Draft Supplementary Airspace Review of Ballina … of Airspace Regulation Page 2 of 29 Supplementary...

Supplementary Airspace Review of Ballina Byron

Gateway

July 2015

Office of Airspace Regulation of 29

Supplementary Airspace Review of Ballina Byron Gateway – July 2015 Version: 0.7

DOCUMENT SPONSOR: OFFICE OF AIRSPACE REGULATION TRIM REFERENCE: D15/528307 FILE REF: OP14/481

Document control:

Version Issue/Nature of Revision Date

0.1 Draft April 2015

0.2 Incorporate Internal Comments May 2015

0.3 For Management Review June 2015

0.4 EMAAR Comments June 2015

0.5 Incorporate Comments July 2015

0.6 Editorial changes July 2015

0.7 Incorporate Comments July 2015



Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 4

2. AERODROME AND AIRSPACE ................................................................................... 6

3. CONSULTATION ..................................................................................................... 7

4. TRAFFIC DATA REVIEW ........................................................................................ 13

5. AIRSPACE CRITERIA THRESHOLDS ........................................................................ 16

6. AVIATION SAFETY INCIDENT REPORTS ................................................................... 17

7. AIRSPACE REFORM .............................................................................................. 21

8. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................. 25

9. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................ 26

ANNEX A – ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................. 28

ANNEX B – STAKEHOLDERS ......................................................................................... 29



1. Introduction

This supplementary airspace review was commissioned in response to the Government‘s expectation under the Australian Airspace Policy Statement (AAPS1) for the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to undertake regular and ongoing studies to meet its obligations under Section 13 of the Airspace Act 2007. The Office of Airspace Regulation (OAR) undertakes a risk based approach in determining which locations are studied.

The purpose of this supplementary review is to review the airspace classification within 20 nautical miles (NM) of Ballina Byron Gateway, New South Wales (NSW), from the surface to 8,500 feet (ft) Above Mean Sea Level (AMSL).

This review will assess the risk levels for Passenger Transport (PT2) operations to determine whether the airspace classification is appropriate and whether an air traffic service is required.

In December 2010 and May 2013 the OAR completed aeronautical studies of Ballina Byron Gateway aerodrome (hereafter referred to as Ballina). Both studies are available on the CASA website.3 The 2013 study made the following recommendations:

1. Discussions should be conducted formally via the local Regional Airspace and Procedures Advisory Committee (RAPAC), with a view to establishing a separate Common Traffic Advisory Frequency for Lismore aerodrome.

2. CASA is undertaking a separate assessment to examine the feasibility of controlled airspace in areas where surveillance exists. A lowering of controlled airspace in the vicinity of Ballina should be considered a priority if the assessment recommend implementation of controlled airspace in areas where surveillance exists.

3. CASA and Airservices Australia (Airservices) should cooperate to produce a safety poster that overlays Ballina’s instrument approach procedures and way points on the Visual Terminal Chart (VTC).

4. CASA sport aviation and Regional Office surveillance staff should undertake a detailed review of parachute jumping activity in the immediate vicinity of Ballina, particularly with respect to the drop zone in the town area.

5. CASA and Airservices should cooperate to update and expand the En Route Supplement Australia (ERSA) information relating to parachute operations at Ballina.

6. CASA should review the helicopter training circuit procedures at Ballina, formalise their approval if appropriate, and publish relevant information in the ERSA.

7. CASA should establish twice-yearly live traffic data collection at Ballina to provide timely awareness of possible increased collision risk.

8. CASA should monitor the development of the Evans Head aerodrome airpark for possible effect on traffic levels in the area.

9. CASA should consult with industry with a view to establishing a Northern Rivers area RAPAC to ensure that the aviation industry in the area has practical access to the RAPAC process.

1 A full list of acronyms and abbreviations used within this report can be found at Annex A.

2 For the purposes of this study, PT services are activities involving RPT and all non -freight-only charter operations.

3 OAR Papers and Reports

http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_90465




10. CASA should undertake a further review of operations at Ballina when traffic approaches 28,000 movements per annum, including all Visual Flight Rules (VFR) traffic.

Actions on the Recommendations:

1. The issue of the Lismore Common Traffic Advisory Frequency (CTAF) was on the agenda for the February 2015 New South Wales RAPAC meeting and the April 2015 South Queensland RAPAC meeting. The RAPACs were informed of this Supplementary Review and they will discuss the issue once the report has been released.

2. This recommendation has been further examined in this supplementary review report in the discussion of the introduction of more controlled airspace in the vicinity of Ballina.

3. Feedback from industry was that adding Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) waypoints to visual charts would cause confusion.

4. The CASA Self-Administering Sport Aviation Office carried out surveillance in 2013 and 2014 and consulted with the operator of the parachuting activities at Ballina. No adverse safety issues were found. The Ballina-based parachuting operator has recently relocated to Tyagarah aerodrome (14 NM north of Ballina). As a result, there may be a corresponding reduction in aircraft activity at Ballina that will appear in the next cycle of Airservices’ aircraft movement data.

5. Parachuting operations at Ballina are published in the Ballina section of the ERSA. A symbol indicating parachuting operations at Ballina is included in the Brisbane Visual Navigation Chart, Gold Coast VTC and the en route chart low L3.

6. The helicopter circuit procedures are not published in the ERSA.

7. The OAR is supplied traffic and passenger numbers at Ballina on a monthly basis, by Airservices. A preliminary risk assessment of operations at Ballina is conducted quarterly. The aircraft movement data include VFR aircraft movements (AvData) therefore live traffic data collection is not required.

8. The OAR is monitoring the development of the Evans Head aerodrome airpark. Current evidence indicates continued development and promotion of the airpark.

9. Industry has been invited to join the NSW and South Queensland RAPACs to be kept informed about airspace issues in the Northern Rivers area.

10. This Supplementary Review supersedes recommendation 10 from the 2013 Study. Airservices’ data showed 19,004 total aircraft movements for the 12 months to December 2014.

Based on recent aircraft and passenger movement data and the recommendations from the previous studies, it was determined that a supplementary review of the airspace should be conducted. During the conduct of this supplementary review, stakeholders were consulted; aircraft and passenger movement data were reviewed and incident data were analysed.



2. Aerodrome and Airspace

Ballina is a certified aerodrome, has an elevation of seven ft AMSL and right hand circuits are required on runway 06. The aerodrome layout is shown in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Ballina Aerodrome Layout, Departure and Approach Procedures (May 2015).

