Spodman, you state:
I know in your private self you are working to the concept of Enroute ATC applying control services to IFR flights in all airspace, down to almost ground level, but it isn't in the document
(my underlining).
Unbelievable, unbelievable, unbelievable.
You, and a number of your colleagues are so convinced of the myth that I make up my airspace views as I go along that you obviously haven’t even bothered to look at the NAS document that I prepared with Qantas.
What do you mean
…it isn’t in the document
Have a look at the NAS document, prepared on 14 December 2001 (nearly 5 years ago) as approved by Cabinet
here.
First of all, the NAS document states under
Executive Summary:
Provides an IFR separation service to 700’ AGL at non-tower terminal airspace at selected locations.
On page 8, under
Interim Design Model, it states:
… it is proposed initially to introduce low level Class E corridors, and on a trial basis to a limited number of aerodromes, Class E terminal airspace (base 700 ft AGL) to demonstrate cost/benefits and test the TAAATS procedural management of low level Class E corridors.
Surely nothing can be clearer than that.
Later on (under the same
Interim Design Model heading) it states:
Class E airspace will be established lower to 700 ft AGL in terminal areas with published let down procedures but without tower services.12
On page 16, Note number 12 states:
Initially this airspace will be at two airports – possibly Mt Isa and Longreach for ATC and pilot training purposes – with the plan to move to an end result of the airspace dropping to 700’ wherever required by IFR traffic services. It is noted that this will require extensive training for air traffic controllers.
Nothing could be clearer.
Spodman, because of your statement:
…but it isn’t in the document
the above clearly shows that you haven’t bothered to read the document. Why would this be so? Is it because you have made up your mind that there is just no way we in Australia will move to this safer system?
Just so you understand, I have been working for over 10 years to improve the service in low level airspace. If US and Canadian enroute controllers can provide an excellent terminal service in Class E non-radar airspace, I believe it should at least be tried here. I had been in touch with the operators at Longreach and they wanted to cooperate in a trial of Class E to 700 feet. Of course, there is a complete vacuum of leadership at Airservices, so this has never gone ahead.
I remember I tried to get Class E airspace in after 1992, but I was told that this could not come in until TAAATS was completed – what a furphy. Now that TAAATS is in, I’m told that we need ADS-B for Class E to work – i.e. anything to resist change.
Can I suggest that you and your colleagues have a thorough look at that NAS document which I prepared with Qantas? There are probably other things in the document that you haven’t seen. You have to read it first, don’t you?