Corporate Contrails

During the first meeting held to discuss the subject, we were shocked to find that Government has no plans to improve the capacity of Sydney Airport which is at saturation level. Industry representatives at the meeting estimated that holding is costing over $20m a year in wasted fuel, let alone the flow on effects of such a situation.

ABAA supports the position adopted by ICAO some 40 years ago that Air Traffic Control is designed to be safe, efficient and expeditious. This presupposes, however, that ATC are given the means to fulfill these needs. It is apparent that the Air Traffic Controllers in Sydney are finding it increasingly impossible to achieve these three objectives. The Government seems remote from the practical realities of congested airports in view of their inactivity over the issue.

ABAA has made a number of constructive proposals to alleviate the current situation including the provision of a reliever runway as a matter of urgency. Additional measures to assist will include more efficient use of airspace and access to the airport during curfew by certain aircraft.

The Sydney situation has highlighted a discriminatory and unrealistic priority system that disadvantages those operators who were not represented when the system was evolved. The present system was instituted over a decade ago when there were few corporate jet operators in Australia and their needs were not considered. Consequently, private corporate jets find themselves behind all other categories in the queue and are even pushed behind airline traffic that departs Melbourne after their corporate jet has entered the holding pattern.

This situation is totally unacceptable and the ABAA will continue to pressure for an overhaul of the present system. We also believe that a more efficient Air Traffic System is called for which minimises the wastage of fuel. The present system is open to misinterpretation by the Controllers, which in turn causes aggravation with pilots.

ABAA member companies have recently spent up to 60% more time on flights terminating at Sydney than planned. This is unacceptable from whatever viewpoint we adopt. Corporate jet owners represent less than 1% of movements at Sydney and they are unable to use other facilities. Surely the power brokers in the airlines can accept that the corporate leaders of Australia should be given a fair go!

Future of Operational Control

We were pleased to see the debate on the future of Operational Control brought into the public arena in the recent issue of Australian Aviation (refer p115 Sept AA). This whole issue has for some time been of great concern to corporate operators who broadly see the provision of operational control as an imposition in both financial and philosophical sense.

ABAA has recently made a submission to NAPAC in which we have called for operational control to be charged to those sectors of the industry who require the service, except for the provision of Search and Rescue alerting, which is primarily a communications function. ABAA members see no need to pay for a service which they do not receive overseas.

Many corporate operators fly all over the world, as does Qantas, and carry out perfectly safe and efficient operations. Pilots in command are fully responsible for the ‘operational safety’ of their multi-million dollar aircraft and any suggestion that they could not undertake the same responsibilities in Australia is an imposition on their intelligence.

By way of example, the ABM finds it difficult to accept that a pilot can make his own decisions about operating to an aerodrome outside controlled airspace whereas ATC can close an aerodrome, which is often better equipped, within controlled airspace. This anomaly should be removed and the whole operational control system independently reviewed.

If certain sectors of the industry require the service they should incur the cost. The use of Air Traffic Controllers in this role does not appear to be efficient and the ABAA would support a full public review of the situation.

Membership Continues to Grow

At a recent Committee meeting the following new members were accepted into the growing supporters of ABAA: Venture Stores with a Falcon, Consolidated Press Holdings with a Gulfstream, Sherrard Aviation, Cessna Aircraft Company and Moana Airlines of New Zealand.

Membership enquiries should be directed to the ABAA at Building 190, Essendon Airport, North Essendon, Victoria 3041. Australia, or contact the Chief Executive Officer on (02) 374 1141.

Essendon Airport – Unique Asset for Melbourne

In view of the situation in Sydney which is reported elsewhere, the need for Essendon as a facility for Corporate aviation in Melbourne is obvious. The ABAA members based at Essendon and visitors from both interstate and overseas experience no delays to their operations and see Essendon as a unique asset for the City of Melbourne.

The situation in Sydney would, indeed, be very different today if the city was blessed with such an airport. ABAA members have campaigned for the continued operation of Essendon over the years as no alternative exists to serve the City of Melbourne.

Unfortunately the facilities at Essendon have been allowed to decay over the past 15 years and do not present a very good image. This has primarily been due to the fact that the Department of Aviation would only allow monthly leases. This situation is clearly unacceptable and should not be allowed to continue. ABAA members are willing to make investments in the airport if realistic commercial terms are made available to support their investment. Surely it is time for the assets at Essendon Airport to be allowed to work for the good of the whole of Melbourne.

New Brisbane Airport Leaves Corporate Aviation in the Cold!

ABAA were recently made aware of the proposals to accommodate Corporate aircraft at the new Brisbane airport. It appears that the airport was planned by the Department of Aviation with little recognition of the need to accommodate Corporate operators. We are surprised to find that despite the fact that the facilities were planned recently and designed to fulfill the needs of the next century, there is no provision for an FBO type of operation.

Member companies of ABAA are currently considering their response to the situation because although the Department of Transport and Communications have a designated parking area for GA aircraft, it is some kilometres from facilities appropriate to the needs of corporate operators.

Wherever new airports are planned in the future we would expect that some consideration be given to the requirements of the corporate owners.