Drastic reduction in airport rescue services suggested

Press, 23 October 1984, Page 2

Drastic reduction in airport rescue services suggested

By

OLIVER RIDDELL

in Wellington

A drastic reduction, if not withdrawal, of airport-based rescue and fire-fighting services is contemplated by a consultant commissioned by the Director of Civil Aviation. The consultant, Mr Russell Smith, decided that it had by any., standard or measure, been demonstrated beyond all doubt that airline passenger and equivalent commercial air transport flying in New Zealand at civil airports were “so safe.” But he decided that minimum levels of rescue services should be kept for the foreseeable future at New Zealand’s international airports. Mr Smith made five recommendations: • Further detailed planning for a restructured rescue fire service at international airports. • Auckland's SRN-6 hovercraft be withdrawn from service forthwith. • When the rescue fire service is equipped as proposed, Auckland’s jet boat also be withdrawn from service. • Wellington’s jet boat not be returned to ser-

vice. • Other consequential decisions be taken. The Director of Civil Aviation, -Air Commodore S. Mclntyre, has endorsed the main thrust of Mr Smith’s report. Mr Smith concluded that some items of rescue fire equipment should become redundant. These' included, as well as marine equipment, surplus fire-fighting vehicles at the three international airports. But extra rescue and firefighting vehicles would be needed, including a "Pathfinder” vehicle for Harewood. He also said that the proposed water hydrant system at Christchurch and the upgrading and sealing of access roads at Christchurch would not be needed. Central to Mr Smith’s opinions was the belief that the International Civil Aviation Organisation doctrines for airport rescue services were, in today’s conditions, deficient. These doctrines required an excessive concentration on fire-fighting capability for New Zealand airports, he said. The claimed “principle

objective” of saving lives at or in the immediate vicinity of an airport was not in accord with the true facts of the near negligible level of exposure at aircraft accident risk at New Zealand airports. An operational objective that focused mainly on the aircraft movemerit area had resulted in a misdirection Of rescue resources/for New Zealand conditions. It was concluded that the proportion of. airport revenues absorbed in providing organisation levels of fire-fighting protection was actually detrimental to flight safety. This was because there were fewer resources available to upgrade the positive accident prevention services of air navigation aids, flight information services, and to provide improvements to the airport ground operating environment. Mr Smith said New Zealand ought to establish its own standards for rescue and fire-fighting services at international and domestic airports meeting its own conditions and requirements. A model standard for such services is set out at the end of the report.