Make time to visit the TWR at EN....they have a monitor that was FISAD. It gets a feed from radar! The guys and gals cannot use it for separation purposes but it help heaps in SA...that, and to let you know you havent switched from stby to transmit on the xpdr
Using the the principal of FISAD and the feed from TAAATS virtual track facility, remoting all the FSUs back to BN/ML keep the two airspace model, as in CTA and OCTA, plan activated by departure call, monitor area frequency without need to call FS unless you are running late on your plan or have need to divert. Quadrantal levels so absolutely no possibilty of opposing tracks at same level. DTI for both VFR & IFR enabled by FS monitoring virtual tracks. Pilots responsible for separation. When tracks show conflict FS asks for actual FPR when within five minutes of closure (TAAATS alarm)....radio use is lineup, departure, inbound, joining circuit (triggers cancelling SAR) and base...FPR as requested...ETA change and diverting from plan altitude or direction....how bloody hard would that have been!
Clearance only required to operate CTA and entry to TWRd ADs. No need for MBZ, CTAF, AFIZ or Class E. The NORAD argument remains...but how bloody hard is it to own a portable for those situations where the Kickatinalong crowd need to go to the local big smoke.
To the present day, add ADS-B, remote twr cab images, ADS-B receivers covering every aerodrome with a NPA or higher. FSO changing to enroute qualified ATC allowing positive separation within coverage....and we have a system that cooks!
It doesnt matter if the aircraft is RPT or PVT VFR. Maintain SA by monitoring area frequency. Poke holes, but kindly say why that would not have worked.
OT. As for MDX....that was a matter of trust and a certain amount of resistance to admit the need to ask for help that resulted in a terrible outcome. How do we engender trust that everyone is there to help with no incrimination by asking.