RAAF and ASA
 

Does anyone actually know what the future holds with project "Genesis"?

I have been told that ASA will be taking over several towers ie Richmond, Nowra, East Sale and Edinburgh?? Pearce Approach has moved into Perth and Darwin Approach is apparently moving to Brisbane at the end of 2007. Is the plan to eventually amalgamate the two ATC providers into one and allow civilian controllers into places such as Williamtown (Newcastle), Townsville and Darwin, where the majority of traffic is civilian anyway.

AsA have really only just come back from the Xmas stand-down period, so by the start of Feb. I'll know more about what is going on.

At this stage, as far as I know, Project Genesis is full steam ahead.

Everything will eventually be integrated with RAAF controllers using the TAAATS gear in the centres. Towers will have both mil and civilian controllers (this already happens as far as I'm aware, eg. Willy). Willy will be stand alone as a centre but eventually change to TAAATS equipment in the future. ADATS is dead.

There will always be a place for military controllers for deployment to various hot spots and exercises. Civil controllers (even ex-RAAF ones like me) have no desire to be in war zones. When Timor first kicked off in 1999, all ex-mil controllers (including me) in Brisbane Centre were asked if they would deploy to Timor tower. 100% negative reply.

Once again, I'll know more in about a couple of weeks, but someone out there with an ear closer to Canberra may have more up to date info.

[QUOTE=DirtyPierre;3086189]AsA have really only just come back from the Xmas stand-down period, so by the start of Feb. I'll know more about what is going on.
At this stage, as far as I know, Project Genesis is full steam ahead.
Everything will eventually be integrated with RAAF controllers using the TAAATS gear in the centres. Towers will have both mil and civilian controllers (this already happens as far as I'm aware, eg. Willy). Willy will be stand alone as a centre but eventually change to TAAATS equipment in the future. ADATS is dead.

Does anyone know why ADATS was ever ordered? There seems to be no reason why TAAATS shouldn't have been used in the first place.

Probably politics at work again!

Aussie

Does anyone know where a RAAF ATCer's power to issue instructions to civvy aircraft comes from? Do they hold ATC licences like their civvy counterparts?

To put it another way, if a civvy aircraft fails to comply with an instruction from a RAAF ATCer, which regulation has been breached?

In relation to ADATS, I believe that when the RAAF put the tender out, Thales (or whoever owned TAAAAAAAAAAATS then) didn't think they could fulfill the requirements (lots of outstation approach cells and towers) so they didn't bid. Therefore the RAAF couldn't get TAAATS as it wasn't even on offer. Now, with the experience AsA and Thales have now, they should be able to do something. ADATS is, afterall, just a software program. Getting TAAATS onto the equipment might not be as easy as inserting the TAAATS boot disk and hitting CTRL-ALT-DELETE, but it certainly isn't impossible.

As for the authorisation for RAAF ATC to direct civilian aircraft, I'm looking into it. I believe that the Defence Force is one of the authorised agencies to perform ATC in Australia, so if they are the administrtor of the airspce (either class C steps like DAR/TVL, or restricted areas like Willy) they can direct the aircraft contained within. I will have a closer look for references anyway. And the aircraft captain can also not comply with civil ATC instructions also if he/she believes it will put their aircraft at risk, if that is what you are getting at?

Cheers,

NFR.

RAAF ATCO's do not hold a CASA license as such, however should it matter?

Dunno about the particular regulation, but you may find yourself in the middle of a bunch of PC9s/Hawks/F18s etc doing all sorts of whacky stuff. Ya gotta ask yourself.......do you feel lucky?.....Well, do ya?!

RAAF ATCO's power comes from the ADF who is an authorised provider of ATC. Ref: CAR's.

Which CAR?

If a civvy flies into Townsville and fails to comply with an ADF ATCer's instruction, which rule does she break?

CAR 100 and 183 seem to be the ones that say you should comply with ATC instructions. RAAF members are Air Traffic Controllers. Just licensed by a different authority.
ASA and ADF are airspace administrators.

How would you know if the girl/guy in the tower/radar room was in a blue suit or not anyway? You should obey the instruction regardless, unless as a captain, you believe it to be unsafe

My understanding is that all ATCs in the RAAF have an ICAO licence.

That used to be the case, and when you left, the RAAF took it back from you. Now, however, as the CARs state that you are able to perform ATC if you are employed by the Defence Department to do so, an ICAO licence is no longer required. I think that's how it works. I never got one and I did my course in 1997. People a few years ahead of me did have a yellow book, however. Not really worth the paper it's printed on if you have to give it back.

Cheers,

NFR.

Check the definition of Air Traffic Control and Air Traffic Control Instructions in the CARs and then, as NFR says, see CAR 100 (1)

I think this was tested in court several years ago ('bout 97/98) when a pilots lawyer questioned the ADF's legal ability to control civil aircraft in Class C airspace (ie Darwin). At that point the legislation was found to be inadequate and the 'loophole' was subsequently closed.

I don't quite understand the point of the debate.

As a military pilot, I respect the instructions/clearances issued by either military or civil authorities. When I am denied a clearance to climb (in any airspace), I don't think of the legalities of the denial... I think "oh there must be some conflicting traffic".

What's with the quest for a legal way of circumventing the need to follow a clearance if you are military under civil control or vice versa? If you f*ck it up, take it on the chin. If you didn't, the tapes/radar will clear you. Is that too old fashioned?

VI

Frozo is correct. Military pilots have more discretion to disregard instructions. The circumstances would have to be extreme.

Creampuff, if your first question was serious, then a search of CAR's would have yielded the answer to your second question.

GG's answered my question - thanks:ok:

Took the words out of my mouth Victor India

I couldn't give a rats what color uniform the ATCer is wearing. Military ATC works by the same rules as civvy ATC in the vast majority of cases, there are very few differences. I just do what I'm told.

There was an instance of an F/A-18 driver declaring "Due Regard" and disobeying an ATC instruction about 2-3 years ago, and I believe he received a swift kick up the backside for it!!

Genesis
 

I'm intrigued by subtle references to "Genesis" and the suggestion that where PPRuNe is concerned, the word is only whispered in the halls of power.

Anyone care to enlighten me? And confirm that any mention of "Genesis" on PPRuNe may lead to a witch hunt and tea and bikkies with the Chief Honchos?

I'm intrigued - and bewildered!

:confused:

Tail Wheel