No Further Requirements you say
MJ: As everyone else has picked up on except you, I was being sarcastic about copying the US of A. Each FIR is unique and has its differences. Australia is no different.
But you also say
Give us the resources and I'm sure we'd gladly do it.
At first I was somewhat confused by your seemingly conflicting sentiments. But then I took note that you appear to have left Australia and are now controlling in the UAE.
I have flown in the middle east among many other regions in the world and if my memory serves me correctly the UAE has
all airways as controlled airspace and Class D towered airports have an upper limit of 2500ft which is virtually identical to the US system (minor variations noted) that you described as
the best system and we should copy it verbatim?
(here is the context of your quote to save any misrepresentation)
MJ: Give us the terminals, maps, admin support and, most importantly, people and I would be happy to do whatever we can to provide more services. I would love to have a 80NM x 80NM sector in SE Australia instead of the 400NM one I used to work on. Show me the money! Give us the same ratio of controllers to airspace they have in the US - surely it's the best system and we should copy it verbatim?
My point is this. You obviously have experience delivering the kind of ATC service that I would like to see implemented here in Australia with regard to the size of class D airspace and the appropriate use of radar where it is available.
I understand you probably feel a certain level of solidarity with the situation that is being faced by AsA controllers back home. Let me be clear that I fully support policies and strong leadership within AsA and CASA to make sure the controllers here in Australia are given the appropriate level of resources, including man power, to provide a similar world class level of service that you currently provide in the UAE.
If we need smaller sector sizes for ATC then so be it. From my perspective as an airline pilot, who has the immediate responsibility for the lives of many Australians daily, we are getting short changed by our ATC system. Time and again we forgo a radar service at up to 30nm from an airport only to be forced to participate in 1950's era procedural separation.
How can anyone view this as acceptable when we know the risk of collision increases dramatically the closer we get to an airport?
Maroochidore is another that springs to mind. At 20nm we are forced to talk to a tower controller to participate in procedural separation. What makes Maroochidore so frustrating is that we are under the surveillance of Brisbane Approach Control at the time of transfer. What could be better than to stay on the approach frequency with all the radar benefits until we are at a distance where the tower can actually see us?
I really do accept the point that your sector sizes might be too big. I also draw everyones attention once again to the NAS proposal which would have had adequate staffing levels to provide these services into regional airports. I hope AsA refocuses their efforts on staff retention before its too late.