Ballina’s airspace is Class G, restricted airspace is located approximately 5 NM south of the aerodrome which is activated by Notice to Airmen (NOTAM). Circling to the north of runway 06/24 is not permitted for aircraft conducting instrument approaches. Ballina’s airspace is shown in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: Ballina Airspace, Gold Coast VTC (May 2015).

20 NM Ballina

Ballina

Evans Head

Lismore

Swan Bay

Tyagarah

Casino



3. Consultation

Stakeholders were contacted and invited to provide updated feedback and note any changes relating to Ballina’s airspace since the 2013 aeronautical study, in addition to any other airspace related issues.

A list of stakeholders invited to contribute to this review can be found in Annex B. CASA consulted with representatives of Ballina aerodrome, local aircraft operators, PT operators, Department of Defence and Air Traffic Control (ATC) staff from Airservices Brisbane air traffic services centre.

3.1 Airservices

The OAR visited Airservices’ air traffic service centre in Brisbane where aircraft operations in the Ballina area were observed and discussed with ATC staff. Matters regarding increasing traffic levels, meteorology and the relative proximity of Ballina and Lismore to the approach and departure paths of Gold Coast aerodrome were discussed.

No major airspace issues or concerns were raised by air traffic controllers in regard to aircraft operations at Ballina.

3.2 CASA

CASA officers including Aviation Safety Advisors, Aerodrome Inspectors, Standards and the Self-Administering Sport Aviation Office were contacted for their input to this review. Their responses are included within the review.

3.3 Department of Defence

The Department of Defence provided the following input to the review:

The F/A-18F Super Hornets operated by No. 1 Squadron and No. 6 Squadron, based at Royal Australian Air Force Base Amberley are the primary user of the Evans Head Air Weapons Range. This is the only weapons range within the training radius of the F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft from their home base.

In 2013, Defence refurbished the air-to-ground gunnery targets and scoring system at the range. Air Force currently conducts air-to-ground gunnery on the weapons range in accordance with the published range use schedule in consultation with the Evans Head Air Weapons Range Community Advisory Panel.

Air Force will recommence bombing training by releasing inert weapons at the range in the near future. There are no plans for Air Force to use high explosive weapons on the range and there are no plans to change the existing Restricted Area airspace.

3.4 Aerodrome operator

3.4.1 Traffic levels and future growth

The aerodrome operator has recognised the high demand for aviation access to the Ballina/Bryon area. The increasing demand is seen as sustainable by the aerodrome manager due to population growth, a regional focus on increasing tourism and increased aviation operations at the aerodrome. Based on past trends the aerodrome operator projects that passenger numbers at Ballina will reach 470,000 per annum by June 2016, and is expected to continue in the coming years.



A flight training provider from a nearby major aerodrome is planning to use Ballina as a satellite General Aviation (GA) fixed and rotary-wing training facility. The exact level of aircraft activity is yet to be established, however, the operation is expected to further increase aircraft movements at Ballina.

The 2013 Aeronautical Study of Ballina Byron Gateway was discussed in the context of managing the increasing aircraft movements and traffic mix. The aerodrome operator highlighted their commitment to mitigating airborne hazards and reiterated the aerodrome’s support for the introduction of a Certified Air/Ground Radio Service (CA/GRS).

The aerodrome operator added that if this service were to be introduced, it should be provided as a trial, and then reviewed to ascertain its effectiveness before making a recommendation. Provision of a CA/GRS was also identified in the aerodrome’s Airport Vision for 2015 (October 2014).4

The 2013 Aeronautical Study of Ballina Byron Gateway states that the provision of a CA/GRS might be an effective option to assist in managing the increase in aircraft movements.

Stakeholders associated with the aerodrome operator mentioned that a CA/GRS would assist in increasing pilot situational awareness, adding that any trial should operate during peak PT aircraft movement periods.

The Manual of Standards Part 139 Section 14.25 details the standards and operating procedures for a CA/GRS and the requirements and duties of a suitably qualified person to operate as a Certified Air/Ground Radio Operator (CA/GRO).

CASA has reviewed information services (e.g. CA/GRS) in Section 7.2.

3.4.2 Infrastructure

The Airservices’ aviation rescue and firefighting service facility commenced operations in December 2014.

The aerodrome operator has recently completed a capital works program to cater for current demand.

There are plans to begin a second stage of works that will increase the aerodrome’s ability to cater for increased PT aircraft movements and passengers including an upgrade of the Regular Public Transport (RPT) apron area and the passenger terminal is expected to be redeveloped within 12 months to double the size of the current building. There are also plans to develop new light aircraft hangars and parking areas to cater for increasing activity in that sector.

The aerodrome operator noted constructing a full-length parallel taxiway is problematic due to a lake to the immediate north and the topography to the south of the runway.

4 Ballina Airport Update October 2014

http://ballinabyronairport.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Airport-Presentation-Airport-Update-Oct-2014-07102014-for- website.pdf 5 Manual of Standards Part 139 - Aerodromes

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2014C01301

http://ballinabyronairport.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Airport-Presentation-Airport-Update-Oct-2014-07102014-for-%20website.pdf

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2014C01301



3.5 PT Operators

PT operators provided the following comments regarding Ballina’s airspace:

The absence of a full-length parallel taxiway forces all aircraft to backtrack on the runway. This increases runway occupancy times and reduces the efficiency of the aerodrome.

CASA Comment: Refer to aerodrome operator’s feedback regarding a full-length parallel taxiway.

CTAF congestion and poor radio skills of some pilots are a concern.

Incorrect (or lack of) radio transmissions by some aircraft in the Ballina area are a major concern to PT operators.

CASA Comment: CASA AvSafety Seminars are scheduled for Ballina and Lismore on the 4th and 5th of August 2015. Topics for the seminars are:

1. CASA regulation reform update. 2. Flight in low visibility. 3. Unplanned/unapproved low flying. 4. Operations at non controlled aerodromes. 5. Maintenance releases.

Refer to the CASA website for further details.6

Cockpit workload is high when operating at Ballina, particularly on descent due to frequency management and situational awareness issues.

PT operators prefer operating at Ballina during non-visual meteorological conditions as the VFR aircraft activity and associated communications are reduced.

Wildlife hazards (fruit bats) are a big concern, particularly at dusk.

The recent upgrades to aerodrome infrastructure have improved aircraft operations.

3.6 Other airspace users

3.6.1 The Royal Flying Doctor Service (RFDS) did not report any significant safety concerns. When asked about CTAF congestion the RFDS reported that their pilots are used to operating at non-controlled aerodromes and Ballina does not present a significant challenge except for the matter of wildlife.

