The Department of Defence’s risk assessment and review processes for the implementation of the Comsoft Aeronautical Data Access System and removal of the flight data position did not effectively identify or manage the risks associated with the resulting increased workload in the Darwin Approach environment, in particular with regard to the Planner position.
Darwin Approach controllers were routinely exposed to green (limited data block) radar returns that were generally inconsequential in that Approach control environment, leading to a high level of expectancy that such tracks were not relevant for aircraft separation purposes. Refresher training did not emphasise the importance of scanning the green radar returns.
The Australian Defence Air Traffic System (ADATS) did not automatically process all system messages generated by The Australian Advanced Air Traffic System. In cases where transponder code changes were not automatically processed, the risk controls in place were not able to effectively ensure that the changes were identified and manually processed.
The proximity of the landing gear selector valve electrical wiring loom to the external hydraulic power connectors within the left engine nacelle on Fairchild SA227-AT Metro aircraft resulted in the ‘down selection’ wire being damaged during routine maintenance activities.
Bosphorus’ safety management system did not detail any guidance or instructions relating to watch handover or changing the helmsman during high risk areas of a pilotage.
Bosphorus’ safety management system provided no guidance in relation to the allocation of function based roles and responsibilities to members of the bridge team during pilotage.
Brisbane Marine Pilots’ ‘Port of Brisbane Passage Plan’ did not detail any guidance or instructions relating to watch handover or changing the helmsman during high risk areas of a pilotage.
There were non-compliances to the repeat back provision because it was viewed as onerous under certain Local Possession Authorities (LPAs). An opportunity exists to review rule non-conformance with the implementation of LPAs.
Sydney Trains validation processes were not effective in detecting errors in Special Train Notice (STN) 1004 prior to the Local Possession Authority (LPA) implementation.
Transfield did not have adequate systems in place to ensure workers were not adversely affected by drugs or alcohol while conducting safety related work in a remote work environment.
Transfield did not provide oversight sufficient to identify and rectify the non-compliant work practices in the road-rail vehicle operation involved in this occurrence.
The absence of a national standard that addresses the design, fitment and maintenance of rail guidance equipment and the safety performance for road-rail vehicles while on-rail, increases the risks associated with operating road-rail vehicles.
The maintenance regime for Hino TS63 was inadequate and did not account for the accelerated wear and tear on the vehicle when used as a road-rail vehicle.
Transfield’s training regime did not ensure that the track workers involved in this occurrence were trained in new or updated work practices relating to road-rail vehicle operations. Similarly, relevant amended procedures, safety bulletins and alerts had not been effectively promulgated to these employees.
The procedures and guidance documentation for authorising movement past signals displaying a Stop indication was ambiguous.
There was no warning indication at signal DYN114 to warn train crews that the broad-gauge rail terminated in the straight-ahead direction.
The configuration of the dual-gauge points assembly led to a truncated broad-gauge rail in one of the turnout directions.
The train operator’s Route Knowledge Package did not include track layout diagrams, or specific information warning of the existence of dual-gauge turnouts where track terminated in one direction.
The process undertaken by the network control officer for issuing a Caution Order does not require validation of compatibility between the train gauge and the established route.
When train 9501 approached signal DYN114, which was displaying a Stop indication, there was minimal indication to the network control officer that the train gauge and the selected route were incompatible.
