traffic controller provided both separation and traffic information using radar where it was available. The FSO – or Flightwatch person, or whatever you call him or her – gave the important Flight Information Service.

[flyingfox]

'User pays'; 'cost recovery'; 'affordable safety'! Once these words became part of the aviation lexicon it was obvious that safety would be the loser. The old idea of providing a safe environment for aircraft has evolved to the 'big sky' principle of traffic separation. Many of the procedures now used OCTA and in class E airspace would have been condemned as dangerous twenty years ago. Now finding the basement for safety in the skies is done by the 'white cane' method of detection. It will be normal from now on to have to fight each misguided proposal as it arises due to the lead in safety coming from financial razor gangs rather than aviators. Many pilots don't bother fighting the regulators anymore as the exercise is so fruitless. They concentrate on dealing with the safety issues as they are, day to day, out in the real world. The reduced ATC services around primary airports is just a frustration, whereas the lack of FIS services is a definite risk. Furthermore, congestion on many frequencies OCTA often makes gathering required traffic information and organizing separation difficult or impossible. That's just how it is already.
Now where is a phone box. I need some weather ....