3.6.2 Ballina Aero Club raised the following issues:

Inadequate or no communication and poor situational awareness of some pilots, generally itinerant pilots with little experience of Ballina procedures.

Inexperienced first officers in commercial aircraft operating to Ballina can be over-cautious and can disrupt regular traffic patterns.

The Great Eastern Fly-in at Evans Head is a major contributor to frequency congestion on the CTAF. Allocating a discreet frequency for this event was discussed and supported.

A trial of a CA/GRS at Ballina was supported.

The group agreed that the principle of see and avoid works well.

Stakeholders commented that they believed recreational aviation movements at Ballina were decreasing rather than increasing. The busiest times are at weekends, with Sunday mornings being particularly busy.

6 CASA AvSafety Seminar Schedule – http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_91330




The group believed the most significant risk to aviation safety is the level of fruit bat activity. Members of the group agreed that this presents a higher risk than any other issue. The Westpac Rescue Helicopter based outside the Lismore aerodrome will not fly, even to respond to an emergency call, while large clouds of bats pass over at dusk due to the risk of damaging the aircraft.

CASA Comment: The incident data in Section 6 show wildlife incidents (average eight per year) were a more frequent occurrence than airspace related incidents (average three per year).

3.6.3 Australian LightWing Aircraft advised that they have no significant safety concerns. Most local users are familiar with operations and conditions at Ballina. The airspace can be busy but subjectively the CTAF congestion is generally not a problem.

3.6.4 Aussie Air Charter advised that wind patterns and wildlife, not CTAF congestion, are of greatest concern, refer pervious CASA comment.

3.6.5 Classic Aero advised there are no significant safety concerns. CTAF congestion is not an issue.

3.6.6 Air T&G Helicopters advised they conduct left hand circuits on runway 06 and right hand circuits on runway 24 to remain clear of fixed wing aircraft. This is not published in ERSA. CTAF congestion is experienced at times and the operator noted it would be better if Casino and Evans Head were on 126.7 MegaHertz (MHz). IFR training aircraft on instrument approaches can suddenly appear on final or conduct a missed approach before broadcasting.

Various other local aerodrome operators, who are not represented above, made the following observations:

Traffic levels:

There is a general decline in GA/recreational aviation movements. The busiest times are at weekends, with Sunday mornings being particularly busy if weather conditions are conducive to VFR operations.

CASA Comment: While local stakeholders commented on a decline in GA and recreational aviation movements, the data in Section 4 indicate an increase in VFR activity has occurred each year, with a brief pause in 2012. It should be noted that the data in Figure 4 and 5 show movements up to December 2014, rather than April 2015 when the stakeholder comments were provided.

Communications:

The Great Eastern Fly-In is held annually at the Evans Head aerodrome and creates considerable CTAF congestion. Stakeholders reported that on the ground at Evans Head the congestion on the CTAF can be perceived by those coordinating the program using hand held radios as less than the congestion heard in the low level airspace created by Evans Head aircraft broadcasts being heard at adjacent aerodromes, and adjacent aerodrome broadcasts being heard by the Evans Head aircraft. Stakeholders requested the event to be allocated a discrete frequency during its hours of operation.

Aircraft on the ground contacting Brisbane ATC on 124.3 MHz are over-broadcasting the Ballina CTAF (124.2 MHz). This was thought to be due to the retransmitter’s power level and close proximity to the aerodrome.

CASA Comment: Airservices is aware of this issue and the Brisbane ATC frequency is planned to change to 126.05 MHz in November 2015.



Operations:

The varied directions of circuit patterns at Ballina can result in instances of fixed and rotary-wing aircraft converging on the base leg of their respective circuits. Fixed-wing pilots can lose sight of helicopters when turning on the base/final leg as helicopters are under their aircraft’s nose.

CASA Comment: In accordance with Civil Aviation Advisory Publication 166-1(3)7 helicopters may fly a circuit contra to the circuit direction at a height of at least 500 ft above the aerodrome elevation and closer to the runway. This can only be done provided the associated landing site is outside the runway strip in use, the non-standard circuit does not cross the extended centreline of the runway in use and pilots broadcast their intentions.

The possibility of reintroducing fixed-wing left-hand circuits for runway 06 was raised. Some within the group supported left-hand circuits to standardise the circuit pattern, reduce the incidences of converging aircraft on the base leg, and limit confusion for visiting pilots unfamiliar with mixed circuit directions.

CASA Comment: The December 2010 Ballina Aeronautical study noted an Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) recommendation dated 20 August 1998 which stated “right circuits on runway 06 provide the greatest terrain clearance and is therefore the safest option for circuits at Ballina”.8

The Evans Head Restricted Areas were not seen as problematic to aircraft operations, the Air Weapons Range and its associated restricted airspace volumes have been established for many years and are well-known.

Considerable GA and sport aviation traffic track north and south along the coast east of Ballina, there is also parachuting from overhead Ballina to the Kingsford Smith Park south of runway 06/24.

The aerodrome operator should consider providing markers on the ground to identify the northern and southern helicopter training areas as shown in Figure 3. This would give fixed-wing pilots a visual cue to the location of helicopters operating in those areas. Local stakeholders commented that helicopters can be difficult to see when they are operating close to the ground. It was mentioned that it could be even more difficult for itinerant operators who were not familiar with the areas of operation for helicopters at Ballina.

Figure 3: Approximate helicopter operating areas (Google Earth).

7 Civil Aviation Advisory Publication 166-1(3) – Operations in the vicinity of non-controlled aerodromes

http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/download/caaps/ops/166-1.pdf 8 ATSB Recommendation R19980119 20/08/98 Safety Implications Of Circuit Direction Changes At Ballina Airport\

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/recommendations/1998/r19980119.aspx

http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/download/caaps/ops/166-1.pdf

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/recommendations/1998/r19980119.aspx



A CA/GRS operating during hours of PT aircraft activity would be supported if the service reduced frequency congestion and improved situational awareness.

There were varying opinions on whether Lismore, Casino, or Evans Head should move to a different CTAF to help manage frequency congestion, no consensus was reached.

CASA Comment: The Ballina Airport User Group should include separating Evans Head from the Ballina/Lismore CTAF on its agenda and provide the outcome to the RAPAC secretariat prior to the next NSW and South Queensland RAPAC meetings for their discussion.

In considering frequency changes stakeholders should note:

The Ballina instrument approach procedures overlay Lismore’s procedures and IFR aircraft at Ballina and Lismore need to be in direct communication.

The RNAV-X (RNP) instrument approach procedures from air route Y245 track close to Evans Head.

