I am going to spell this out one more time for you 2b1, some would say I am thrashing a dead horse and I probably am. I dont think the moronority who are behind these changes will ever see reason.
There is not one penny to be saved throught the implementation of these ill conceived changes, not one!!
I have been watching ASA and the rest of the NAS bandwagon spend money like water for the past 12 months. Junkets to the US, massive "consultancy" fees, huge travel budget as the tribe of career minded individuals willing to dirty their hands with this debacle traipse around the country. The bills for training the ATCs alone would run to millions, all this cost must ultimately be passed to industry. WHAT ARE WE GETTING IN RETURN?????
A few owners of high performance machinery may have access to a couple of thousand extra feet of airspace without having to bother with contacting ATC.
Whilst it is true that before every change, no matter how positive, there have been naysayers. It is equally true that before every momentous folly those who urged caution have been branded as recalcitrants and doom merchants by the architects of the impending disaster.
Will the sky rain aluminium tomorrow? probably not. But the likelihood of an accident will be higher, Only the willfully ignorant can deny that. The question is if we are to accept increased risk, shouldnt we get something in return?
Are you really stupid enough to think that anything in this will have the slightest impact on the GA industry? If so you are even more foolish than your posts would indicate.