Eeerm
To add what I hope are some facts to the confusion, I believe that one of the mitigators for the transition on this issue, agreed and signed off on by the participants was;
Mitigation Description
37.2 The pilot T&E must include guidance as to alternative sources of frequencies information (e.g. ERSA) 37.3
The 'VFR en-route' advisor must include effective guidance as to operations enroute including specific guidance to use of radio.
37.4 The frequency block on IFR charts should be replicated on VFR charts for a transitional period and then removed.
37.5 FIA boundaries placed on charts for a transitional period and then removed.
There is a bit of sorting out in progress on that particular issue, but I firmly believe an appropriate solution will be forthcoming.
There has been a HUGE amount of work performed by the "experts", airspace and industry and I do not include myself as one of those, on all of the issues surrounding the NAS implementation, to suggest that they ALL got it wrong just doesn't play.
There will be bits around the edges that need adjustment, nothing is ever a perfect fit and as the NASIG has freely admitted the end state is not yet fixed, it would be dangerously irresponsible to do so, hence the staged implementation, but the shape of it is already known from the experience of the USNAS.
It will be approached with the same caution as they have the beginning with the need for a very comprehensive educational programme.
But one thing is certain in my mind, I have complete faith that the people ultimately responsible, will make the go or no go decision, I believe set for the 20/10/2003, based on professional and properly constructed grounds.
They are on a hiding to nothing as they will be pilloried for whatever they do.
This then makes the decision a very simple one.
On the balance of probablilities, what is right.
This is the true test of leadership.