Reference number
AR201300081
Date reported
Published date
Mode
Affected operation/industry
Concern subject type
Concern summary

The concern related to the move from the old air traffic control tower to the new tower at Melbourne Airport. The reporter was concerned that the surface movement controllers had not received sufficient training and simulation in the new operating systems to operate safely.

Reporter's deidentified concern

The reporter expressed a safety concern regarding the transition of operations from the old Melbourne Control Tower to the new tower.

The reporter is concerned about the use of Integrated Tower Automation Suite (INTAS) technology to perform Surface Movement Control, as ground control has become more complex due to increased infrastructure restrictions on the aerodrome and the increased levels of traffic.

The reporter is also worried that the training to this point has been deficient as there has been no simulator and controllers cannot fully utilise the software until a few weeks prior to the transition. Given the lack of a simulator and the inability to fully utilise the transition software, and crucially the fact that utilising the INTAS system whilst making control decisions and communicating with aircraft will not be available until a few days prior to transition, means that those operating the SMC position will be thrown in the deep end.

In the reporter's opinion, the current plan to reduce arriving traffic during transition by 3-4 aircraft an hour at best is not sufficient.

The reporter stated that as there are substantial critical differences present, from a work function view point, a specialist risk assessment should be conducted by an independent body before the move to the new tower is conducted.

Named party's response

Airservices Australia (Airservices) appreciates the opportunity to respond to the reported safety concern regarding the transition of operations to the new Melbourne Control Tower which includes the implementation of INTAS technology.

Melbourne will be the fourth such transition undertaken by Airservices in the last 18 months.

Previous transitions at Broome, Rockhampton and Adelaide have been critically reviewed to assess the effectiveness of training and transition activities.

These reviews confirmed that training and mimic periods of 5 days (per activity) are adequate to enable staff to develop the required competencies for transition.

The INTAS training is provided on a system that, whilst not a simulator, replicates the actions required for system interaction and flight strip manipulation. In addition, Airservices has extended and strengthened the mimic activities for Melbourne to better emulate the operational environment and enable staff to gain confidence and proficiency in the use of INTAS within a managed operational framework.

The Melbourne INTAS training was completed in May 2013 with staff commencing partial mimic activities from early July 2013. Partial mimic will continue until full mimic commences 4 weeks prior to commissioning. Full mimic activities will not occur until the software is comprehensively assessed. This is to ensure the software is suitably mature to enable the required learning outcomes to be achieved. Once started, full mimic will continue until commissioning of INTAS in the new Melbourne Tower. Commissioning is planned for late November 2013. This timeframe will deliver an average of 8 shifts of exposure for each controller in the mimic environment.

The mimic activities for the new Melbourne Control Tower are being conducted under the guidance of experienced INTAS staff, most of whom have been involved with previous INTAS transitions. The purpose of such mimic activities includes validating the design and operation of INTAS (including human factors analysis) and ensuring that staff are subject to required performance assessments prior to operating in the new tower in a live environment.

This is supported by the application of a 10 day recency period for staff undertaking mimic activities to ensure that the recency of learning outcomes is maintained.

Regulator's response

CASA has reviewed the REPCON and notes the reporter's concerns. CASA is satisfied with Airservices response.

From the limited information provided in the REPCON it would appear that the reporter may not have been fully aware of all of the actions taken by Airservices to mediate implementation risk. CASA suggests that the reporter ensures that any concerns regarding current workload or proposed workload and any impact on safety is raised within the Airservices safety management system. CASA periodically conducts surveillance on the effectiveness of that system.