As a long-term civilian flyer, I'm as puzzled as most as to why these changes are being brought about. It seems to me that some reading between the lines is needed and, in this regard,
whowhenwhy's post is interesting. Are we to believe this is really just about a war between military and civil ATSUs?
However, in trying to look at this logically, certain basic questions come to my mind, viz.,
I am a civvie flying around in Class G and need a Flight/Radar Service, should I expect to be able to obtain one? If so, why is it that both civil and military ATSUs seem to only offer me the service as an "extra" to their other commitments? If the service is justified on safety grounds, then surely it should be properly resourced? Next, why do these new provisions in CAP774 make it so complicated that the average Bloggs finds it difficult to understand all the details of service offered, to differentiate between them, to know which responsibility is whose, under what circumstances it can happen, etc. ...? It seems the intrusion of 'elf & Safety, Duty of Care and the like are in danger of becoming counter-productive to the provision of the services themselves. For example, what sort of non-standard gobbledegook is
"taking your own terrain clearance..." ?
I could go on - but I have to say that I see nothing fundamentally wrong with the existing (FIS/RIS/RAS) arrangements - with the possible exception that RAS is only available under IFR. The present names of the services describe their function, the practices are well established and pilots (generally) know what to expect. Overall, it seems to me that what we need is better resources to provide the existing services, rather than changes to the services themselves.
I know it is a tired cliché but, surely,
if it ain't broke don't fix it ...
JD
