Gundog01, you state that it would be nice to have radar controlled airspace and you believe the reason we do not have this is:
Because someone has done the risk analysis (i hope) and decided, you know what, the cost of implementing this outweighs the benefits derived.
I wish that were true. You will find that no risk analysis has been done on this particular issue. Airspace or procedural changes normally only come in after people are killed. I was the one who pushed for Flight Service airspace which was covered by radar to be taken over by air traffic controllers so we could use the radar – not only for traffic purposes, but also to help prevent CFIT accidents.
So far I have failed in relation to proper use of the radar. However eventually – hopefully before the inevitable accident occurs – we will introduce the necessary procedures so our existing radar coverage is optimised for safety.
I have been involved in airspace and regulatory change for over 20 years, and every change I have successfully introduced has been resisted by those who are against change.
I mentioned previously how the Victor 1 lane in Sydney was aggressively opposed by an ex-Department of Aviation bureaucrat, Mr Alan Green, who was then working for Qantas. He managed to stop the Victor lane from being introduced for over 18 months and nearly succeeded.
A small number of people who are in positions of influence and believe that everything we have done in the past is correct and it should never even be queried, let alone changed. For example, we still have airline aircraft on two-way routes flying accurately by GPS and RVSM along the centre line of the route. Over 100 people have been killed in Brazil because of this. I wonder when we will actually bring in a regulatory change in Australia that will help to prevent this type of accident.