NAS is dead so the new acronym is SDE (Service Delivery Environment)

[jumpuFOKKERjump]

I think this one has snuck under most peoples notice so far. As the stake was driven through the heart of NAS Airservices was tasked with coming up with its plan on what should happen in the next 5 years or so to replace it (so whichever minister we have this week can warble on that airspace reform is still on the front burner...)

http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/.../ATC_Jul06.pdf

As you can see from the above, the plan is to split all ATC up into 3 streams. From implementation on they will manage their airspace as they see fit (ie. differently) and waste huge amounts of resources arguing over who gets which airspace and which ATC resources. These arguements have already started, with Regional trying to pinch airspace off High Density in a workload maximising manner so they will have something to do and still feel important...

USER PREFERRED SERVICES : High level continental airspace and all oceanic airspace.

REGIONAL OPERATIONS : Airspace over continental Australia below the user preferred environment including Class D towers, Perth terminal and Enroute services. AusFIC is also part of this function.

HIGH DENSITY SERVICES : Airspace between east coast city pairs from Cairns to Adelaide. Includes Class C towers.

CONCEPT END STATE : Planning will include optimum alignment of Centre operations with service delivery lines. For example, each Centre may be reconfigured for operations for one or two service delivery lines.

Whadderyathink

[Chimbu chuckles]

I just read that link and learned precisely nothing.

Clearly when something is written in such a manner it is because someone has something to hide.

Given the basic premise that it will translate into less service what are the practical applications to the various types of traffic as understood by the ATCOs?

VFR PVT OPS
IFR/VFR Charter OPS
IFR High/Low Capacity RPT.

We can assume it will be seemless for high cap RPT/International ops...we can also assume that IFR Charter/domestic high Capacity/Regional airline ops will find themselves sharing airspace with VFR PVT/COM Ops.

Once again the devil will be in the detail...which we ain't being given in that piece of PR.

[Sunfish]

For $1000/hr, I will interpret. Please do not ask for credit as refusal often offends.

[Shitsu_Tonka]

I don't think there has been anything secretive about it.

In the absence of knowledge, some operational people are left scratching their heads at how this can be implemented when ATC numbers are pretty dire.

There must be an obvious reason for yet another reorganisation - must be.

One thing though - SDE is Airservices idea, NAS wasn't. That was someone elses idea, whose name escapes me. This has nothing to do wth NAS per se.

There is a more detailed explanation here (document is listed as commercial-in-confidence but is on the public website (?):

https://www.airservicesaustralia.com...epts_Jul06.pdf

There are some really neat phrases and buzzwords too!

(page 15)
Strategic Thrusts for the Airside Stream

Explore opportunities for charging for value-add services

Develop ability to provide ‘gate-to-gate’ services by developing strategic
alliances with airport owners

Develop new cost effective solutions for airport traffic control through new
approaches to provision of infrastructure and labour

Leverage the land value for airports by using alternative technologies or
equipment siting

Explore opportunities to provide business continuity services for airports with
security needs or capacity constraints

Create seamless integration of airside and airspace in order to enhance
airport efficiency

Integrate tower services further into airport operations

Can you read between the lines?

And have a look at these little beauties!:

Strategic Thrusts for the Airspace Stream

Differentiate services for customers by identifying tailored service
bundles to maximise added value

Establish the appropriate balance of access & safety between all
categories of airspace users

Ensure traffic flows are not artificially constrained by factors such as
national or facility boundaries, regulations, etc

Ensure Airservices’ internal policies and procedures allow customers
to leverage the use of their capability for maximum efficiency

Establish asystem-wide approach to air traffic management within
the region

Interesting times.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Develop new cost effective solutions for airport traffic control through new approaches to provision of infrastructure and labour

Leverage the land value for airports by using alternative technologies or equipment siting

Integrate tower services further into airport operations

That sounds to me like Sell the Class D/GAAP Towers to the airport owners.

God i hate 'management speak'

[Sunfish]

****su stop talking dirty, your getting me aroused, "leveraged synergies" indeed.

[NOtimTAMs]

I wouldn't mind seeing some "empowerment of stakeholders" in there somewhere......

[Atlas Shrugged]

...and "World's Best F g Practice" too !!

[Biggles_in_Oz]

…and working towards a framework that allows us to charge based on value.

Does that mean we'll hear on the radio, something like ;
"if you want traffic advisories you'll need to upgrade to our premium service."

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

re SDE......

HA HA HA HO HO HO...........

Wait for it......

"YOUR SAFETY WILL BE ENHANCED AND IT WILL COST YOU... LESS"......

(Or was THAT 'ANOTHER ERA'??)

I reckon you could now safely delete that last word above.....