The Lismore RNAV runway 33 instrument approach initial approach and holding fix (LSYSK) is within 3 NM of Evans Head at 2,200 ft AMSL.



4. Traffic Data Review

The 2013 aeronautical study noted several inconsistencies in movement data records. To reduce potential inconsistencies two reliable data sources have been used in this review. They are:

Airservices’ movement data.

Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE).

4.1 Airservices Data

Two types of Airservices aircraft and passenger movement data reports 2009 to 2014 for Ballina were reviewed, the Summary Reports (Figure 4) and Data Validation Reports (Figure 5).

The Airservices data quality for Ballina’s aircraft movements is the highest available with VFR movements provided by Avdata Australia (Avdata). Passenger data include BITRE passengers for scheduled RPT flights, a 70% load factor based on the aircraft seating capacity for IFR Air Transport Movements (ATM)9 other than scheduled flights and an estimate is used for VFR ATM passengers.

The Summary Report’s data below in Figure 4 shows total aircraft movements, air transport movements, other than air transport movements and passengers.

Figure 4: Summary Report data – 2009 to 2014 (Airservices).

The data displayed in Figure 4 indicate:

Total aircraft movements have continued to increase since 2013. The average annual growth rate from 2009 was approximately 5% per annum. Growth in 2013 and 2014 was approximately 12% per annum.

9 Air Transport Movements are movements of aircraft above 2,000 kilograms maximum take-off weight and includes IFR and

VFR aircraft movements.

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

500,000

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

20,000

Dec-09 Dec-10 Dec-11 Dec-12 Dec-13 Dec-14

Pas

sen

ger

Mo

vem

en

ts

Air

craf

t M

ove

me

nts

12 Month Periods Ending December

Total Aircraft Movements Air Transport MovementsOther Than Air Transport Passenger Counts



Air transport aircraft movements (aircraft above 2,000 kg) have increased since 2009 an average annual growth rate of 5% per annum. Recent annual growth between 2013 and 2014 was approximately 2%.

Movements of aircraft other than air transport aircraft have also average an annual growth rate of approximately 5% per annum since 2009. Growth in 2013 and 2014 was approximately 15% per annum.

Passenger numbers have increased at a relatively constant rate of approximately 11% per annum since 2011 (6% per annum since 2009).

Based on the trends in Figure 4 traffic for the 12 months to December 2015 is expected to be approximately:

21,000 total aircraft movements (estimated 11% growth);

8,000 air transport movements (estimated 5% growth); and

480,000 passengers (estimated 10% growth).

A continued growth of 10% per annum would result in passenger numbers reaching approximately 530,000 by the end of 2016.

The Data Validation Reports data in Figure 5 show a breakdown of the total movements shown in Figure 4; total IFR movements, scheduled IFR movements, total Avdata (VFR) and Avdata (VFR) circuits. These data provide an indication of the traffic mix at Ballina.

Figure 5: Data Validation Report data – 2009 to 2014 (Airservices).

The data displayed in Figure 5 indicate:

Growth in total aircraft movements is largely driven by an increase in VFR aircraft movements (total Avdata including circuits).

The total number of IFR movements has fluctuated. Since 2009 annual growth was approximately 2% per annum.

Scheduled IFR movements have also fluctuated and averaged a similar growth rate as total IFR since 2009 of approximately 3% per annum.

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000


Air

craf

t M

ove

me

nts


Total IFR Scheduled IFR Total AvData (inc CTS) Avdata Circuit Count



4.2 Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics

The BITRE data capture only passenger and aircraft movements of scheduled RPT services, resulting in a lower total than the Airservices data. Figure 6 show the BITRE aircraft and passenger movements 2009 to 2014.

The BITRE aircraft movements generally align with the scheduled IFR movements shown in the Airservices data.

Figure 6: RPT aircraft and passenger movements – 2009 to 2014 (BITRE).

The BITRE aircraft and passenger data indicate:

A consistent trend of RPT passenger growth has occurred since 2011 averaging approximately 11% per annum (6% per annum since 2009).

RPT aircraft movements have increased at a rate of approximately 4% per annum since 2009.

4.3 Traffic Data Summary

The Airservices data incorporate VFR movements and indicate growth in that sector. The trend in IFR movements also indicates growth over the longer term. Total aircraft movements have continued to increase since 2013 at a modest rate of approximately 5% per annum. Recently (2013 to 2014) total movements have increased at a higher rate of 12% per annum mostly driven by an increase in VFR movements.

The BITRE data indicate a growth in RPT operations from 2011 to 2014. The strong growth in passenger numbers could be attributed to RPT operators serving Ballina with high-capacity jet aircraft. These types of aircraft are capable of transporting between 98 and 18010 passengers. BITRE data show scheduled aircraft movements have increased 27% over the last 5 years, while passenger numbers have increased by 54% indicating carriers are utilising larger aircraft types and/or load factors per flight have increased.

10

The majority of passengers to and from Ballina travel by jet aircraft ranging in size from Embraer 190 (98 seats) to

A320/B737 (approximately 180 seats). Refer to the 2013 Aeronautical Study of Ballina Byron Gateway for a full list of operators and aircraft types.

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000


Pas

sen

ger

Mo

vem

en

ts

Air

craf

t M

ove

me

nts


Aircraft Movements Passenger Movements



If Ballina were serviced by smaller RPT aircraft only, there would be a significant increase in RPT aircraft movements to accommodate the same number of passengers.

With the recent relocation of a former Ballina-based parachuting operator to Tyagarah aerodrome (14 NM north of Ballina), there may be a corresponding reduction in aircraft activity that will appear in the next cycle of Airservices’ aircraft movement data.

However, the Ballina aerodrome operator advised that operations at Tyagarah can be adversely affected by rain as Tyagarah has a grass runway. If an assessment of the condition of the grass runway at Tyagarah is that it is not suitable for operations after periods of rain, it is expected that the parachute operator will conduct operations from Ballina.

5. Airspace Criteria Thresholds

The AAPS states that, ‘When annual traffic levels at an aerodrome meet a threshold of any one of the criteria CASA should complete an aeronautical risk review in consultation with the public, industry and other government agencies.’

‘While the criteria provide a good indicator of likely airspace classification, CASA will be able to consider public, industry and agency comments, forecast future traffic levels and any significant risk mitigators already in place, or planned at the location, before finalising an airspace determination.’

Ballina exceeds the AAPS passenger criteria threshold for Class D airspace shown in Table 1 and has shown strong recent growth in total aircraft movements (12% per annum and passenger movements (11% per annum).

