Karrank,
I tend to agree in some areas.
If we were to adopt the US system completely, I can see that we would need a fair increase in the number of Air Traffic Controllers however.
Why? Well Sectors size would have to reduce to be able to adequately acquit the Class B, C and E traffic passing responsibilties as per the US system. (Remember target resolution or 2.5nm dependant on the class). These time/frequency available critical, as well as display resolution critical actions / scanning requirements make the full adoption of the US system in many ways impractical. It would cost more - not just the airlines, all users.
Dick Smith goes on quite a lot about Australia having less traffic than the US - well he doesnt seem to focus much on the corresponding truth from that perspective - there is a lot less GAand VFR traffic as well. So the adoptionof the US system to fulfill this small requirement is not cost effective - as we have seen in the last year.
The Australian system evolved from putting resources where they are most needed. While there are some improvements that can be made they do not in my view involve adoopting a system that doesnt suit.
The money that has been wasted in the political exercise to date could have in fact solved most of the issues. NAS in that regard has set us back.
You know who to thank.
Remember not that long ago, The Minister, AirServices
PR, DOTARS, NASIG etc. were calling the Controllers and the Airline Pilots scaremongerers. Now,they are not saying that. They are saying that the system has failed - not very loudly , but nonetheless those who said it would not work or save money have been vindicated.
There is only one person left still shouting scaremongerer, and blaming the growing list of organisations that will no longer support him in his political quest.
Wouldn't it be nice to know just how much all this has really cost? And exactly how it has been funded?