Air Traffic Control Issues

[Melburnian1]

No doubt will be Management down the line here starting to feel the heat.

The 'SMH' report is paywalled but shows a side-by-side FR24 map of where the VAd and QFd planes were at the time.

There's no mention of Federal Minister for Transport Catherine King, who is responsible for funding Airservices Australia, and nor any comment about whether any staff have been stood down.

The ATSB was apparently only notified of the latest incident today. It's surprising this didn't occur on Sunday, or Monday.

 

[Quickstatus]

Transport Catherine King, who is responsible for funding Airservices Australia

I've been looking into the business/legal character of Airservices Australia ASA a bit more

While it is a Government Business Entity GBE, it is actually a Corporate Commonwealth Entity CCE as distinct to a Commonwealth Company. Another CCE is Australia Post. A CCE is not constituted under the Corporations Act unlike the Commonwealth Companies. Both are owned by the Governmrnt

Regardless, Airservices Australia is self funding. The vast majority of its income comes from charges to aircraft operators for using Australian navigation, ATC and ARFF infrastructure

While self funding, the govt can financially assist via capital injections through Parliamentary Appropriations and/or an Act of Parliament.

Of course any GBE can be privatised.....

 

[markis10]

Here it is



Yes - the On the Job instructors do are active/operational ATC
The Sim section also draw from experienced ATC cohorts - not sure if need to be operational.

The Sydney TCU is different unit to the tower which is experiencing some stress at present.

Re On the job instructors - that’s essentially the practical part of the course near its end, so much like a person learning to drive someone with a full licence is required. Check controllers who assess ongoing licence holders also require to be licensed.

For training there is no current licence requirements AFAIK nor is there for sims which are again more related to the latter part of training, which is why UTAS ran it for a long time. For my course one of the sim drivers never had a licence as they made a somewhat hard to understand decision of telling a glider to go around on their prac.

 

[Melburnian1]

Typically in our instantly connected, smartphone-dominated world of 2026, Australians have relatively short memories.

Mainstream media retain good reach but a growing number either don't read 'news' or rely on Facebook, Instagram or TikTok for what passes as that.

Given there's been more than one concerning incident in Sydney, perhaps more travellers will (temporarily?) become nervous flyers. A small few will abandon the mode but not always practical.

This is a sample of comments made by viewers of 'The Australian' last night and this morning, demonstrating individual opinions differ.

Whether staff are sacked due to a single error "depends": supermarket staff who steal from their employer are routinely sacked, but don't place any lives in danger with that action.

DGMS*

12 hours ago

Geez boys - what are you DOING? I think you have racked up more incidents in the past few weeks than I saw in the seven years I spent in Sydney Tower 25 years ago!

--------------------

Richard

11 hours ago

Some bright spark will tell us soon that there are staff shortages. Certainly there is a shortage of competence. This is elementary stuff on a simple enough airport by world standards. Think UK, Europe, USA etc.

--------------------

Michael Pending for Rejection

11 hours ago

We are now seeing a definite trend of breakdown in air traffic control. Obviously systemic failure of the system. It is known that runway incursions are deadly. Sydney has a real issue.

----------------------

Robyn

11 hours ago

This is of major concern. Often there is a trail of near misses as a pre cursor to a major accident. We all hope these issue are investigated and resolved very soon.

----------------------

Randolph

11 hours ago

Catherine King must be called to answer. What is happening to Civil Aviation in our country under her watch!

--------------------

Peter

11 hours ago

AI can only be a good thing for air traffic control. The sooner the better. (Daughter)

---------------------

Albanese must go OG

9 hours ago

Speaking as an airline captain, Sydney has become an “interesting”’port to operate into. Having operated across all continents except Antarctica, I have experienced the mayhem of LAX, the airspace congestion through the Middle East and various other things and yet Sydney is a challenge - not necessarily from our perspective as flight crew per se, but to misquote Forrest Gump - Sydney is like a box of chocolates - you don’t know what you are going to get each time you go in there.

----------------------

Dave_S

2 hours ago

@Kathy you and the traveling public are lucky that the crews in the aircraft are still highly trained and experienced, and these incidents have not led to disaster. As long as the pilots remain well rested and trained, you will be safe. Air services Australia do need a kick up the back side however. They are operating very close to the edge at the moment

----------------------
River Red Gum

2 hours ago

Obviously something is going very very wrong I wonder when some of the air traffic controllers will speak out about the internal issues causing this dramatic drop in safety

 

[esseeeayeenn]

I find it impossible to understand or accept why this wasn’t reported on Sunday and has taken several days to emerge. Was it covered up?

 

[markis10]

I find it impossible to understand or accept why this wasn’t reported on Sunday and has taken several days to emerge. Was it covered up?

