CASA + ASA = Axis of Evil
just that the OJT system (and I can't speak specifically for BK) seems to lack an evaluate - feedback - review loop to improve it
To me the problem stems from a disconnect between what the college is producing & what the field needs - that is where the feedback loop needs to implemented. All we have currently is a management blame game. If it's the same people doing the OJTI on the same sectors & the failure rate suddely heads south where do you look?
Lodown, I fully understand the financial imperative & sympathise, believe it or not - I know it isn't easy when income is at the whim of conditions beyond your control.
That said, you wouldn't fly into a thunderstorm just to meet a schedule or training commitment would you? This is no different.
There would seem to be two separate issues - the new GAAP procedures & an apparent short term lack of staff due to illness. I don't know BK procedures for handling staff shortages but would presume that once they reach certain levels traffic restrictions would be put in place. RVFR would be implemented to allow safe processing of traffic by the available controller(s). Once staff are available RVFR is lifted. No dogma, just safe processing of traffic.
Sh!t happens occasionally & should be allowed for.
That said, you wouldn't fly into a thunderstorm just to meet a schedule or training commitment would you? This is no different.
There would seem to be two separate issues - the new GAAP procedures & an apparent short term lack of staff due to illness. I don't know BK procedures for handling staff shortages but would presume that once they reach certain levels traffic restrictions would be put in place. RVFR would be implemented to allow safe processing of traffic by the available controller(s). Once staff are available RVFR is lifted. No dogma, just safe processing of traffic.
Sh!t happens occasionally & should be allowed for.
Guest
Posts: n/a
le_pingouin, you're not by chance a CASA/ASA cronie?! only a buerocrat could come up with warped logic like that
Only in Oz, is all I can say, in any of the larger aviation markets, the utter incompetence and stupidity of this move would not have gone unpunished, and someone would have been very quick to get an injunction against this rubbish!
Why none of the larger businesses have already done it is beyond me. If I owned a school at Bankstown I would have had my lawyer kick up a massive stink on day two of these shenanigans, including filing a lawsuit against these feckers for compensation for loss of earnings
Only in Oz, is all I can say, in any of the larger aviation markets, the utter incompetence and stupidity of this move would not have gone unpunished, and someone would have been very quick to get an injunction against this rubbish!
Why none of the larger businesses have already done it is beyond me. If I owned a school at Bankstown I would have had my lawyer kick up a massive stink on day two of these shenanigans, including filing a lawsuit against these feckers for compensation for loss of earnings
PlankBender, I'm just a controller. Other than restricting traffic how can a safe service be provided with less than required number of controllers? Do you believe any workload can be safely handled, no matter how many aircraft?
Is that what you think is warped?
It's a separate issue to the new GAAP procedures.
Is that what you think is warped?
It's a separate issue to the new GAAP procedures.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: In a caravan
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PlankBender, I'm just a controller. Other than restricting traffic how can a safe service be provided with less than required number of controllers? Do you believe any workload can be safely handled, no matter how many aircraft?
Is that what you think is warped?
It's a separate issue to the new GAAP procedures.
Is that what you think is warped?
It's a separate issue to the new GAAP procedures.
Guest
Posts: n/a
yep penguin, so according to your logic it was less safe before with the same number of controllers and different rules. how can that be when we now have highly dangerous congestion around the reporting points and pissed off pilots and instructors in the air, stressed out by congested frequencies and loss of income? please explain!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Two problems.....
Sick ATC's means the required service is not available, and if you revert to a CTAF/TIBA it will work ...BUT the risks at YSBK would increase over a normally staffed GAAP. The problem is if you try to supply the same service at YSBK with one ATC on staff.............it ends in
Second problem is CASA requiring Class D ops and restricted volume....but that has not been the real issue in this debate.
YCAB on a Saturday..........the look on an ATC's face is =
J
Sick ATC's means the required service is not available, and if you revert to a CTAF/TIBA it will work ...BUT the risks at YSBK would increase over a normally staffed GAAP. The problem is if you try to supply the same service at YSBK with one ATC on staff.............it ends in
Second problem is CASA requiring Class D ops and restricted volume....but that has not been the real issue in this debate.
YCAB on a Saturday..........the look on an ATC's face is =
J
YCAB on a Saturday..........the look on an ATC's face is =
I have flown at YCUN (CTAF) with 4x C152, 1x Glider, 1x Austere tug, 1x BE58 doing an instrument approach and circuit and 2x PC9 doing a circuit. That was fun (ahem) but it wouldn't make me cringe if I had my ATC hat on.