SARTIME with MUM.......
Weather from 'Aunty'

Cheers

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Re quote;

"Explore opportunities for charging for value-add services"

I remember from the 'old days' a letter from HO proposing -

'To Introduce a pricing regime to discourage participation...'

This was originally intended to apply to VFR flights submitting / cancelling SARTIMES by radio, as well as other 'ON AIR' requests...., as I remember.

But then the aim was to get rid of FSOs.

Discourage participation = less services = less staff.

Is this going to be another way of coping with less staff after the 20% cut???

Cheers

[IMHFO]

Just to throw in what should be a centre-fielder. Isn't all this just a bit premature what with the looming advent of the Office of Airspace Management about to kick off.

Or is this premeditated.

and OAM - More of the same or something different pending; considering CASA (should) have non-commercial (bi-partite) persuasion (yup - pun intended).

[VVS Laxman]

I would suggest that because ASA is responsible for implementation (training their staff) and their own risk management processes; they will have a significant influence over any changes even after the OAM becomes it's own beast.

(yes Minister, but we're too busy reforming our business, you must give us until 20XX before we will be ready)

[jumpuFOKKERjump]

Isn't all this just a bit premature what with the looming advent of the Office of Airspace Management about to kick off.

Define premature. The minister has indicated what the gummint policy is, but ASA still has its own CEO and Board, and their own policies. Because the (previous) minister has indicated his office might pick up the reins sometime next near (at the current rate this will be in 6 ministers time) the current CEO will be working overtime to implement stuff so his CV looks good for his next gig the year after, (in about 12 ministers time). Whether any of it works, or is cost effective, or will be reversed by ministerial rein twitching is irrelevant, coz he will be working somewhere else when we find out.

As to airspace change, if it is imposed by a committee addicted to Ozemite we will just have to deal with it, and flyers will pay the bills.

what are the practical applications to the various types of traffic as understood by the ATCOs?

At the moment, if you fly from ML/SY/ML you fly through two enroute functional groups. These groups have their own co-rated ATC, their own line managers, sit in different aisles and have only a cursory knowledge of what the others do, and how their decisions affect the other group. The groups cover all levels, so the same two groups that process the ML/SY track process the AY/SY as well.

What is proposed would combine the sectors that cover the ML/SY/ML jet traffic into a single group under a single manager, in the same aisle as ML TMA, shoving the regional traffic underneath to another group. If a sector within that group requires a change of some sort it can be implemented within a single group rather than negotiated. Then do the same for AD/ML/AD and AD/SY/AD. After that somebody will notice that some of these tracks cross, the earth is not flat, and we will go back to stopping sector boundaries at state borders...

The guts:

ECS: Optimised everything for the customers that pay the bills, RPT. Everybody else ****-off.

RO: Praying for low level E airspace so somebody won't notice that Flight Service has been reintroduced and make them all unemployed. Night shifts spent talking to nobody in vast, aeroplane-free, conked sector groups. "Is that guy departing traffic for me?" "No, he's in Mildura, you're in Merimbula..."

UP: Flextracks everywhere & dynamic sectorisation. Optimised everything for the customers that pay the bills, RPT. Everybody else ****-off. Every night a bewildering brain-fest.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

G'day 'Fokker'.....

I seem to remember much 'discussion' about THAT bit too....
It used to be alluded to as 'Core Business'....RPT En Route High Fliers only thanks....

The 'automation' from TAAATS or whatever, was to make it all work, and 'sell' the service to the world...more airspace administered = more $'ss for the 'Major Stakeholder'.....

Is it still the current plan to introduce ADSB into the Upper Airspace Program for the 'High-Fliers' only?

Max income from the 'Heavies' - en route air nav charges - vs Min staff to make it work.

For the rest of us??
Its a Family affair...
Sartime with Mum...
Weather from Aunty...

Cynical??....You Bet!

[Ultralights]

so to put it all into laymans terms, were all fcuked! and the costs of those services will skyrocket in the face of open competition...

Is this the final nail in the coffin?

[Chimbu chuckles]

Where will the open competition come from?

[Shitsu_Tonka]

I really think you are all over reacting to what is essentially an exercise in deck chair shuffling.

As chuck implies - there is no competition. The model for competition is the one that has been abandoned, mainly because the previous restructure was along profit lines (which is based on the charging regime - the thing that really needs fixing). Who wanted to buy a whole lot of unprofitable control towers and be forced to pay a 'service' fee to the federal government? Turns out: nobody!.

At the end of the day, planes have to take off, cruise descend and land. To do that you need air traffic controllers, people to recruit, administer and train them, you need ATM equipment and infrastructure, the people to maintain it, and you need to keep up with technology. These are all fundamental truths that no amount of weasel word management-speak and hype ever change. In fact, what is old is inevitably re-badged as something new after a few cycles. And all the time the planes keep coming and going, the radar keeps turning and the managers keep changing and promising new and better things - which are really just microwaved re-heats of something old but with newer trinkets thrown in.

