Australian Airspace Reform
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: S37.54 E145.11
Posts: 639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australian Airspace Reform
Sorry Woomera, I tried to follow Danny's policy but, unfortunately, I can't find the appropriate forum covering airspace reform.
The following press release by the Minister with respect to the future governance and operation of Australia's national airspace will be of interest to all Australian air operators and ATS:
http://http://www.casa.gov.au/media/...RS06_155WT.htm
The following press release by the Minister with respect to the future governance and operation of Australia's national airspace will be of interest to all Australian air operators and ATS:
http://http://www.casa.gov.au/media/...RS06_155WT.htm
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Straya
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Orstralia
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Betta un-ban Dick, Truss mentioned NAS!!!
I must admit I expected OAR to be made a part of DOTARS, to be firmly under ministerial whim. As CASA has worked hard to sabotage most recent airspace reform it will be interesting to see what they do with the parcel they will be passed.
I must admit I expected OAR to be made a part of DOTARS, to be firmly under ministerial whim. As CASA has worked hard to sabotage most recent airspace reform it will be interesting to see what they do with the parcel they will be passed.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still looks like a recipe for a camel instead of a racehorse.
CASA has responsibility for OAR but Defence is still responsible for "defence airspace" whatever that is. (In war I would expect it to be everything, in peace I would have hoped we were trying to run a business i.e. Australia Incorporated)
Oh, and Airservices will:
"undertake more rigorous analysis of airspace operations thus providing earlier notice of possible emerging risks, which will deliver a significant improvement in anticipating and planning for immediate and future airspace needs."
Isn't that what an Office of Airspace Regulation should do?
CASA has responsibility for OAR but Defence is still responsible for "defence airspace" whatever that is. (In war I would expect it to be everything, in peace I would have hoped we were trying to run a business i.e. Australia Incorporated)
Oh, and Airservices will:
"undertake more rigorous analysis of airspace operations thus providing earlier notice of possible emerging risks, which will deliver a significant improvement in anticipating and planning for immediate and future airspace needs."
Isn't that what an Office of Airspace Regulation should do?
It is appropriate that regulatory responsibility goes to CASA rather than DoTRS, as there are no other available choices on the table. As the safety regulator, CASA have the aviation knowledge and expertise to a degree to deal with airspace regulatory matters. Normally such matters also involve them in relation to safety regulation issues as well.
DoTRS and airspace policy is appropriate also, but at this stage they appear to have little knowledge or expertise in airspace matters, and to make matters worse they have lost face and credibility by aligning themselves with NAS and rejecting industry input and concerns with the program, rather than adopting a more neutral position. But then as with other DoTRS matters, they no doubt view their airspace policy role as simply burocrats following the Minister’s direction.
I don’t agree that CASA or any other organization has sabotaged airspace reform. Some would say a particular individual sabotaged the LLAMP project in the late 90’s – and that project had widespread industry support because all the stakeholders were involved at all times and their input was listened to.
DoTRS and airspace policy is appropriate also, but at this stage they appear to have little knowledge or expertise in airspace matters, and to make matters worse they have lost face and credibility by aligning themselves with NAS and rejecting industry input and concerns with the program, rather than adopting a more neutral position. But then as with other DoTRS matters, they no doubt view their airspace policy role as simply burocrats following the Minister’s direction.
I don’t agree that CASA or any other organization has sabotaged airspace reform. Some would say a particular individual sabotaged the LLAMP project in the late 90’s – and that project had widespread industry support because all the stakeholders were involved at all times and their input was listened to.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Calcutta
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA, must complete a Hazard assessment for the implementation of change; thus they could derail any attempt at change by saying not safe to implement... So what has changed?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder what the priorities will be?
SDE or NAS or TINA or TAAATS software or International training commitments or other international interlectual propoerty stuff, or replacing the 200+ controllers headed out the door in the next 5 years; all with a gutted Admin section and VRs seamingly on offer for anyone who wants to go. Seems that all these things will keep bumping heads, will anything at all get done?
Let's not mention the AWA "debacle" and the pending ATC CA (EBA) conflict in early 2008.
SDE or NAS or TINA or TAAATS software or International training commitments or other international interlectual propoerty stuff, or replacing the 200+ controllers headed out the door in the next 5 years; all with a gutted Admin section and VRs seamingly on offer for anyone who wants to go. Seems that all these things will keep bumping heads, will anything at all get done?
Let's not mention the AWA "debacle" and the pending ATC CA (EBA) conflict in early 2008.
