From the US- It's tough on GA downunder
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Reckon this is sure gonna be a hot topic!
First thing I noticed was:
Then:
Now let me see 300,000,000 divided by 5,174 = 1 airport per 57,982 citizens.
20,000,000 divided by 300 = 1 airport per 66,667 citizens.
Not that much different really!
What I would really like to see is figures relating to airport movements, aircraft ownership and usage...
And finally this one, which surely has been plagiarised from the annals of Pprune.
First thing I noticed was:
But Australia has a small population of only 20 million people compared with 300 million in the United States.
Even today, Australia, an advanced, modern society, has less than 33 percent of the nation covered by low-level radar, only 26 control towers, and just 300 paved runways (compared with 5,174 in the United States).
20,000,000 divided by 300 = 1 airport per 66,667 citizens.
Not that much different really!
What I would really like to see is figures relating to airport movements, aircraft ownership and usage...
And finally this one, which surely has been plagiarised from the annals of Pprune.
Australian GA pilots feel that they are the pariahs in a system that favors the airlines and the "big end of town."
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting article. Hard to compare the two systems, although the government seems intent on turning AUS into the US.
It’s a 5 year rule isn’t it!?!?
Probably not the correct thread, but I would really like not to pay $75 for a little stamp on my medical (Although it’s a damn site better than $130).
It’s a 5 year rule isn’t it!?!?
Probably not the correct thread, but I would really like not to pay $75 for a little stamp on my medical (Although it’s a damn site better than $130).
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I thought the US were currently in the process of changing to the Aussie system (ie: USER PAYS!), of course there is much opposition to this especially from AOPA in the US!
I would be all for the US system if it meant we didn't have to pay ridiculous fees anymore...
I would be all for the US system if it meant we didn't have to pay ridiculous fees anymore...
Metrosexual
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Enroute
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BAIT
Strident controllers, under the aegis of powerful unions, insist on extravagant in-trail separation, low-volume traffic flows, and circuitous routings at Class D nonradar towers.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strident controllers, under the aegis of powerful unions, insist on extravagant in-trail separation, low-volume traffic flows, and circuitous routings at Class D nonradar towers.
What exactly is an extravagant in-trail space; 10 mins, well what else can you use with aircraft without the gear and without surveilance; where exactly are these low-volume traffic flows and where can I get one?
I see the biggest problem is that we don't have enough education on both sides of the mic; come and see what we do please, don't just throw sh!t at it; generally there is a very valid reason and we are working often at maximum capacity or worse; picture the "one armed paper hangar".
Look at staffing levels/traffic levels as well as facility levels, the averages are about the same. 15 times the traffic volumes, 30 times the radars, 20 times the runways, 20 times the towers, 20 times the controllers etc.
The most significant difference is the charging regime and who do we have to thank for that little baby; can you say sold a pup?
Will it be too different if the FAA gets it's way by the end of 2008?
Same crusty old buggers make the same old noises, I flew to Heathrow and never held why can't Sydney be like that? etc. Yet all the UK-NATS controllers we talk to say we do sh!t loads of holding for Heathrow?
Most of what we do in terms of holding/Noise sensitive tracking/curfews etc is political interference and nothing to do with ATC; other than 'deliberate non-compliance' ends with tea and bickies if your lucky and the door if you're not.
When I was a pax on QF recently that diverted to CB instead of busting the SY curfew the pilot announced it was the "fault" of Air Traffic Control (Air Traffic Control have advised us...), I was just a little p!ssed off, especially when we departed I was thinking, we aren't going to make it; so why did we go and then why go to CB, for farks sake.
Metrosexual
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Enroute
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aaaah, SM-4, it was a $hit-stir!
It was a quote from the US AOPA article I thought deserved some tearing down - not necessarily the opinions of this monkey that drives the machine!!!
For the record, I have utmost respect for ATCers (except for the occasional dodgy processing into YBBN
)
My sarcasm probably wasn't obvious enough... should have stuck a few of these in there somewhere!
P.S You know what they say about sarcasm: 'Lowest form of wit"
PSS Now don't you go giving me vectors to halfway to NZAA on my way back down the coast!!
It was a quote from the US AOPA article I thought deserved some tearing down - not necessarily the opinions of this monkey that drives the machine!!!
For the record, I have utmost respect for ATCers (except for the occasional dodgy processing into YBBN
)My sarcasm probably wasn't obvious enough... should have stuck a few of these
in there somewhere! P.S You know what they say about sarcasm: 'Lowest form of wit"
PSS Now don't you go giving me vectors to halfway to NZAA on my way back down the coast!!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A good article
Bob Murphy
That article is a very good summary of much of what has been happening here for a long time. Australian pilots and operators are not prepared to criticise the authorities, as they are mindful of the approvals and renewals they have to ask for on a regular basis, and the "dispensations" and "exceptions" that are issued to some.
