Comments on: No ATC for Bankstown

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:46:19 +0000

I hate to admit but GA aviation is dying on the east coast and it is starting with sydney and spreading south. but hey there is light at the end of the tunnel for those PPL/CPL/ATPL students, come and learn to fly in WA the weather is great, no problems with airspace and with the the big commercials airlines fighting to have you fly with them (i regularly pay $400 rtn to perth) come for a week and fly your bum off.and once quailified then fly from either wollongong, Goulburn, warnervale, and RAAF Richmond that way you arn’t reliant on sydney aerospace with all it’s problems.

By: ex-BK ATC

ex-BK ATC — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 22:39:32 +0000

It is a shame that the upper echelons of management didn’t plan for the staff shortages. It is also sad that the GAAP and regional towers are the first to suffer when there are staff shortages. It would be great to have more controllers out there at Bankstown, but there are none. When they do come, they will go to the capital cities first to make up their numbers.

It is unfortunate, but no controller, nor the boss at Bankstown Tower can do anything about it. The local tower manager can only ask for more staff, they do not employ them directly.

By: Aminta Hennessy OAM, JP..

Aminta Hennessy OAM, JP.. — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 10:55:48 +0000

Interesting to note that Airservices run a number of FAA towers, but they run them under US rules not Australian rules. What is their answer to that? – if our rules are so wonderful why are they not running the towers in the USA under our rules. The answer is of course that the US aviation world would grind to a halt, like it is almost doing here. Airservices is immune to market forces, CASA is immune to market forces but we are governed by CASA, Airservices, BAL and WE PAY THEM ALL. USER PAY BUT HAVE NO SAY!

By: Duncan Bayne

Duncan Bayne — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 09:01:33 +0000

Why is it that so many in the aviation wish for aviation to be immune to market forces? After all, we’re the first to take advantage of mass production, cheaper labour in third world countries (Cessna’s production of the Skycatcher in China springs to mind), new materials, new technologies.

We can’t have it both ways: aviation benefits incredibly from free markets (although they could be a lot freer), but the fact is that (fixed wing) aviation operations take up a lot of land, which if it’s located in proximity to a city is often more valuable when sold for purposes other than aviation.

A significant step the Government could take would be deregulation of land; if people were free to develop anywhere they wished (subject to common-law nuisance restrictions), then there’d be a lot less pressure on developers to develop airports into commercial or residential blocks. See http://pc.blogspot.com/2007/07/housing-inflation-its-regulation-stupid.html for more details.

Ultimately though aviation is an industry like any other. If it operates in disregard of market realities, it will eventually collapse despite Government intervention.

By: Paul Phelan

Paul Phelan — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 18:58:07 +0000

The Office of Airspace Regulation tells us that at the moment the Act allows just for two air traffic service providers – Airservices Australia and the Australian Defence Force. What is therefore needed, is an amendment to the Act so that any organisation with appropriately qualified and licensed controllers can provide tower services. This is not a new concept, it’s been happening all over the USA for as long as anyone can remember. One organisation that provides tower control in the USA is Airservices Australia – at six separate locations – in copetition with other service providers.

By: Greg Ackman

Greg Ackman — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 12:10:44 +0000

If they spent a bit more time and resources actually operating AND supporting the Local GA industry properly instead of chasing more PROFIT, then maybe they could really EARN the title of ‘AIRSERVICES’.

It’s just not acceptable that Airservices Australia are not providing the REQUIRED manpower to operate BK.

If you can’ t do the job ‘THAT YOU ARE PAID TO DO’ move out and the GA operators will get in there and do it properly ! Or on the basis of ‘KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID’ make it a CTAF ( Believe-it-or-not it works great a hundreds of other airports )

Maybe the TOWER MANAGER of AIRSERVICES @ BANKSTOWN should ring the briefing office and listen to the bullshit about how good a job they are doing while they keep you on hold for 5 minutes.