If people are sick, people are sick. It can't be helped. The reason we lower our workload is that our oppurtunity for a break decreases so we don't want to over do it when it could be a couple of hours before we get a break.
Nothing about the controller's ability, simply a risk management exercise.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to clarify a common misconception. I'm sorry if it appears rather long-winded but to fully understand the difficulties imposed on YSBK ATC by the new CASA Directives you must appreciate how the tower operates. I can't speak for the other GAAP towers.
AIP is poorly worded and for years we (ATC) have been trying to get CASA to amend it. There are TWO references to Restricted VFR in the GAAP section.
The first, which everyone automatically points to is:
And the second which is often overlooked by pilots as it is about ATC:
25.2 ATC Responsibilities
Of course 25.2.2 doesn't go on to say that ATC will put Restricted VFR Operations on the ATIS but it should be somewhat obvious, what else would you put on the ATIS when you are restricting VFR operations?
These two entries fall under different, but not necessarily mutually exclusive, conditions. The first deals with the type of separation provided under certain conditions and the second with ATC responsibilities. We can be RVFR on a CAVOK day to satisfy 25.2.2. due to short staffing, runway closures, frequency failures and so on.
How does that relate to Bankstown?
Generally there are three controllers per morning and afternoon periods. There are four control, positions in the Tower: Aerodrome controller 1 (ADC1) for arrivals and departures; Aerodrome controller 2 (ADC2) for the training circuit,; the coordinator (COORD); and the ground controller (SMC). COORD & SMC are done by one ATC.
Pre CASA Directives it was well within the capacity of a single ATC to run ADC1 & ADC2 combined with up to 4 aircraft in the training circuit as well as arrivals and departures. This is important as it allowed another ATC to take a short break to refresh, to answer natures call or to eat etc. We are not machines that can work 8 hours straight and still maintain the same level of alertness demanded by the job.
Now enter the CASA CAP: six aircraft under the control of one ATC with a runway on a discrete frequency. Three staff and ADC1 & ADC2 separate, not a problem. ADC1 and ADC2 are mostly separate all day now, even if it means having only one or two aircraft in the training circuit because GAAP is too unpredictable and six is a ridiculously small number to apply at a GAAP aerodrome. It's so easy to have six or seven aircraft call inbound close together or have a string of departures waiting to go. With the two ADCs split then at least the ADC2 can take some of the overflow from 2RN for the ADC1 if there is space in the training circuit.
But when someone needs a break, which are mandated and necessary, or we're short staffed we run into problems. Someone is going to be delayed and generally it will be the training circuit so we can concentrate on arrivals and departures.
Unfortunately we aren't allowed to cut an ATC in two nor are we able to get a freeze-dried one out of the storeroom and add some water.
So if you only have two controllers, one does COORD/SMC as normal and one does ADC1/ADC2 combined, apply the CASA CAP and even having one in the training circuit only allows 5 arriving and departing aircraft plus a discretionary departure.
Anyone regularly flying out of Bankstown knows that it is easy to have three times that either wanting in or out at the same time. Allow three or four in the circuit and you severely limit your capacity to accommodate arrivals and departures.
Believe it or not but we don't like holding people outside the CTR or delaying operations anymore than you like being delayed. It goes against our natural desire to do our job to the best of our ability and move the traffic. However we have our hands tied by this CASA CAP. Limiting the ADC1 to six aircraft is reducing his capacity by at least 60%. Having to monitor and control the cap increases the workload at times by 200% easily.
As for the staffing issue, you'd need to talk to someone a couple of paygrades higher up than me for why we don't have enough controllers.
I can tell you this, we have been short-staffed here for a long period, over 24 months. We consistently run overtime to cover shortfalls in the roster, as well as cover sickness, on average at least one per person a fortnight. We have more movements now and do the job with 11 staff than was done by 24 staff only 10 years ago. Our roster is way past lean, it is down to the bones!
Because of Camden we have less staff rostered off on weekends, we only get one weekend off per six week roster and it could be up to ten weeks between weekends off depending where they fall from roster to roster. Work/life balance is difficult to achieve, more so if you have a family.
So when people are ill on the weekend those lucky sods rostered off are extremely loathe to give up their weekend and come to work. We are a tired old bunch let me tell you. On top of that we have management breathing down our neck haranguing us for daring to be sick, so people end up coming to work when they should be at home and before you know it the lurgy knocks over two or three controllers and hey presto RVFR and delays all round.
Now I'm not saying these things to garner sympathy or pity for the poor controller, there are certainly plenty of people worse off than me, but so you can understand why it is that you and we are in the position we're in where you only have one in the circuit and mega delays. I can honestly say that if not for the CASA directives and their cap you would still be none the wiser about our staffing issues and it would be business pretty much as usual for you and me.