Class B Class C Class D

Service provided ATC ATC ATC

Total annual aircraft movements 750,000 400,000 80,000

Total annual passenger transport operations aircraft movements

250,000 30,000 15,000

Total annual passenger transport operations passengers

25 million 1 million 350,000

Table 1: Airspace criteria thresholds (AAPS 2012)

However, the Airservices aircraft movement data for the 12 months to December 2014 (refer to Figure 4) indicate that both PT and total aircraft movements are significantly below the Class D trigger criteria.



6. Aviation Safety Incident Reports

6.1 Aviation Safety Incident Reports Description

All incidents and accidents involving Australian registered aircraft, or foreign aircraft in Australian airspace must be reported to the ATSB. The ATSB receives incident information via pilot reports, Airservices’ Corporate Integrated Reporting and Risk Information System reports and the Australian Defence Forces’ Aviation Safety Occurrence Reports.

The ATSB maintains its own database, the Safety Investigation Information Management System (SIIMS), in which all reported occurrences are logged, assessed, classified and recorded. The information contained within SIIMS is dynamic and subject to change based on additional and/or updated data. Each individual report is known as an Aviation Safety Incident Report (ASIR) and for identification purposes is allocated its own serial number.

CASA receives de-identified ASIR data for the purpose of improving safety. The airspace related incidents within 20 NM of Ballina from 2009 to 2014 were reviewed.

6.1 Ballina Incidents

Table 2 shows airspace and wildlife related incidents within 20 NM of Ballina in Class G airspace and total aerodrome movements from 2009 to 2014. Incidents within 20 NM of Ballina that occurred at Lismore aerodrome (on the ground or in the circuit area) have not been included.

Although not related to airspace stakeholders reported wildlife hazards during consultation these incidents have been included for completeness.

Incident Type 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total

Wildlife/Bird strikes 7 8 11 8 7 7 48

Communications 5 2 1 1 0 0 9

Runway Incursion 0 0 1 0 2 0 3

Aircraft Separation 0 3 3 2 1 2 11

Total Incidents 12 13 16 11 10 9 71

Total Airspace Incidents

5 4 4 3 1 2 19

Total Movements 15,299 14,175 15,322 15,037 16,837 19,004 95,674

Table 2: Incidents 2009 to 2014 (ATSB and Airservices data).

The incidents recorded by the ATSB shown in Table 2 indicate:

Wildlife incidents are more than twice as common as airspace incidents.

Aircraft separation incidents have remained relatively constant since 2009 at two per year, despite an increase in aircraft movements.

All of the recorded aircraft separation incidents involved a breakdown in communication. There were no communication incidents recorded in 2013 and 2014 which were not also attributed to a separation incident.

Of the 11 aircraft separation incidents: o All were recorded as having occurred below 5,000 ft AMSL11.

o Six involved passenger transport aircraft.

o Six were between IFR and VFR aircraft. 11

Altitude information was not shown for one 2011 incident which occurred in Class G airspace during climb.



o Two involved IFR and unknown aircraft.

o One was between two IFR aircraft.

o One was between two VFR aircraft.

o One involved two unknown aircraft.

No link between the level of aircraft movements and the number of incidents was identified.

Separation Incident Probability:

Over the six year period shown in Table 2 the Airservices data showed a total of 95,674 movements. Over the same period the ATSB data showed a total of 11 aircraft separation incidents. This equates to approximately 8,700 movements per incident or 1.15x10-4 incidents per movement. This rate of occurrence falls within the ‘unlikely’ (could occur but considered unlikely or doubtful) probability range (1 in 1,000 - 10,000) of the CASA risk matrix. Considering total RPT movements over the six year period and the six separation incidents involving these types of aircraft, this also equates to an ‘unlikely’ probability (approximately 1 in 4,100).

6.2 ATSB Investigations and Reports

The ATSB prioritises investigations based on societal risk. The hierarchy of priorities is outlined on the ATSB website.12

Between 01 January 2009 and 31 December 2014 the ATSB conducted three investigations into incidents that occurred at Ballina.13 Of these investigations:

One was a collision with terrain (AO-2013-217).

One was a runway incursion related to a radio issue (AO-2013-177).

One was an aircraft proximity event which was related to a radio unit that was not transmitting or receiving (AO-2010-074).

Incident AO-2010-074 ATSB Comment: Flights conducted at non-controlled aerodromes are not provided with a traffic separation service from air traffic control. Consequently, maintaining separation is the pilot’s responsibility. To maintain separation, it is imperative that pilots utilise alerted and unalerted see-and-avoid principles to enhance situational awareness. The effective use of aerodrome frequency response units and anti-collision lighting can contribute to pilot’s situational awareness at non-controlled aerodromes.14

In its June 2015 report Emerging trends in Australian aviation safety July – December 2014 the ATSB noted:

While the nation-wide number of operational/communications/air ground air – low capacity air transport occurrences is relatively small, the rate of air-ground-air communications issues involving low capacity air transport aircraft has been above the 5-year quarterly average in both the Jul-Sep 2014 and Oct-Dec 2014 quarters. A majority of the occurrences involved aircraft undertaking charter operations (16), while seven of the occurrences included an aircraft undertaking low capacity RPT operations.15

12

ATSB: Terminology, investigation procedures and deciding whether to investigate.

http://www.atsb.gov.au/about_atsb/investigation-procedures.aspx 13

ATSB Aviation safety investigations and reports webpage advanced search: Ballina, 01/01/2009 to 31/12/2014

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/safety-investigation-reports.aspx?mode=Aviation 14

ATSB Investigation number: AO-2010-074 http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/2907457/ab2010103.pdf#page=34 15

ATSB Report: Emerging trends in Australian aviation safety July – December 2014

http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/5310875/ar-2015-021_final.pdf

http://www.atsb.gov.au/about_atsb/investigation-procedures.aspx

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/safety-investigation-reports.aspx?mode=Aviation

http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/2907457/ab2010103.pdf#page=34

http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/5310875/ar-2015-021_final.pdf



Due to resource restraints and the limited scope for uncovering systemic safety issues the ATSB did not investigate a high risk general aviation occurrence at Ballina where a Robinson R22 helicopter crossed the runway while a Cessna 150 was conducting a touch-and-go (2014-06348). This incident is captured by the data in Table 2.

Airspace related ATSB reports and investigations relevant to Ballina 2009 to 2014 were all communications related.

6.3 Incident and Traffic Comparison

The incident numbers together with aircraft and passenger movements for Ballina were compared to other locations in Australia. A direct comparison is difficult as every aerodrome is different and supports different levels and mixes of air traffic.

