When the NATS supplied traffic figures were used by some at MACC to try and support their argument against the banding proposals, there were many voices from the south rubbishing the figures for a variety of reasons. And now the figures have changed (by only a very few percentage points) to favour other units, they're suddenly credible and to be believed? Don't think so. Seems there are a number of anomolies and issues with the way in which the figures are compiled for ALL units.
And as for needing verification of a MACC sector/airspace being 5th in Europe for complexity and airspace movements.....it's not the first report/document to suggest this. I believe the report (and I stand to be corrected on this) came out of Eurocontrol......don't think they have any particular axe to grind....could they not be considered independant enough for the figures to have some credibility?
So a thread that started about some of the issues at MACC turns into a them and us slanging match between the units.....again.
How about keeping things in context whichever unit we work for (and to show a bit of balance ..."2 hours on and half an hour off to debrief your trainee"? ....don't know of a single instance when someone has worked for 2hrs unless there have been extenuating circumstances.....if it happened more than once on the unit every couple of months I'd be suprised. Having said that, an AAVA "ban" will see that change).
So MACC is busy and faces some issues....just like many units. If you're not working at MACC come and visit (always welcome) and base your opinions of the unit on what you've seen....not the (often jaundiced and uninformed) rumours and postings you may come across.