It is interesting that the persons quoted in the article are pilots with significant flying experience. But none of them depend on operating aircraft for a living.????? They are prepared to speak out.
That article is a very good summary of much of what has been happening here for a long time. Australian pilots and operators are not prepared to criticise the authorities, as they are mindful of the approvals and renewals they have to ask for on a regular basis, and the "dispensations" and "exceptions" that are issued to some.
It is interesting that the persons quoted in the article are pilots with significant flying experience. But none of them depend on operating aircraft for a living.????? They are prepared to speak out.
Last edited by bushy; 16th May 2007 at 14:54.
Us Atc
Just landed after an IFR sortie here in the states so may comment.
Air Traffic Control here is really good as a blanket statement. I guess having radar coverage pretty much everywhere except the mountains and below 1000 agl in parts helps. ATC do a really good job of providing traffic information and active "flight following" of VFR aircraft OCTA. I am always surprised to hear a good natured atc-er happy to provide a code to vfr aircraft and helpful traffic, when they could just say "Maintain vfr and code 1200".
The IFR service is really good. Every night of the week we are sequenced into an airport ahead of and often behind a 757, with several regional jets in the mix and often at least 2 single engine turboprop airforce trainers in the pattern (circuit).
With the advent of ground stops and flow management programs, haven't had to hold (i fly a turboprop so not too high performance) yet unless requested and to think of it have only flown a full approach a couple times. In mexico you always fly a full approach or you'll become part of a hill. ATC are a little hit and miss there.
I think overall a lot of it is attitude. There is a whole bunch of GA over here and i think in Oz they get the shaft.
Here's one for you. THe other day at the local FBO i go to, the tower had a customer satisfaction survey for transient pilots to fill out! Service.
Air Traffic Control here is really good as a blanket statement. I guess having radar coverage pretty much everywhere except the mountains and below 1000 agl in parts helps. ATC do a really good job of providing traffic information and active "flight following" of VFR aircraft OCTA. I am always surprised to hear a good natured atc-er happy to provide a code to vfr aircraft and helpful traffic, when they could just say "Maintain vfr and code 1200".
The IFR service is really good. Every night of the week we are sequenced into an airport ahead of and often behind a 757, with several regional jets in the mix and often at least 2 single engine turboprop airforce trainers in the pattern (circuit).
With the advent of ground stops and flow management programs, haven't had to hold (i fly a turboprop so not too high performance) yet unless requested and to think of it have only flown a full approach a couple times. In mexico you always fly a full approach or you'll become part of a hill. ATC are a little hit and miss there.
I think overall a lot of it is attitude. There is a whole bunch of GA over here and i think in Oz they get the shaft.
Here's one for you. THe other day at the local FBO i go to, the tower had a customer satisfaction survey for transient pilots to fill out! Service.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 587
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DUXNUTZ
OI!
Pretty much sums it up from where I am.
If you have the infrastructure you can do much more than without.
OI!
I guess having radar coverage pretty much everywhere except the mountains and below 1000 agl in parts helps.
If you have the infrastructure you can do much more than without.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A slightly different viewpoint is that when GA occupies a significant portion of ATC and FAA time and the revenue is not so important (ie, the USA) the industry tends to receive a significant amount of attention. When the priority is the money and GA don't contribute much of the green stuff for AsA or CASA(ie, Australia), then understandably, that portion of the industry doesn't receive much attention and tends to be viewed as a royal pain in the rrrrrrrr.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 'straya!
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thoroughly enjoyed that article.
Well whatta ya know!
Couldn't have said it better myself...
Slowly it's turning around. It will be interesting to see the state of the industry by the end of next year.
He says, "It is ironic, but this organization is successful because it is largely devoid of CASA purview.
Smith says, "One of the biggest contributing factors in declining GA here is an almost complete lack of understanding by the government that safety regulations must be affordable. On top of this, they sold off the airports and commercialized air traffic control to give a return to the government. This may be OK if these organizations were run efficiently; however, traditionally [as they are government owned] they are highly unionized and highly inefficient."
Slowly it's turning around. It will be interesting to see the state of the industry by the end of next year.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suitcase
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The way that article was written will change nothing. It is just a bleat with no solution suggested.
Until all stakeholders act in a cohesive manner and employ those organizations which work towards the betterment of the industry (associations, clubs, unions, etc), then yes, nothing will change.
The soloution belongs to those in the industry, expecting someone else to do it for us is folly.
GAPILOT has a better quote ref-R Smith.
Smith quoted in user fees fight-
AOPA US has quoted former CASA chairman Dick Smith in its fight against user fees in the US.
Phil Boyer told the panel members that the FAA had manufactured the funding crisis they claim to be addressing with the proposal.
Boyer said Dick Smith, a former proponent of a fee-based system in Australia attributes a 28% decline in GA activity over the past 20 years in that country to user fees.