Table 3 is a summary of other aerodromes with similar traffic levels to Ballina and the number of separation related and communications incidents at these locations. It should be noted that each aerodrome has a different mix of traffic. For example: Ayers Rock, Newman and Port Hedland do not have the same volume of VFR itinerant traffic as Ballina.

Aerodrome Movements December 2014 Airspace Related Incidents

16:

2009 to 2014 within 20 NM Current

ATS Total Movements

ATM Passengers

Non-controlled Separation Communication Total

Ballina 19,004 7,271 437,940 11 9 20 CTAF

Ayers Rock 17,700 5,000 284,600 0 0 0 CA/GRS

Gladstone 22,624 17,154 506,856 5 6 11 CTAF

Newman 12,146 10,065 436,551 2 6 8 CTAF

Port Hedland 14,200 12,805 577,293 3 4 7 AFIS17

Controlled

Coffs Harbour 26,878 9,410 394,539 9 0 9 ATC

Hamilton Island 18,180 7,779 502,951 8 0 8 ATC

Table 3: Movements and incidents at other aerodromes 2009 to 2014 (Airservices and ATSB data).

Comparison Summary:

Traffic Movements:

Ayers Rock recorded a similar ratio of total movements to air transport movements but much lower passenger numbers. There were no incidents.

The other non-controlled locations recorded a higher number and percentage of air transport movements. There is less than half the number of non-air transport movements at these locations than at Ballina;

Newman has similar ATM and passenger movements to Ballina, however has much lower total movements as a result of limited non-air transport aircraft movements indicating a simpler traffic mix.

The controlled aerodromes supported similar air transport movements. However Coffs Harbour accommodated an extra 8,000 total aircraft movements while Hamilton Island supported approximately 65,000 more passengers during 2014.

16

ATSB primary occurrence type counted for comparison of aerodromes. 17

Aerodrome Flight Information Service.



Incident Numbers:

Ballina recorded a higher number of separation related and communication incidents that the other locations;

Approximately half of the separation related incidents at Ballina involved PT aircraft, refer to Section 6.1. Most of the separation incidents at Coffs Harbour also involved PT aircraft;

The controlled aerodromes recorded a similar number of separation incidents to Ballina. Some of these occurred during CTAF hours.

The other non-controlled locations recorded less than half the number of separation related incidents as Ballina.

6.4 Incident Summary

As the traffic levels have increased at Ballina the annual number of airspace related incidents has remained relatively constant. Bird/bat strikes are a more common occurrence than airspace related incidents.

All of the recorded aircraft separation incidents involved a breakdown in communication. Of the 11 aircraft separation incidents with altitude information all were recorded as having occurred below 5,000 ft AMSL18, six involved passenger transport aircraft and six were between IFR and VFR aircraft.

Compared to other locations in Australia that supported similar traffic levels in 2014, Ballina recorded a higher number of separation related and communications incidents over a six year period.

18




7. Airspace Reform

As required by the AAPS, this review takes into account the Government’s requirement that CASA will continue the reform of Australia’s airspace, move towards closer alignment with the International Civil Aviation Organization system and ensure that appropriate levels of airspace classification and air traffic services are implemented to protect regional aerodromes served by passenger transport services.

7.1 Class E Airspace

Class E airspace has been used at other regional Australian aerodromes below 8,500 ft AMSL where radar coverage is available. These locations include:

Avalon aerodrome.

Mackay aerodrome.

Rockhampton aerodrome.

At these locations, Class E either supports the Class D or C airspace at a towered aerodrome, or replaces Class D airspace outside tower hours down to below the aerodrome circuit height.

In contrast, applying Class E in the current Ballina environment would not be supporting or replacing Class C or D airspace at an existing towered aerodrome. Class E would extend a level of Air Traffic Service (ATS) down to an altitude that would be below the current Class C airspace, but remain well above the aerodrome’s circuit height.

Class E airspace services summary:

A separation service is provided between IFR aircraft.

Traffic information on VFR aircraft is provided to IFR aircraft as far as practicable (similarly to Class G).

VFR aircraft do not require a clearance from ATC and can request a surveillance information service (as in Class G) where available.

All aircraft require a secondary surveillance radar transponder, except VFR aircraft which are not fitted with an engine-driven electrical system.

All aircraft must be equipped with a radio.

The greatest enhancements to aviation safety from employing Class E airspace are the separation service between IFR aircraft, and the enhanced traffic information on VFR aircraft provided to IFR aircraft (as far as practicable) as a result of transponder requirements making VFR aircraft visible to ATC within radar coverage.

Reliable radar surveillance exists down to approximately 5,000 ft AMSL in the Ballina area, which would enhance the provision of a Class E ATS. Automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast coverage is currently available to a similar level.

During the OAR site visit to Airservices air traffic services centre in Brisbane, the possibility of establishing Class E airspace around Ballina was discussed. Feedback received included:

There is limited IFR traffic cruising between 5,000 ft AMSL and 8,500 ft AMSL.

IFR traffic below the Class C steps is usually heading to/from Ballina or Lismore.



There is a small amount of private IFR traffic (except for parachuting operators) cruising below the Class C steps or the area Class E lower limit (8,500 ft AMSL) to the south of Ballina.

ATC generally prefer there to be surveillance coverage of 500 ft to 1,000 ft below the base of controlled airspace to allow time for climbing aircraft to be observed, identified and given a clearance prior to their entry into controlled airspace.

Ballina IFR traffic summary:

The Airservices Ballina Data Validation Report for the 12 month period to December 2014 showed 12,820 VFR movements (67%) and 6,184 IFR aircraft movements (33%).

IFR air transport movements accounted for 5,789 (30%) of the total movements. At nearby Lismore there were approximately 2,500 IFR air transport movements in 2014.19 Although ATC advised there is limited IFR traffic cruising below the Class C lower limit this may change if Class E was established. Some pilots, at present, may be choosing to cruise at a higher level than they would prefer so that they are in the Class C airspace in order to receive an ATC service.

Class E airspace volume:

Based on ATC feedback and traffic data, establishing Class E below Class C is likely to benefit aircraft on climb or descent at Ballina and Lismore in most cases. The lower limit of the Class E airspace would likely be no lower than 6,500 ft AMSL. This corresponds with a VFR cruising level and should provide time for an aircraft to become identified by ATC (with the current surveillance coverage) and receive a clearance before reaching the lower limit.

To adequately service aircraft during climb and descent below 8,500 ft AMSL a Class E lateral boundary would likely need to be established approximately 30 NM or more from Ballina and Lismore.