I'm sorry if I digressed or bored you with minutae but i do tend to get carried away sometimes and I've rather forgotten where this thread started going.
So to wind up my rather wordy rant:
1. RVFR is for weather AND/OR ATC traffic management purposes;
2. CASA's directives and CAP is mainly responsible for the delays that weren't there prior by limiting controller capacity, with a little ASA staffing issues contributing;
3. Don't shoot the messenger! We're trying our best.
Please. Arrange a visit to the tower and see for yourself how it all works. Come talk to us and get firsthand experience of what goes on day to day. Visitors are welcome most of the time.
Disclaimer: These are of course only my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer or my colleagues.
AIP is poorly worded and for years we (ATC) have been trying to get CASA to amend it. There are TWO references to Restricted VFR in the GAAP section.
The first, which everyone automatically points to is:
24.
PROVISION OF SEPARATION
24.2 To aid in the provision of separation, ATC will determine the status
of operations in the GAAP CTR as follows:
a.
of operations in the GAAP CTR as follows:
a.
Unrestricted VFR Operations
There are no weather related restrictions to aircraft operations.
IFR aircraft must operate to the VFR within the GAAP CTR.
b. Restricted VFR Operations
There are no weather related restrictions to aircraft operations.
IFR aircraft must operate to the VFR within the GAAP CTR.
b. Restricted VFR Operations
ATC may apply weather-related restrictions to VFR operations
to facilitate the movement and separation of IFR aircraft. ATC
will then broadcast on the ATIS, “RESTRICTED VFR OPERATIONS”.
The actual restriction imposed may be specified individually
to aircraft, although general restrictions may be notified
on the ATIS; eg, “START APPROVAL REQUIRED”.to facilitate the movement and separation of IFR aircraft. ATC
will then broadcast on the ATIS, “RESTRICTED VFR OPERATIONS”.
The actual restriction imposed may be specified individually
to aircraft, although general restrictions may be notified
And the second which is often overlooked by pilots as it is about ATC:
25.2 ATC Responsibilities
25.2.2 ATC may restrict VFR operations:
a. to reduce congestion in the traffic circuit, and maintain an orderly
flow of traffic; and
b. to facilitate the movement and separation of IFR aircraft.a. to reduce congestion in the traffic circuit, and maintain an orderly
flow of traffic; and
Of course 25.2.2 doesn't go on to say that ATC will put Restricted VFR Operations on the ATIS but it should be somewhat obvious, what else would you put on the ATIS when you are restricting VFR operations?
These two entries fall under different, but not necessarily mutually exclusive, conditions. The first deals with the type of separation provided under certain conditions and the second with ATC responsibilities. We can be RVFR on a CAVOK day to satisfy 25.2.2. due to short staffing, runway closures, frequency failures and so on.
How does that relate to Bankstown?
Generally there are three controllers per morning and afternoon periods. There are four control, positions in the Tower: Aerodrome controller 1 (ADC1) for arrivals and departures; Aerodrome controller 2 (ADC2) for the training circuit,; the coordinator (COORD); and the ground controller (SMC). COORD & SMC are done by one ATC.
Pre CASA Directives it was well within the capacity of a single ATC to run ADC1 & ADC2 combined with up to 4 aircraft in the training circuit as well as arrivals and departures. This is important as it allowed another ATC to take a short break to refresh, to answer natures call or to eat etc. We are not machines that can work 8 hours straight and still maintain the same level of alertness demanded by the job.
Now enter the CASA CAP: six aircraft under the control of one ATC with a runway on a discrete frequency. Three staff and ADC1 & ADC2 separate, not a problem. ADC1 and ADC2 are mostly separate all day now, even if it means having only one or two aircraft in the training circuit because GAAP is too unpredictable and six is a ridiculously small number to apply at a GAAP aerodrome. It's so easy to have six or seven aircraft call inbound close together or have a string of departures waiting to go. With the two ADCs split then at least the ADC2 can take some of the overflow from 2RN for the ADC1 if there is space in the training circuit.
But when someone needs a break, which are mandated and necessary, or we're short staffed we run into problems. Someone is going to be delayed and generally it will be the training circuit so we can concentrate on arrivals and departures.
Unfortunately we aren't allowed to cut an ATC in two nor are we able to get a freeze-dried one out of the storeroom and add some water.
So if you only have two controllers, one does COORD/SMC as normal and one does ADC1/ADC2 combined, apply the CASA CAP and even having one in the training circuit only allows 5 arriving and departing aircraft plus a discretionary departure.
