One thing the CAGRO doesn't now have vs the old system, is actually being part of the system, so no coordination from other ATS units, flight plan info etc.
Yes agreed. As on 'old' FSO I know exactly how that system worked. The main difference is that it used to be all on the one frequency, so the 'pop-up's' we see now did not occur like they do today. Back then there was a policy that all RPT jet ops had to operate into a Towered airfield. That fell apart with the F28 ops in WA and the DC9 ops into Gove got a tower built there that was never opened - what a waste!
and aircraft had to call at 30 miles,
If I was the pilot of a high performance aircraft, I would be listening on the CTAF from TOD my first call on the CTAF would be at 30nm or about 7minutes out - certainly not at 10nm!
The earlier comment re having a tower at Ballina is valid to many, but the present numbers (if that is what is used as a criteria) don't get up. The tower with the lowest number of movements according to BITRE is Hamilton Island with 7584 for 2019. The 18/19 movements for Ballina was 4553, down to 3529 for 19/20 due Covid. Of course there may be other factors (like lack of a parallel taxiway and pax numbers) that might get the box ticked, but I don't think ASA or the Airlines want to pay for it(??).
As I see the proposal, the SAFIS would work the surrounding airspace but the CTAF would be the same and be on a different frequency. Other than passing traffic info, what would they be doing? Maybe some co-ord with the ATC sectors etc. Would they have direct co-ord with the CAGRO? Would it have helped with the A320/Jab incident? As the incident occurred some 12nm from Ballina, does increasing the size of the Ballina area to 15nm solve the problem? I don't believe so. There are no doubt other factors that need to be considered one of which is the standardisation of teaching of radio procedures.
ASA are obviously under pressure (Board or Minister?) post MNG to do 'something' and the E proposal was their first try, but it is a mess because they have knee jerked with a proposal that due to time constraints is flawed in its design, meaning it will not work nor be safe, not to mention the restrictions placed on many operations. How will it be covered without increasing staff numbers. ASA have lost a lot of good people over the past few years and sadly it shows.