There is no evidence it wasnt reported immediately by the three companies involved as is required. Some posters need to take off the tin hats and look for sources other than main stream media for the real truth as to what is happening.

 

[markis10]

For the avoidance of doubt here is what the ATC bible (MATS) requires:



And here is what the pilots bible (AIP) says


IIRC there is a requirement to stand down affected staff, however I do wonder if that will add to the problem of staff shortages?

 

[Quickstatus]

wasn’t reported on Sunday

The Media is not the ATSB.

 

[AuSammy]

I find it impossible to understand or accept why this wasn’t reported on Sunday and has taken several days to emerge. Was it covered up?

When did social media get added as a step in the aviation incident reporting process?

I must have missed that change to official procedures

 

[RooFlyer]

There is no evidence it wasnt reported immediately by the three companies involved as is required. Some posters need to take off the tin hats and look for sources other than main stream media for the real truth as to what is happening.

Well, is there evidence that it WAS reported immediately as required?

Tell us then, how does the public find out these things other than the public media. Can I dial the ATSB and ask? Tin hats

For the avoidance of doubt here is what the ATC bible (MATS) requires:

View attachment 518105

And here is what the pilots bible (AIP) says
View attachment 518106

IIRC there is a requirement to stand down affected staff, however I do wonder if that will add to the problem of staff shortages?

Adds nothing. That’s what is supposed to happen - but again, did it? You tell us and how you found out, so we can all know.

 

[markis10]

Well, is there evidence that it WAS reported immediately as required?

The ATSB is required to report when mandatory reporting has not occurred as part of their investigation notification.

Most folk with intelligence and even a moderate amount of not so common sense would understand the likelihood of all three unrelated companies failing to meet their reporting obligations (at the risk of significant penalties including loss or suspension of their AOC as well as jail time) is as likely as me winning lotto without buying a ticket.


Part 3—Reporting of accidents etc.
Division 1—Compulsory reporting
18 Immediate reports
(1) If a responsible person has knowledge of an immediately reportable matter, then the person must report it to a nominated official as soon as is reasonably practicable, by the means prescribed by the regulations and including those of the particulars prescribed by the regulations that are known to the responsible person.
Penalty: Imprisonment for 12 months.
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the person believes, on reasonable grounds, that another responsible person has, or other responsible persons have, already reported the matter, or will as soon as is reasonably practicable report the matter, to a nominated official with all the particulars prescribed by the regulations.
Note: A defendant bears an evidential burden in relation to the matter in subsection (2). See subsection 13.3(3) of the Criminal Code.
(3) Subsection (1) does not apply if:
(a) the person has already reported the matter under the Navigation Act 2012 or the Protection of the Sea (Prevention of Pollution from Ships) Act 1983; or
(b) the person believes, on reasonable grounds, that another responsible person has already reported, or will as soon as is reasonably practicable report, the matter under either of those Acts.
Note: A defendant bears an evidential burden in relation to the matter in subsection (3). See subsection 13.3(3) of the Criminal Code.
19 Written reports within 72 hours
(1) If a responsible person has knowledge of an immediately reportable matter or a routine reportable matter, then the person must within 72 hours give a written report of the matter (containing the particulars prescribed by the regulations) to a nominated official.
Penalty: 30 penalty units.
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the person believes, on reasonable grounds, that another responsible person has already given such a report to a nominated official.

Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003 - Federal Register of Legislation

www.legislation.gov.au

 

[RooFlyer]

The ATSB is required to report when mandatory reporting has not occurred as part of their investigation notification.

Most folk with intelligence and even a moderate amount of not so common sense

I am quite sure that they were reported, but you keep putting in these silly putdowns, while only quoting from the regulations without addressing the original wondering that it may not have been reported in a timely fashion.

You seem to be so plugged in to all this. Tell us - was it reported when it should’ve been, or not. Has the ATSB reported any non-reporting?If you don’t know, then maybe stop with the putdowns and just leave it be.

 

[AuSammy]

I am quite sure that they were reported, but you keep putting in these silly putdowns, while only quoting from the regulations without addressing the original wondering that it may not have been reported in a timely fashion.

You seem to be so plugged in to all this. Tell us - was it reported when it should’ve been, or not. Has the ATSB reported any non-reporting?If you don’t know, then maybe stop with the putdowns and just leave it be.

Air Services have stated the incident in question did not meet mandatory reporting requirements under the regulations.

Obviously if they reported everything every day that happened at every airport then ATSB would be swamped following up things that don’t need following up and not focussing on the important stuff.

Surmising when rumours started circulating about the incident and a fuss being made the ATSB was advised and will investigate both the incident and whether the reporting guidelines were met or need to be reviewed.

Initial comments from ATSB seem to be will just be added to the mix and they not overly concerned with this specific “incident” as action was taken by both ATC and the airline simultaneously to avert any danger and the aircraft were a long distance apart anyway.

