Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

Airservices reports more than $10 million loss this financial year

Wikiposts
Search
The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Airservices reports more than $10 million loss this financial year

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 00:27
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,602
Likes: 0
Received 69 Likes on 28 Posts
Airservices reports more than $10 million loss this financial year

In an article in The Australian newspaper this morning headed, “Airservices loses 523 to voluntary redundancy” it mentions there will be more than a $10 million loss this year.

This is of course nothing compared to the losses they are going to force on General Aviation with the $32 million plus ADSB mandate for all aircraft which fly in cloud from next February.

Everyone tells me this is nothing other than sheer bastardry as there is clearly no safety reason for this requirement. As Jeff Boyd, Chairman of CASA made clear at the hangar meeting at Tamworth, with the Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, it’s an Airservices requirement the ADSB mandate goes ahead and is not delayed until 2021, as per the AOPA request.

Readers of this sight may remember John McCormick was quite happy to give dispensations in the same way dispensations were given on RVSM, however he later advised that Airservices refused to allow this to happen on so called safety grounds.

This of course is shown to be rubbish as they allow the military to fly in the airspace without ADSB and also allow airlines for up to 3 days to operate with a faulty unit.

It looks as if they are not only intent on sending their own organisation into losses but forcing the same on General Aviation.

I also note the article mentions the $1.5 billion OneSKY project. Wait until we hear further about that. Everyone is saying it’s going to be one of the most costly fiascos of all time – far worse than the Super Seasprite disaster.

Last edited by Dick Smith; 22nd Jul 2016 at 00:53.
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 01:28
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 555
Received 79 Likes on 38 Posts
Originally Posted by Dick Smith
In an article in The Australian newspaper this morning headed, “Airservices loses 523 to voluntary redundancy” it mentions there will be more than a $10 million loss this year.

This is of course nothing compared to the losses they are going to force on General Aviation with the $32 million plus ADSB mandate for all aircraft which fly in cloud from next February.

Everyone tells me this is nothing other than sheer bastardry as there is clearly no safety reason for this requirement. As Jeff Boyd, Chairman of CASA made clear at the hangar meeting at Tamworth, with the Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, it’s an Airservices requirement the ADSB mandate goes ahead and is not delayed until 2021, as per the AOPA request.

Readers of this sight may remember John McCormick was quite happy to give dispensations in the same way dispensations were given on RVSM, however he later advised that Airservices refused to allow this to happen on so called safety grounds.

This of course is shown to be rubbish as they allow the military to fly in the airspace without ADSB and also allow airlines for up to 3 days to operate with a faulty unit.

It looks as if they are not only intent on sending their own organisation into losses but forcing the same on General Aviation.

I also note the article mentions the $1.5 billion OneSKY project. Wait until we hear further about that. Everyone is saying it’s going to be one of the most costly fiascos of all time – far worse than the Super Seasprite disaster.
Dick, haven't you read the latest from CASA regarding the success of the early roll out of ADSB? https://www.casa.gov.au/standard-pag...pment-suitable


"ADS-B is the cornerstone for Australia's transition to satellite technology based surveillance. The technology has already enabled a vast increase in the air traffic surveillance coverage over Australian territory - resulting in significant increases in operating and safety efficiencies."

Last edited by Cloudee; 22nd Jul 2016 at 05:15.
Cloudee is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 02:25
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,693
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
resulting in significant increases in operating and safety efficiencies
At airline altitudes maybe, but not typical GA altitudes
Old Akro is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 05:12
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This may explain.

Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 05:15
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,693
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Safe Skies are Empty Skies
Old Akro is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 06:13
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Empty skies don't make money.
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 07:25
  #7 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,602
Likes: 0
Received 69 Likes on 28 Posts
The chief pilots of the airlines have said they have gained no measurable savings by fitting ADSB.
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 07:40
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This may explain.
I don't think so. I doubt that 75% of private pilots dropped out of the system in 2 years - even a major change in medical requirements is unlikely to hit 3/4 of the population.

More likely a badly explained change in the way they count (which the note at the bottom suggests).
andrewr is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 08:36
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
i am wondering when casa wakes up to the fact that empty skies will mean far less staff required to regulate only the airlines that are left?
Ultralights is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 09:49
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: moon
Posts: 3,564
Received 89 Likes on 32 Posts
ultralights, Bureaucratic theory says staff numbers will increase with time no matter how few aircraft and pilots there are.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2016, 10:22
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 5,296
Received 423 Likes on 211 Posts
They will definitely need more people. How else will they complete the 70% or so remaining work on the regulatory reform program?
Lead Balloon is online now  
Old 23rd Jul 2016, 01:24
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,693
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Empty skies don't make money.
Hence the AsA loss
Old Akro is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2016, 01:33
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,693
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
More likely a badly explained change in the way they count (which the note at the bottom suggests).
Nope. The timing is wrong. The change in counting occurred in 2012/13. The major licence number decline occurred in 2010/11.

I would suggest that it is more likely to be:
1. Pilots moving to RAA
2. Inactive student pilots leaving due to ASIC requirements or similar
3. Introduction of car licence type medicals.

The interesting question is with CASA AVMED issuing about half the number of medicals as they did about 5 years ago, why is their response time worse than ever?
Old Akro is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2016, 08:53
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,955
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
----why is their response time worse than ever?
Why, the CASA designed modernization program, of course.
Remember, to err is human, but to really screw up, you need a computer.
Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2016, 09:04
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,693
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Remember, to err is human, but to really screw up, you need a computer.
Thanks for that
Old Akro is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2016, 09:18
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There is truth in statistics, then again liars produce the statistics.
thorn bird is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.