[Peetwo]

ASA at Estimates 05/05/16 - Hansard

To begin with, something I should of noticed before; Hoody was not in attendance.  Now of course we know why.. :Hoodlum to take over from Beaker
 
Besides Harfwit in his flash blue suit (again) - and still on a "I'm the boss" high - probably wouldn't have allowed him to get a word in edgewise.

One thing I noted from that Oz article was a comment from a "Boyd", that would seem to indicate that Hoody had kept the ATSB CC job close to his chest: 

Boyd  - 4 days ago

He is actually a current Airservices manager... And nothing has been announced to his staff yet. Nice.

 
- Bitter chips perhaps?
Anyway, here is the small passage of the latest Estimates Hansard from with NX asking questions on the YMML LAHSO Ops etc., which ironically Hoody would have been far more qualified to answer..    

Airservices Australia

[18:48]

Senator XENOPHON: I want to ask about land and hold short operations at Melbourne airport. You wrote to me on 28 April 2016; there was a voluntary suspension of those night-time operations in November 2015. Has that now been reinstated?

Mr Harfield : That is correct.

Senator XENOPHON: Can you provide the committee with details of the basis of that reinstatement of those land and hold short operations in airports?

Mr Harfield : We voluntarily suspended land and hold short operations at Melbourne last year, and as a result of that we undertook a reassessment and analysis of the procedure. In doing so, we improved the controller training in regard to what we would call compromised separation in regard to aircraft in a double go-around situation. We did further risk assessment and, included with that, a concept called the stagger was introduced. The stagger means that when we are flowing aircraft in LAHSO operations—

Senator XENOPHON: Is the new concept the stagger?

Mr Harfield : The stagger means we ensure that the arrival over the threshold of each aircraft is staggered.

Senator XENOPHON: It sounds like someone is over the limit, but anyway.

Mr Harfield : What it means is that the event of two aircraft—even in a go-around situation—coming to the intersection of the runway at the same time is reduced because of the fact that we have a different timing from when the aircraft are landing on the runway.

Senator XENOPHON: Could you provide documents in respect of that to the committee in due course.

Mr Harfield : Absolutely.

Senator XENOPHON: I previously raised a couple of specific instances where people wrote to me saying, 'I was on this flight at this time, and it looked awfully close.' Can you just remind me whether you got back to me on that.

Mr Harfield : Yes, we did: back on the questions on notice. Off the top of my head, there was one that we could track down that was due to a go-around situation from the controller, and the other one we could not actually track down.

Senator XENOPHON: Okay. I will follow that through. Will there be an ongoing monitoring of the LAHSO?

Mr Harfield : Absolutely.

Senator XENOPHON: Okay. Your air traffic controllers have had extra training in respect of this?

Mr Harfield : Yes

Hmm...how come everyone else seems to have a copy of the AQON?? 
One other passage of more than passing interest, which I almost missed & on the subject of ASA, trough feeding, conflicts of interest and dodgy deals, occurred between Sterlo & Murky right at the start of the DoIRD session:

...Senator STERLE: Are you able to point us in what areas they are at this stage?

Mr Mrdak : In terms of the department itself, they predominantly range around some specific functions which could be considered for no longer continuing. Some areas that have been identified include the performance of some functions such as the administration of financial assistance to local government and other payment processes, which could be considered for centralisation in other areas of government such as the Department of Finance; and ceasing areas such as the department's performance of activities in maritime regulation, and whether that better sits with the Australian Maritime Safety Authority. It also indicates areas where government may wish to consider larger structural changes, such as considering the future of Airservices Australia.

Senator STERLE: How?

Mr Mrdak : Whether the government wishes to consider future options for different governance and ownership arrangements for some of our statutory bodies, including Airservices Australia.

Senator STERLE: So that could be outsourcing?

Mr Mrdak : It could be or it could be looking at taking it into different ownership structures to what they currently are.

Senator STERLE: What could they be? The reason I am asking is: we all know for Airservices Australia there is no competition, and it is quite a bit of a money earner for the government. Could you shine a light for us on how that could be done in a different way?

Mr Mrdak : The Functional and Efficiency Review did look at international examples of where governments have placed their air traffic control provider—air services provider—in different governance structures, particularly the United Kingdom and Canada, where they have been placed in either part-private ownership or a not-for-profit government body. They were models that were looked at in the scope. The Functional and Efficiency Review recommended that we consider further options for the future of Airservices Australia...

   
Hmm...I wonder if in light of the AOPA Project Eureka & TAAAF Policy 2016 whether the FER recommendations are being more closely looked at?

MTF...P2