Anyone regularly flying out of Bankstown knows that it is easy to have three times that either wanting in or out at the same time. Allow three or four in the circuit and you severely limit your capacity to accommodate arrivals and departures.
Believe it or not but we don't like holding people outside the CTR or delaying operations anymore than you like being delayed. It goes against our natural desire to do our job to the best of our ability and move the traffic. However we have our hands tied by this CASA CAP. Limiting the ADC1 to six aircraft is reducing his capacity by at least 60%. Having to monitor and control the cap increases the workload at times by 200% easily.
As for the staffing issue, you'd need to talk to someone a couple of paygrades higher up than me for why we don't have enough controllers.
I can tell you this, we have been short-staffed here for a long period, over 24 months. We consistently run overtime to cover shortfalls in the roster, as well as cover sickness, on average at least one per person a fortnight. We have more movements now and do the job with 11 staff than was done by 24 staff only 10 years ago. Our roster is way past lean, it is down to the bones!
Because of Camden we have less staff rostered off on weekends, we only get one weekend off per six week roster and it could be up to ten weeks between weekends off depending where they fall from roster to roster. Work/life balance is difficult to achieve, more so if you have a family.
So when people are ill on the weekend those lucky sods rostered off are extremely loathe to give up their weekend and come to work. We are a tired old bunch let me tell you. On top of that we have management breathing down our neck haranguing us for daring to be sick, so people end up coming to work when they should be at home and before you know it the lurgy knocks over two or three controllers and hey presto RVFR and delays all round.
Now I'm not saying these things to garner sympathy or pity for the poor controller, there are certainly plenty of people worse off than me, but so you can understand why it is that you and we are in the position we're in where you only have one in the circuit and mega delays. I can honestly say that if not for the CASA directives and their cap you would still be none the wiser about our staffing issues and it would be business pretty much as usual for you and me.
I'm sorry if I digressed or bored you with minutae but i do tend to get carried away sometimes and I've rather forgotten where this thread started going.
So to wind up my rather wordy rant:
1. RVFR is for weather AND/OR ATC traffic management purposes;
2. CASA's directives and CAP is mainly responsible for the delays that weren't there prior by limiting controller capacity, with a little ASA staffing issues contributing;
3. Don't shoot the messenger! We're trying our best.
Please. Arrange a visit to the tower and see for yourself how it all works. Come talk to us and get firsthand experience of what goes on day to day. Visitors are welcome most of the time.
Disclaimer: These are of course only my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer or my colleagues.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Close
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Ultralight.....
Re your Dick Smith response.....
"he's still holding at Prospect behind 3 liberties"
That's alot of Liberties to be in the air at YSBK at the one time....has a new school opened up?
Re your Dick Smith response.....
"he's still holding at Prospect behind 3 liberties"
That's alot of Liberties to be in the air at YSBK at the one time....has a new school opened up?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
its funny with all the talk and rumours about SFTC, the liberties are still flying regularly. though not in the same numbers as before.
seeing as it takes so long now to get back into YSBK, the 3 liberties left at 1 hr intervals, just that they have been holding so long all are now orbiting PSP awaiting their return.
as for the problems with one ATC staffer on duty at YSBK, i dont believe its the fact that one is sick increasing the workload, it does immensely, but with 1 on duty, the most aircraft in the air can be 6. the problem is that when its quiet at YSBK, there is still 6 or more aircraft in the air. the problem is on perfect cavok weekends at YSBK, 6 aircraft are arriving and departing every 5 mins! with the 6 limit, its like having a 4 lane freeway feeding into one lane! there is only 1 outcome, massive congestion on the radio and at holding points.
seeing as it takes so long now to get back into YSBK, the 3 liberties left at 1 hr intervals, just that they have been holding so long all are now orbiting PSP awaiting their return.
as for the problems with one ATC staffer on duty at YSBK, i dont believe its the fact that one is sick increasing the workload, it does immensely, but with 1 on duty, the most aircraft in the air can be 6. the problem is that when its quiet at YSBK, there is still 6 or more aircraft in the air. the problem is on perfect cavok weekends at YSBK, 6 aircraft are arriving and departing every 5 mins! with the 6 limit, its like having a 4 lane freeway feeding into one lane! there is only 1 outcome, massive congestion on the radio and at holding points.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Close
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or is it just the one liberty flying three times a much? Maybe David Copperfield (the master of illusion...) has jumped on board after all (lol).
As for the traffic congestion....that's exactly what's going on atm...very well put!
As for the traffic congestion....that's exactly what's going on atm...very well put!
