snarek
Your
current opposition to the 'no monitoring the freq' policy is commendable. Not being an AOPA member, I have no reason or right to be concerned that you only appear to have realised the import of the frequency issue
after implementation.
What I was referring to when I said that the discussion had ‘dried up’ was your confident assertion that US controllers would routinely ‘query’ unidentified VFR aircraft as to their level or other information, Given that you had said:
Oh, and before you ask, yes they do it in the US.
I therefore ask you:
1) How do they do it?
2) How do you know?
3) What evidence do you have to substantiate this claim?
It seems that there are too many players in this sorry saga who make bald statements like:
“It is safer” or
“They do it in the US”
“…I’m sure you would have to agree that the US system must be pretty good.”
… without even the slightest attempt to back up their statements with solid facts. Some of these people are accountable to the parliament, others to the minister and others to their members. Is it asking too much that serious issues like air safety are based upon
fact rather than unsubstantiated opinion and personal crusades. Casual conversations with ‘someone who should know’ just do not cut it.
As a matter of interest, you would no doubt have guessed that NAS occupies the minds and conversations of ATCs around the country. In the many NAS-related conversations I have had, both before and since 27 November,
not once has a controller mentioned the impact of NAS on jobs, or in any way commented upon ‘industrial’ issues.
Without exception the conversations have revolved around concerns about safety or procedures.
So, next time you deride legitimate concerns about safety as ‘union scare-mongering’, at least enhance your own credibility by providing the slightest hint of a shred of evidence to support your claim. Unsubstantiated abuse says more about the lack of substance in your own argument than it says about those you attempt to insult and denigrate.