By: Judy Says:

Judy Says: — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 05:28:36 +0000

Money, Money, Money! But will shoppers spend at Bankstown when aeroplanes come in through the roof? I had a (successful) emergency landing on 18 but it’s not there any more.
We love you, Tower Guys, but we land at many busy airports without towers. CTAF training at Bankstown could start immediately. There was no-one manning the Bankstown tower when I did my (country-based) night training.
Government attitudes to aviation remind me of the ‘banana republic’ category. Tenders from suitable companies to provide air traffic control is an option that should be investigated.

By: Peter Flanagan

Peter Flanagan — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 23:27:20 +0000

Here we go again. Were are the current governments taking us? I dont care which Government you talk about, Labour, Liberal, Federal or State. Why is this country falling apart at the seams? I used to love this counrtry with all of my heart and felt so privaledged to live hear. Now I am disgusted at it’s deterioration. Now all I see is destruction and ruin caused by governments that are so self interested in party politics that they have all forgotten why they are there. This country should be improving on a daily, monthly, yearly basis. Yet the destruction of basic services for us all continues at an alarming rate through appallingly bad management. This debarcle at Bankstown is just another example of Minister Albanese total indifference to GA aviation. His lack of willingness to get involved in GA and support small businesses that are struggling is another shining example of how arrogant government has become.

By: Roger Merridew

Roger Merridew — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 10:43:13 +0000

Bankstown tower could halve its staffing requirements if it reverted to the pre 1977(approx) procedures in which all circuits were left hand. Such a system requires only one Tower crew instead of the two teams required to manage contra circuits.
In the days prior to 1977 there were three parallel runways and heavier traffic than exists currently at Bankstown.
Aircraft on down wind nominated at the base turn “ABC base Left,…. PQR base Centre,… XYX base Right” and the next one nominated base left again.
The system was inherently safe because the relative speeds between aircraft approaching the base turn was less than 10 to 15kt allowing ample time for pilots to see and avoid.
The contra circuit is by contrast inherently dangerous.
This system places aircraft on Left and Right base on a head-on collision course at a closing speed approaching 200kt (360kph). Collisions are avoided only by the dilligence of Tower Controllers and good luck.
Further, the controllers and aircraft on one contra circuit communicate on a different channel from those on the other circuit, which makes it nearly impossible to warn an aircraft on (say) the Left Base of the presence of an aircraft on a Right Base which has over-shot its turn on to final and thus penetrated into the path of the aircraft on Left Base. Add that to the matter of the pilot turning Final directing all his attention to the Rwy ahead and you have almost set the stage for a collision.
Regrettably Tower Controllers are only human, and luck eventually runs out, resulting in catastrophic collisions. (Canberra, Gold Coast, Moorabbin, and Bankstown come to mind).
It is a fundamental principle of control systems (particularly those involving humans) that failures will occur, and a good control system is one that can not fail dangerous.
The writer has managed a GA airport containing parallel runways for over 30yrs which routinely operates with up to 5 aircraft in the circuit all using the same circuit direction.
There has never been a hazardous situation between aircraft on Downwind, Base or Final using the parallel runways. All aircraft using the airport broadcast their intentions on the same channnel, and there has never been a Tower.

By: Mark Smith

Mark Smith — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 07:12:22 +0000

Gosh, huge country, small population, General Aviation is the domain of rich kids and their toys RIGHT???? WRONG!!!! It’s time government realized the next generation of RFDS pilots, airline pilots and instructors for both are coming from places like Bankstown.
It’s shameful that we now have to import foreign trained Doctors due to a lack of foresight, in both training places and demand for medical services, 25 years ago…Now we have to endure a Govt indifference to General Aviation that will lead to the same shortages.
We are a country that requires comprehensive numbers of trained professionals in all levels of General Aviation. The travesty and injustice occurring at Bankstown give little hope for the present Labour Govts attitude towards GA being any different from the previous regime.
I wish my passion was submarining…At least the Govt would leave me alone.