There is a bit more to getting E down to 1200ft, mostly in the training for both the controllers and the flight crews
Yers, indeed.
however I would concede that it is probably achievable and I suspect achievable with the current staff. While I think I understand the concept of what you're proposing,
I don't think you'll have the staff, mainly because of the enormous sectors you run. I mean, 30 miles north of Melbourne to 30 south of Sydney. Ridiculous.
I don't have the details However I guarantee people will have to be dragged kicking and screaming for it to occur.
It won't happen whilst people like Bloggs are in cockpits. A new generation of pilots need to brought up with this.
My question would be what metric is used to decide which aerodromes get E down to 1200ft? Is it any aerodrome that has an instrument approach? Or any aerodrome with more than a certain number of movements? Keep in mind that movements may not be the best indicator of business because a lot of our IFR training aerodromes the aircraft doesn't physically land on the aerodrome.
Airspace needs to be and can be dynamic, I'm not suggesting towers at these aerodromes, not needed. If you have an organisation set up a school that will be training 200 pilots per year, pounds to peanuts, you're gunna need some airspace.
ASA, CASA, ATSB need to spend a bit of time on a work study in the States. Not the usual stooges, line controllers.