Thank you Colonel.
Hadagutful, far from being a prophet of doom I profess to be the opposite. I want the safest skies possible and we could have achieved this had the appropriate people been involved in the initial discussions of airspace reform.
Your assumption that a thorough cost/benefit analysis was completed is not quite correct. Did you attend any of the NAS circus road shows trying to sell the proposal? Mr Smith and his mates stifled ANY debate and criticism of the proposal. They were set on adopting the NAS no matter what. In doing so there were not any real professionals consulted throughout the process. Just a bunch of private hacks wanting to make their life easier.
I don't have a problem at all with VFR jocks hacking around. I used to do it myself. But I always had the correct frequency tuned and would speak up when required to assist with RPT operators to sort out separation.
All this smart ar$e airspace ONLY benefits the VFR drivers. It has NO benefit whatsoever for the charter and RPT operators. Now considering that we use this airspace as part of our daily profession, we think we deserve the right to at least know what the hell is going on with ANY and ALL other traffic. I consider that a basic and fundamental right and obligation.
Mr Smith (Dick) loves to use car analogies. Well EVERY car I have ever seen on the road has come and gone with my full knowlegde of where he was. If they overtake you (not me very often) you see them in the rear view mirror. If they are coming head on, you see them coming, even in rotten weather. How on earth that applies to a/c moving many times faster in three dimensions is beyond me.
So there is no emotion in the subject . Just plain hard facts, of which the proponents of the NAS will not even consider let alone accept.