Following is a letter sent from Dick Smith to Minister John Anderson on 21 February 2005.
Dear Minister
Re: Approach radar for Class C airspace
I notice that the Department is preparing a “cop out” for you in relation to the important directive you made regarding approach radar for Class C airspace.
I point out that Martin Dolan, in an answer to Senator Mark Bishop at the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee on Monday 14 February, stated the following:
“The Minister has indicated that, if his safety concerns are met – which is to say that the analysis is reliable – then he will reconsider the position of the direction.” (My underlining.)
Minister, if you remember, the original reason for your direction was not necessarily to have Airservices spend $150 million on approach radar units, it was to get Airservices to ensure that their safety study requiring Class C airspace was scientifically and objectively based, and therefore accurate.
You may also remember that Professor O’Neill of the ANU showed that the safety study was flawed and had been manipulated to give a pre-planned outcome.
I can assure you there is no way that an air traffic controller responsible for a busy Class D airport is also able to operate additional Class C approach airspace without a reduction in safety. The problem is not safety in the Class C airspace (which is important) it is the reduction in safety in the Class D airspace close to the aerodrome area that is the issue.
The reason Class C terminal airspace everywhere else in the world requires an approach radar unit (with both primary and secondary radar) is obvious. That is, it is not safe to diffuse the concentration of a controller in the airspace close to the airport where the collision risk is extremely high.
Airservices has never studied this issue in an objective and scientific way. More importantly, they are not the people to do it because they have a vested financial interest in the outcome. Hundreds of safety incidents that are already in existence in ATSB/BASI files show that many errors are being made in Class D airspace by air traffic controllers at the present time. Any of these errors could end up with a collision with many hundreds of people being killed.
For the safety of the Australian public, your own family, my family, our children and grandchildren, I ask that you do not change this important directive.
The facts are simple. If an objectively based “scientific risk analysis” (to quote Senator Mark Bishop) shows that Class C airspace is necessary, it is obvious that additional controllers and proper radar is required.
The issue is whether Class C airspace is required in the first place. As you know, the only report that shows a requirement for Class C airspace is clearly flawed and was manipulated by Airservices. I ask that you arrange for an expert to fix the errors in this report.
I also point out that you have been misled in relation to ADS-B. Airservices has never proposed that ADS-B be used to replace approach radar facilities. No such units have been certified anywhere in the world and I doubt that they will be in the next decade.
Yours faithfully
Dick Smith