User pays (as we call it here) or the commercialization of CASA and Airservices has been a disaster for GA in Australia and I believe the same will happen in the USA if it goes ahead
quote-GAPilot AOPA magazine. (my italics)
ATC is a safety provider, first and formost. A second set of eyes to facilitate the expedicious movement of aircraft in high traffic areas. What some make it out is a barstardised version of a lollypop operator that lets only trucks through and no one else because they pays the bills.
In reality this is far from the case. Granted limited experience, have nothing but positive praise for the people behind the scope and the binos.
Smith quoted in user fees fight-
AOPA US has quoted former CASA chairman Dick Smith in its fight against user fees in the US.
Phil Boyer told the panel members that the FAA had manufactured the funding crisis they claim to be addressing with the proposal.
Boyer said Dick Smith, a former proponent of a fee-based system in Australia attributes a 28% decline in GA activity over the past 20 years in that country to user fees.
User pays (as we call it here) or the commercialization of CASA and Airservices has been a disaster for GA in Australia and I believe the same will happen in the USA if it goes ahead
quote-GAPilot AOPA magazine. (my italics)
ATC is a safety provider, first and formost. A second set of eyes to facilitate the expedicious movement of aircraft in high traffic areas. What some make it out is a barstardised version of a lollypop operator that lets only trucks through and no one else because they pays the bills.
In reality this is far from the case. Granted limited experience, have nothing but positive praise for the people behind the scope and the binos.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I could have posted this on the GA site, but I honestly believe that a lot of us have forgotten our "grass roots". It is important to remind ourselves that not many learned to fly in a Boeing, SAAB, or whatever. The bottom end of GA deserves better and we all need to be reminded of it occasionally.
Cheers.
Cheers.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
shortage
There was a hazard alert issued over Brisbane centre last night, reverting class G, E and A airspace to TIBA due to lack of staff.
Are ATC starting to feel the same pinch as mid level operators with regards to staff, or were there just a lot of people that called in sick?
I can understand closing ‘G’ and ‘E’, but ‘A’…
Are ATC starting to feel the same pinch as mid level operators with regards to staff, or were there just a lot of people that called in sick?
I can understand closing ‘G’ and ‘E’, but ‘A’…
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Golden Road to Samarkand
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jedi,
There is a serious current shortage of Air Traffic Controllers in Australia. The reason behind the current international recruitment campaign. Something that hasn't been seen in Australia for 20 years. When an Air Traffic Service provider starts recruiting controllers from overseas, it means that the responsible managers have stuffed up their forward planning for staffing to the point where the domestic recruiting and training part of the business cannot provide enough trained controllers to replace those who are leaving the operational environment.
The managers were warned about the looming shortage and were inadequate in their actions (or lack there-of) to rectify the problem. In some cases, certain managers stated aggressively that there was no problem.
It's important to note that it is cheaper to run a roster (approx 15 controllers working the same sectors grouped into a small business unit) with one or two lines of overtime rather than employ the required number of controllers on a full salary and leave entitlement. That way, the manager can demonstrate an efficiency in that financial year and guarantee full payment of his performance bonus. It could be debated that such actions are motivated by personal greed and a belief in one's infallibility of decision-making. Such a belief can result in resentment of the manager by his/her subordinates.
The contingency for unexpectantly losing a controller from an operational group was the transfer of a controller from another operational group into the group that was one-too-many controllers below it's minimum requirement. The point at which there are physically no more controllers on a day off who can be called to attend.
The problem with this is that a point was reached where most of the groups were operating one or two controllers short and therefore... no contingency.
There is a serious current shortage of Air Traffic Controllers in Australia. The reason behind the current international recruitment campaign. Something that hasn't been seen in Australia for 20 years. When an Air Traffic Service provider starts recruiting controllers from overseas, it means that the responsible managers have stuffed up their forward planning for staffing to the point where the domestic recruiting and training part of the business cannot provide enough trained controllers to replace those who are leaving the operational environment.
The managers were warned about the looming shortage and were inadequate in their actions (or lack there-of) to rectify the problem. In some cases, certain managers stated aggressively that there was no problem.
It's important to note that it is cheaper to run a roster (approx 15 controllers working the same sectors grouped into a small business unit) with one or two lines of overtime rather than employ the required number of controllers on a full salary and leave entitlement. That way, the manager can demonstrate an efficiency in that financial year and guarantee full payment of his performance bonus. It could be debated that such actions are motivated by personal greed and a belief in one's infallibility of decision-making. Such a belief can result in resentment of the manager by his/her subordinates.
The contingency for unexpectantly losing a controller from an operational group was the transfer of a controller from another operational group into the group that was one-too-many controllers below it's minimum requirement. The point at which there are physically no more controllers on a day off who can be called to attend.
The problem with this is that a point was reached where most of the groups were operating one or two controllers short and therefore... no contingency.