Class E airspace conclusions:

Based on the review of Class E airspace above establishing Class E airspace below Class C airspace down to 6,500 ft AMSL in the Ballina area would allow ATC to separate IFR traffic during climb and descent. The additional 2,000 ft of controlled airspace for IFR aircraft would provide a separation service for approximately four minutes during each climb and descent.20 Class E airspace would also require most VFR aircraft that are not exempt to be equipped with a transponder.

Incidents recorded by the ATSB since 2009 show that no aircraft separation incidents were recorded above 5,000 ft AMSL within 20 NM of Ballina in Class G airspace.21 Aircraft separation-related incidents and stakeholder feedback (see Section 3) indicate that no elevated conflict risk exists above 5,000 ft AMSL in Class G airspace within 20 NM of Ballina.

CASA has not identified any significant risks which would be mitigated by the introduction of Class E airspace above 6,500 ft AMSL to the base of Class C at Ballina. However, Class E airspace would provide separation between IFR aircraft and enhanced traffic information on VFR aircraft for an additional period, during climb and descent which would be of benefit.

19

Airservices Lismore Data Validation Report: 12 months to December 2014. 20

Four minute estimate based on climb or descent rate of 500 ft per minute. Higher performance aircraft, particularly RPT jets,

operate at higher climb and decent rates exceeding 1,000 ft per minute. 21




Although no elevated conflict risk was identified in the airspace above 5,000 ft AMSL within 20 NM of Ballina, CASA considerers that establishing Class E airspace in this area, where surveillance is available, would enhance safety further to reduce the risk to as low as reasonably practicable.

7.2 CA/GRS and Aerodrome Flight Information Service

A CA/GRS is a flight information service provided by the aerodrome operator under Civil Aviation Safety Regulation (CASR) Part 139. Airservices can also provide an Aerodrome Flight Information Service (AFIS) at an aerodrome. An AFIS is the same service as a CA/GRS but provided under the terms of Airservices’ CASR Part 172 approval.

The benefits of CA/GRS (or AFIS) are that pilots receive traffic information in specific terms for their flight which enhances their ability to see and avoid potentially conflicting traffic. The CA/GRO can see the aerodrome, its environs and the traffic. The CA/GRO can assist by providing information which is not apparent to the pilot and has not been announced on the radio for example, “Fruit bats observed flying in the approach area of the runway”. At aerodromes where there is no parallel taxiway the CA/GRO can provide useful information of the progress of aircraft taxiing on the runway. The CA/GRO may provide other information of a general nature such as local weather variations from the reported weather.eg, “Heavy rain in the missed approach area”.

An approval for a CA/GRS or an AFIS at an aerodrome is quicker and easier to achieve than for ATC. However, a CA/GRS and AFIS do not provide any ATC separation services.

In the recent past, when aerodromes have become controlled, Airservices has implemented an AFIS as a precursor to the introduction of ATC. An AFIS provides a useful mitigation to the risks identified for which ATC is required whilst the ATC service goes through the approval process. It also allows the staff who will be providing the ATC service to become familiar with the local environment and traffic flows. Should a CA/GRS be established at Ballina in the future and ATC is then determined to be required at a later date, Airservices should replace the CA/GRS with an AFIS prior to commencing ATC operations.

There is no trigger e.g. a certain number of passengers, for the provision of CA/GRS or AFIS. Each case is taken on its merits based on the consideration of a multitude of factors. While the introduction of an information service may be an interim step towards ATC at some locations, establishing a CA/GRS or AFIS does not always eventuate in the need for establishing an ATC service at an aerodrome.

The March 2013 Aeronautical Study of Port Hedland recommended an AFIS to be established. The December 2012 Airservices movement data for Port Hedland showed:

17,562 total aircraft movements (similar to Ballina at the end of 2014);

14,639 ATM (double Ballina at the end of 2014); and

594,983 passenger movements (35% more than Ballina at the end of 2014).

Port Hedland recorded a lower number of airspace related incidents to Ballina from 2009 to 2014, this is likely due to the lower number of VFR operations. Based on the current growth Ballina would be expected to exceed 500,000 passengers by the end of 2016.

Services that provide traffic information improve pilot situational awareness which reduces the risk of proximity incidents. These services have also been shown to



improve radio procedures and compliance with CTAF procedures including appropriate frequency management.22

The primary purpose of a CA/GRS or AFIS is to enhance the safety of air transport aircraft operations by providing relevant traffic information. The Government also considers the safety of passenger transport services as the first priority in airspace administration.23 Over the 2009 to 2014 period there were six separation related incidents at Ballina involving PT aircraft (approximately one per year). All of these separation incidents involved a breakdown in communication.

A service providing traffic information may reduce the occurrence rate. However, the service provider will be unable to provide traffic information on aircraft that are not broadcasting while outside the view of the service provider’s ground position.

The additional broadcasts from the information service may also increase frequency congestion. However, it has been shown in the UNICOM trial and reported at Ayers Rock that a third-party radio service can reduce frequency congestion because it drives better radio discipline and provides more pertinent and timely traffic information.

CA/GRS and AFIS Summary:

Provision of a CA/GRS or AFIS would reduce the potential for an aircraft separation incident (currently considered ‘unlikely’ refer to Section 6.1). Should a CA/GRS be established at Ballina in the future and ATC then required at a later date, Airservices should replace the CA/GRS with an AFIS prior to commencing ATC operations.

An AFIS was recommended to be established at Port Hedland which at the time supported a higher percentage of PT aircraft movements (less GA traffic) and a higher number of passengers, but recorded a lower number of separation incidents.

The traffic mix a Ballina is more complex than Port Hedland with aircraft ranging from slow microlight aircraft, helicopters and general aviation to fast RPT jets.

In this context and in line with Government’s priorities for the safety of passenger transport services, provision of a CA/GRS at Ballina would be a proactive response to the expected increase in passengers which is expected to exceed 500,000 per annum by the end of 2016, refer Section 4.1.

22

Airservices Unicom Trial Proof of Concept Report – March 2009 23

AAPS 2012 paragraph 34

https://infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/aaps/files/F2012L01389.pdf

https://infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/aaps/files/F2012L01389.pdf



8. Summary and Conclusions

Stakeholder consultation and traffic and incident data reviews during the compilation of this report indicate the following:

Infrastructure:

The aerodrome operator is making, or planning to make, significant investment in new infrastructure including light aircraft hangars/parking areas, increasing the size of the passenger terminal and extending the RPT apron to accommodate expected traffic growth.

Traffic Levels:

Ballina hosts increasing PT and GA/recreational light aircraft movements.

Total aircraft movement numbers have increased by approximately 12% per annum 2012 – 2014. Scheduled passenger aircraft movements have increased 27% over the last 5 years.