Personal opinion is this third “incident” is nothing but a media beatup

 

[Melburnian1]

CEO of Sydney Airport Scott Charlton (previously CEO of listed on the ASX Transurban) has said this late this morning in 'The Australian' online.

"...Mr Charlton insisted travellers and airline operators should not be concerned, saying safety remained the number one priority at Australia’s biggest gateway.

“Some of the delays and other issues that have occurred over the last few weeks are the result of Airservices ensuring that the airport is safe by spacing out some of the flights and doing some other things given some of the challenges they’ve had around staffing,” Mr Charlton said.

“We’re looking forward to the issues being resolved over time to make sure that we have the air traffic control strength that’s required to operate Sydney efficiently.”

He said he had confidence in the air traffic controllers, but it was clear performance needed to lift to “world-class levels” in Sydney and across the country.

“We’ll do whatever we need to do to support Airservices and get them to that stage,” said Mr Charlton.

“But a lot of that falls on Airservices and the government, making sure that they’ve got the sort of recruitment, training, technology and the things they need to fulfil their obligations on the Airservices side...."

 

[Melburnian1]

In the same 'The Australian' online article, a Qantas pilots' association head has made a suggestion to reduce flights.

This is unlikely, as it would cost airlines a lot of money and reduce capacity., especially at peak times when flights have a greater chance of being full or close to that:

---------------------

"...The head of the Qantas pilots association says there is “deep concern” the air traffic control system at Sydney Airport is at breaking point.
Australian and International Pilots Association president Andrew Marshall spoke to The Australian...

....In all cases, airlines said their crews were following the directions of air traffic control which had given clearance to cross taxiways and runways despite other aircraft being on them...

...Captain Marshall suggested a short term reduction in flights in and out of Sydney Airport, to allow training to be completed at air traffic control for the good of aviation more broadly.

He said the current situation, where controllers were working ten days on, and one day off, was “unsustainable in any workforce”.

“It’s almost like you would have to have all the carriers agree to reduce operations for a little while, allow a little bit of slack in the system so the controllers can get the time and the breathing space to train up,” he said..."

 

[Quickstatus]

You and @Quickstatus may not have read the above article.

Pretty sure I did not say it was reported, or immediately reported, or not reported

I said "the media is not the ATSB"

To elaborate, the reporting pathway and obligation is properly to the ATSB and not the media, though nothing to stop a whistle blower telling the media but that is a separate debate.
.
What gets reported or not reported, or when it should be reported will be in the relevant "rule book" which I don't have any knowledge of.

 

[Quickstatus]

allow a little bit of slack in the system so the controllers can get the time and the breathing space to train up,” he said..."

Which comes back to the original question in Post #1:

Should SYD reduce their capacity until the ATC issue is resolved

I suspect Airlines will not unilaterally reduce their flights based on their perception of the safety issue at play. I suspect they will only do it if everyone has to do the same.

The problem could also be easily solved (on paper) by reducing the Sydney Curfew from 2300-0600 to 0000-0530 for the next year and then review.
An extra available 1.5 hours mean the max daily cap of 1360 flights translates to 73.5 per hour instead of current max 80/hour
This is approx 9% which would go some way to alleviating the overall 10% shortage and might even reduce the unexpected sick leave on some days.

This would allow the same flights /day but spread out over longer period

........,,
And will also relieve the non existent looming jet fuel shortage

 

[MEL_Traveller]

The VAd/QFd incident was not reported at the time. Air Services didn’t believe it met the reporting requirements. The ATSB believes otherwise and doesn’t understand why it wasn’t reported. That’s from reps of Air Services and the ATSB speaking on the news tonight.

 

[Melburnian1]

The problem could also be easily solved (on paper) by reducing the Sydney Curfew from 2300-0600 to 0000-0530 for the next year and then review.
An extra available 1.5 hours mean the max daily cap of 1360 flights translates to 73.5 per hour instead of current max 80/hour
This is approx 9% which would go some way to alleviating the overall 10% shortage and might even reduce the unexpected sick leave on some days.

Would this reduce the number of controllers on duty at any one time?

What about pushback from local residents including in Albanese's seat of Grayndler?

Admittedly there are already freight flights during the 'small hours' and also the strictly limited number allowed to land in SYD between 0500 and 0559 hours. But increasing flight numbers between 2300 and 2359 late night and 0530 to 0600 in the early morning would presumably prove more disruptive to sleep for the locals, even if arrivals had to be from the direction that flies the least over housing, which is from the south IIRC.

 

[Melburnian1]

Pretty sure I did not say it was reported, or immediately reported, or not reported

I said "the media is not the ATSB"

Yes, all correct. I shouldn't have included you. Apologies.