Dick,
.
Whilst not disagreeing with the thrust of your argument re: AV, there are a couple of relevant points:-
.
1. CASA (as I understand it) determined that a Class C tower service is required
2. AsA (apparently) could not come up with the service as determined in the time frame envisaged (how, why and for how long .. you would have to ask them ... I haven't a clue)
3. Mandatory TXPDR requirements as a supposed mitigator has been attempted, and used ... that being here in OZ and part of the now historical and nostalgic
AusNAS i.e. Class E ... and before you say CTA E is not OCTA G ... IFR/VFR conflict pairs are for all intents and purposes uncontrolled and possibly/probably unaltered i.e. same as they would be in G …. If I may, in raising this, is to highlight that your other valid arguments are able to be diluted with inconsistencies that distract from the real issue/s
.
Now, far be it for me to defend the OAR but ... if they say a C tower (as opposed to a C centre service) is the go (not that I personally support either of those classifications in this case), and the ANSP have not/cannot pony up ….. weeeeell
.
.... perhaps the OAR had no other option than to do the next best thing i.e. CA/GRS and TXPDR mandate (not that I personally support that classification in this case) whilst waiting for the ANSP? .... dunno?
.
Like so many things in life, if proper consultation occurs, and the industry understand the why and wherefore’s, then perhaps these issues would not bob-up as they do
.
So, where should the bone be pointed?