Funnily enough, these managers, accountants and spinners come and go very quickly, but the air traffic controllers, technicians and other professionals stick around for a long long time, and continue to keep getting on with the same job 24/7..... with an ever wryer and wryer subtle grin, and a hardened edge to their lack of surprise at the next wunderkind who comes up with a 'new' idea.

Relax.

Leave the intrigue and politicking to those who have shown themselves to know or care little about aviation and air traffic control - and leave the aviation and air traffic control to those who don't care about the intrigue and politics.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Sde.....

G'day Mr 'T'.....

POINTS taken and understood - thoroughly.

But, 'tis strange that despite the various managerial 'comings and goings'..and 'second comings' - (Some who think that they are) -
THE WHEEL JUST KEEPS ON TURNING!

As it has done for the last 15+ years or so...Yep, 15+!

Like...WHO keeps on turning it????.....was a question much asked in those former 'trying times'....

And YEP, there is no competition as such - the 'Private' Italian company which at one time was heavily rumoured to be interested in Adelaide as a 'package', have learned that, for them and the package, it was a 'no go'.
No $$$'s in it! WHO was going to pay?? It didn't take long for THEM to work that one out.

And YEP, aircraft will still take-off and land, but it is rapidly becoming clear that the deck chairs are being 'washed overboard' as time goes on....

And, at OTHER THAN CAPITAL CITY Airports, more 'responsibilities' will be passed on to the PIC.

A 'chronological sequence' of those 'deck chairs overboard', would have to include the various Regional Flight Service Units - the FIRST to go I think, Regional ATC/FS Admin Services, - Briefing Offices around the country, - ATC Regional Services, eg. PD Twr, KA Twr and all the others...etc etc.. -concentration / redundos to BN & ML Centres for ATC, - Flight Service Centres, - Tech staff at all locations...and the list goes on...

Fewer 'deck chairs' now methinks.

And, fewer Unions to contend with.

And RPT still operate into PD, KA, ABY, et al....(Should I mention Proserpine...??)

So what do we have that is left?

Are we close to 'Core Business' yet??

Yep - and 'they' are gettting closer....

And, a better question might be, with all the comings and goings and 'golden handshakes' along the way, WHO are 'they'?? = (Who is/are still doing this??)

Now, you know this, and, with respect, Chuck soon will when he flies his Bo - and finds there are FEW/NIL services avbl to him as a GA/Pvt op. - it won't affect his ATPL flying at all - THAT IS the 'Core Business'....

eg. I recently completed my AFR and filed a FPL for JT for the coast - Perth City and out to the coast again - Clearance Not Avbl - too busy - there was NIL aluminium heard or sighted west of the approach - nil service - ho hum.

And it is painfully obvious that no-one else is going to take up the expensive 'to run and maintain' Capital City Twrs.

So, what else is there when the 20% or so have been offerred and accepted, the 'big handshake' ??

Less staff = less services in anybody's language I reckon.

It is a fair bet that as a Country, all we will be left with is 'Full Service' for Upper Levels, 'Some' yet to be determined service for Intermediate Levels, and Capital City, and maybe 'SOME YET TO BE SELECTED', Arrivals / Towers.

Watch the 'WHEEL'---round and round it goes, and where it stops--
You know the rest....

Nuthin' personal Louie...Its Just business....BANG!!

Like I said before,
'Tis a Family Affair....,

Sartime with 'MUM',
Weather from 'Aunty',

Enjoy
And, I do look forward to all responses - especiallly if there are ANY from Canberra!!!

[Dick N. Cider]

Not sure I agree entirely...

Whilst I agree with ****su that this smacks severely of deck chair shuffles you can guarantee that there will be a huge amount of angst as people are pigeon-holed into what ever structure Airservices eventually gets (as opposed to what they think they'll get).

As Ex FSO GRIFFO has identified elsewhere on this site the constant drain on what was Flight Service and became AUSFIC will be part of this cull. CENSAR will be heaped onto the flight datas in the TAAATS Centres and they'll also ge the briefing part of things. The Flightwatch VHF will be shoe-horned into the DTI sectors (what used to be Flight Service areas) and pressure to combine it up with Class E/C/A airspace. As far as I can tell that only leaves HF from the FS structure and services.

I'm having a bit to do with the spin doctors that are trying to sell it but most of I what hear apart from motherhood statements is "...but there's still a parcel of work to be done on that." One of my peers keeps telling me to "Enjoy every day at Airservices. This is the best it's ever going to be."

I'll reserve my judgement but I have a bad feeling in my waters.

DNC