Total passenger numbers have increased by approximately 11% per annum since 2011.

The aerodrome operator forecasts passenger numbers will reach approximately 470,000 per annum by June 2016.

Based on Airservices total passenger data trends, passenger numbers are expected to be 480,000 for the 12 months to December 2015 and exceed 500,000 by the end of 2016.

Operations:

Stakeholders reported wildlife (flying foxes) as the greatest threat to safety. This was supported by the incident data which showed more wildlife incidents than airspace incidents each year since 2009.

Helicopter training areas to the north and south of runway 06/24 should be documented in the ERSA to increase awareness of helicopter operations.

Opposite direction helicopter circuits (left hand runway 06 and right hand runway 24) are not published in ERSA.

Communications:

All (11) separation related incidents 2009 to 2014 involved a breakdown in communication.

Radio discipline and CTAF congestion were mentioned by a number of stakeholders as issues.

When compared with other similar locations, Ballina had the greatest number of communications incidents. The provision of a third-party radio service such as a CA/GRS would be expected to reduce this number. The provision of a CA/GRS and a reduction in communications incidents may also have a positive effect on the number separation incidents.

Local stakeholders stated that frequency congestion is generally not an issue, but can occur on weekends, particularly Sundays.

The Great Eastern Fly-In held at Evans Head is a major contributor to CTAF congestion.

Ballina and Lismore should remain on the same CTAF due to overlapping instrument procedures.



The Ballina Airport User Group should discuss separating Evans Head from the Ballina/Lismore CTAF and consider utilising the Tyagarah/Swan Bay frequency (126.7 MHz).

Airspace and Information Services:

No significant safety issues concerning airspace classification or architecture were raised by stakeholders.

The current airspace classification is appropriate and air traffic control services are not yet required at the aerodrome.

Introducing Class E airspace between the base of Class C and 6,500 ft AMSL would provide a small benefit for aircraft during climb and descent.

A trial of a CA/GRS was discussed and generally supported by stakeholders.

The provision of a traffic information service (CA/GRS or AFIS) at Ballina would be a proactive response to the expected increase in passengers which, based on current trends, is expected to exceed 500,000 per annum by the end of 2016.

9. Recommendations

The following recommendations are made in light of this review of supplementary information and further data analysis. These recommendations supersede those made in the Aeronautical Study of Ballina Byron Gateway report, dated May 2013:

1. The operator of Ballina aerodrome should implement a CA/GRS before the end of June 2016.

2. CASA should continue to monitor movement numbers at Ballina with a view to designating Ballina as a controlled aerodrome as soon as the risk to traffic warrants it.

3. Airservices should consider implementing an Aerodrome Flight Information Service, replacing any CA/GRS, as a precursor to the provision of air traffic control should it be required in the future.

4. Airservices, in consultation with industry, should submit an airspace change proposal to introduce Class E airspace below the Class C airspace in the vicinity of Ballina.

5. The Ballina Airport User Group should discuss separating Evans Head from the Ballina/Lismore CTAF and provide comments at the next NSW and South Queensland RAPAC meetings. Stakeholders should note the considerations identified in this review.

6. Should Evans Head not be permanently separated from the Ballina/Lismore CTAF the organisers of the Great Eastern Fly-In should request a discrete CTAF for the events’ hours of operation.

7. The organisers of the Great Eastern Fly-In should request a routine NOTAM be raised for the duration of each event to notify airspace users of the increased activity in the area.

8. The Ballina aerodrome operator should publish the location of the grass helicopter training areas to the north and south of runway 06/24 in the ERSA.



9. The Ballina aerodrome operator, in consultation with industry, should document opposite direction helicopter circuits (left hand runway 06 and right hand runway 24) in the ERSA preferably before the end of 2015.



Annex A – Acronyms and Abbreviations

Acronym Explanation

AAPS Australian Airspace Policy Statement

AFIS Aerodrome Flight Information Service

Airservices Airservices Australia

AMSL Above Mean Sea Level

ASIR

ATC

Aviation Safety Incident Report

Air Traffic Control

ATM Air Transport Movement

ATS

ATSB

BITRE

Air Traffic Services

Australian Transport Safety Bureau

Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics

CA/GRO Certified Air/Ground Radio Operator

CA/GRS Certified Air/Ground Radio Service

CASA Civil Aviation Safety Authority

CASR Civil Aviation Safety Regulation

CTAF Common Traffic Advisory Frequency

ERSA

ft

GA

IFR

En Route Supplement Australia

Feet

General Aviation

Instrument Flight Rules

MHz megahertz

NM Nautical Miles

NOTAM Notice to Airmen

NSW

OAR

New South Wales

Office of Airspace Regulation

PT Passenger Transport

RAPAC Regional Airspace and Procedures Advisory Committee

RFDS Royal Flying Doctor Service

RPT Regular Public Transport

SIIMS Safety Investigation Information Management System

VFR Visual Flight Rules

VTC Visual Terminal Chart



Annex B – Stakeholders

Position Organisation

Manager Air T&G Helicopters

Implementation Manager – New ATC Services Airservices Australia

ATC Sector Controller Airservices Australia

ATC Line Manager Airservices Australia

Pilot Aussie Air Charter and Training

Aussie Air Training Charters

Manager Australian LightWing Aircraft

Various pilots Ballina Aero Club

Aerodrome Manager Ballina Byron Gateway aerodrome

Aerodrome Operations Officer Ballina Byron Gateway aerodrome

Manager Black Swan Aviation

Byron Council (Tyagarah Aerodrome)

Byron Gliding Club (Tyagarah)

Aviation Safety advisor Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Aerodrome inspector Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Self-administering Sport Aviation Office Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Senior Aerodromes Standards Officer Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Pilot Classic Aero Adventure Flights

Defence representative to the OAR Department of Defence

Peter Lynch Evans Head Airpark

Coordinator Great Eastern Fly In - Evans Head

Aerodrome and airways manager Jetstar Airways

National flight operations manager Regional Express Airlines

Contact Officer Richmond Valley Council

Pilot Royal Flying Doctor Service NSW

Head of flying operations Royal Flying Doctor Service Queensland

Skydive Byron Bay

Manager - Air Traffic Management and Meteorology

Virgin Australia

Chief Pilot Westpac Rescue Helicopter Lismore

Draft Supplementary Airspace Review of Ballina … of Airspace Regulation Page 2 of 29 Supplementary...

Documents

Transcript of Draft Supplementary Airspace Review of Ballina … of Airspace Regulation Page 2 of 29 Supplementary...