Hi Mike; I agree about the narrow basis of the report. The question is does anybody know of a report that is in the context of glider safety?
On Fri, 12 Feb 2010, Mike Cleaver wrote: > Let me tell you some facts about the report that Derek quotes: > > 1. It was about risks of mid-air collision at a GAAP aerodrome when > the GAAP ATC service was operating - no other risks involved for > gliders or anybody else, or anywhere else. > > 2. It was prompted by mid-air collisions at GAAP aerodromes > (Archerfiled, Bankstown, Camden, Moorabbin, Parafiled and Jandakot > only) in the past 10 years and hence is slewed by recent accidents (2 > at Bankstown, thus the risks there are assessed as "Intolerable"). > > 3. According to the report, fitting every GA aircraft at these > aerodromes with FLARM for use as a traffic alert measure would give a > positive cost-benefit of $11.7 million - the greatest positive > outcome of all options canvassed. > > 4. The report did not seem to even mention the fact that Bankstown > (the highest risk historically) has been reduced from 5 runways to > just 1, and Moorabbin from 7 to 3, over the past 30 years. > > 5. The report shows that there were actually NO mid-air collisions at > GAAP aerodromes between 1990-1999 when the traffic movements peaked, > compared to 8 collisions from 1968 - 1978 (before GAAP procedures) , > 3 or 4 in the next 10-year period, and 6 from 2000 to 2008 after > traffic levels, and service levels provided by Airservices Australia, > had declined. > > 6. As an overall risk indicator for gliding the reports is useless; and > finally > > 7. The Government / Minister / CASA Office of Airspace Management > have announced plans to introduce changes that were different from > those the consultants (Ambidji Group) recommended, and in many ways > went quite contrary to the recommendations. > > So much for statistics when they are taken out of context! (and the > same comment applies to the first 5 glider accident reports that DL > quoted: 2 in Australia, 2 in New Zealand and 1 in Switzerland in the > past 2 years. I thought we were discussing perceived risk in > Australia last year. > > Wombat > > At 10:33 11/02/2010, Derek wrote: > > >There are some statistics in the following report. > > > ><http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/oar/download/gaap_report_v2.pdf>http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/oar/download/gaap_report_v2.pdf > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net > >[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of David Lawley > >Sent: Tuesday, 9 February 2010 1:44 PM > >To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net > >Subject: [Aus-soaring] TV portrayal. > > > > > >Dave Donald wrote; > > > > > > The segment started with (words to the effect) "sure it's > > dangerous, they crash all the time". > > > >Crap? The great pity it is that statement is true, or dont you see > >the regular posts about gliding accidents both here and overseas? > > > >Sometimes it is PERCEPTION of danger that attracts people, even if > >they only turn up for an AEF we have improved the financial > >viability of our sport, and have no other way of gaining members. Cheers -- Peter F Bradshaw: http://www.exadios.com (public keys avaliable there). Personal site: http://personal.exadios.com "I love truth, and the way the government still uses it occasionally to keep us guessing." - Sam Kekovich. _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
