Originally Posted by
KRviator
Of course not. Because it'll be the pilots fault - like those two in Darwin the other month when they used the same, but reciprocal runways and went nose to nose... And remember - there's no separation standard in Class G, so everything's completely normal right up until you swap paint.
Why do we think they implement TIBA rather than simply closing the airspace? KPI's and because it'll be our fault when something happens. It won't be theirs, even if they didn't have the staff to cover the roster.
A couple of points:
In the Darwin occurrence it was not Class G - it was Class C with an embedded TRA matching the dimensions of the Class C airspace with certain broadcast procedures specified. Not the same procedures as Class G but in reality not too different. If pilots want to use RRO that's their decision (subject to their company also allowing it?). Surely it is a company decision as to whether to permit their flights to operate in airspace of this classification, and not solely at pilot discretion?
As for TIBA vs closing airspace - there's some legal issues here and certainly the operating companies would question CASA's right to close Class A/C/E airspace when a control service is not available. Again, it is up to operating companies to determine whether they will permit their aircraft to fly in TIBA airspace. Some have been known to go a longer way around it.
And for context, a reminder that Airservices does not classify, nor change classification of airspace - that is a role of CASA. TRAs etc are created by CASA, not Airservices. Airservices simply provides (and on occasions does not provide) the services associated with the extant airspace classification.