I suppose GLA has much the same ATC environment/ difficulties that EDI has (although its maybe not as busy.
You suppose wrong. Yes we are busier than gla which the figures show. However;
1- Gla have a runway which they can see. They don't just get a glimpse of 2/3rds of it. Because of this there are restrictions like no conditional lineups or clearances on 06 which all slow down operations.
2-Gla have high speed exits which do help. All of Edi's are 90 degree turns which altho I'm sure doesn't slow yourself in vacating it sure slows down the rest!
3-Gla do not work the VFR traffic we do. From what I was told they cut down what they worked a long time ago. However as I dont work there I could be wrong, but I do know we very rarely turn down transiters.
4-Edi works IFR traffic inbound to leuchars and dundee daily. These all add workload onto us but these are not added to the traffic figures published. This means we do a lot of work outside controlled airspace.
5-Gla has a much better airfield layout. From what I remember they dont pushback from 1 stand blocking a whole apron all the time. This is a regular problem at Edi which slows down ground considerably.
These are only a few of the differences between Edi and Gla but they point out that our environments/difficulties are nothing similar. As for saying that we can copy a few of Gla's ideas I think you will find that we do infact follow the same rule book as Gla and indeed most airports, so the "ideas" are or at least should be the same. As you admit you are only an occasional user there, maybe if you spent more time there you would find a few flaws as well!
And I would also like to point out that I am not minimising Gla in anyway. They have, I'm sure, their own problems and difficulties.
Babe