Just think of it – if the USA or Canada decided to have Class C over D as per Australia at their 350 Class D airports, the Class C “steps” would extend to 120 nautical miles where they contacted the Class A airspace at FL180. The Class C would cover most of the continent at this level and the “steps” would make the airspace so complex that no pilot would be able to fathom out where the boundaries were!
The whole system would basically grind to a halt.
Agreed, but that doesn't mean we must copy them; we have a 'baseline' risk; how you actually establish/measure that is debatable, but to change it in the hole requires it to be measured and to evaluate the change. This is why ASA believed they were 'exposed' with NAS 2b; it wasn't anybody's airspace structure it was ours. We were in transition to something that was ours from a position where we had an established baseline. The measurements taken by everyone involved determined
AFAIK, came to the same conclusion NAS2b was a higher risk than what was before with no quantifiable cost benefit. To get out of that legal loop hole, they had to move forward quickly or go back. they chose to go back. Doesn't mean they were right, but it is what they did. Now everyone is more aware about the legalities and the regulations.
This is where you fall down Dick in your mantra for change; somebody logically explains the reasons why we need to do assessments and the reasons we have what we have and instead of engaging in that element of debate you bring it back, sceptics 101 style, to your fundamental position. Not why we just can't, but, what we should. Yes, but what about the issues raised in the "why we just can't side."
As I have said, I'm all for change, I'd like to see lots of low level sectors and lots of ADS-B and lots of better mapped terrain (radar terrain) paths, lots of easily determined RNAV approaches, lots of Multi-Lat, radar surveillance, ADS-B in stations etc; GBAS/GRAS/GLS for better precision approaches, protected ILS GP huts etc. Hell if everything that flew was visible to a controller and we could really use 'segregation' not separation when one is a VFR, real pilot and ATC education, then I'd say go for it; make all of Australia E at A1200 ft. But back to reality, it all costs money and for whatever reasons people resist change, like ADS-B, GBAS etc; right?