Well if you do, I'm sunning it in Forteleza, Brazil. About as far from NAS and UnCivilAir as I can get.
That said, I have lobbied for the freqs to be put back on the maps. It was put to a vote of the AOPA Board and the MAJORITY accepted the maps as is. I accept the majority opinion. Any member who doesn't like it should get the e-mail addresses off the web and e-mail the entire board with their opinion backed up with their name and member number.
That don't mean I will stop lobbying, cos I wasn't at that meeting and my vote was by proxy. Like I have said time and time again, we will fly the system and make comment as necessary.
As for the next bit of NAS. I have some PERSONAL concerns about A thru E over C and some of the statistical arguments put up to support it. Having spent a full time equivalent of 10 years at uni, I speak statistic, and I PERSONALLY don't feel comfortable with some of the assumptions used (like random traffic paths).
I DO like E. I DONT like being fuc<ed about in CBR airspace just cos there is a Dash-8 somewhere in a clear blue sky. I don't mind being d!cked (no pun intended) around where there is real twaffic out there (like Cairns). I do want to know when some radio challenged meathead is going to throw human beings at me over Mission Beach!! There is a compromise there somewhere, perhaps NAS (with frequencies on maps) is it.
As a simple 'sometimes IFR' pilot I have been paying a lot of attention to 2b. I PERSONALLY ain't 100% happy with the maps, but I also ain't happy that totally unnecessary MBZs stayed longer than needed. (More abuse of 'statistics' by airport revenue raisers).
Now I suppose I will have to pay more attention to the rest-of-NAS.
So tozzy me old mate, we shall see and, no doubt, we shall move on to arguing about NAS-Next.
AK