I cannot accept that you made it to a 717 with such a poor level of comprehension
Actually, MJBOW2, it is you who is quite clearly lacking comprehension. Your post is either deliberately misleading, or lacking basic understanding. It contains several
factually incorrect statements. You say
In VMC conditions class E is exactly the same as what we do now, in class G.
That is blatantly incorrect. Do you really need it explained to you? How can someone claiming to " have operated for years in NAS class E and understand how safe and flexible it is" have any credibility after demonstrating such a basic lack of understanding?
The Qantas GPWS incident in IMC at Canberra would not have occurred.
Blatantly incorrect. The incident occurred because the controller arrived late for work. It wouldn't matter what class of airspace you have- even class A- if the controller isnt there to provide the service. But go ahead- continue to misinform.
The Benalla and Mount Hotham accidents would not have occurred.
Are you stupid, or just repeating misinformation from Dick's handbook? A lie told a hundred times....How does a controller, controlling procedurally (Mt Hotham- due lack of surveillance), stop CFIT? How does a controller, after having released an aircraft to make an approach (Benalla- even if there was surveillance) have any idea whether the pilot is visual, or have said pilot on freq to issue warnings etc? Are you advocating that pilots remain on the centre freq until decision height/visual? I'm really intrigued how you think this will work in the real world. (NB. This is without even going into having to have every possible approach at every airfield available to controllers, how controllers- even with adequate surveillance- would monitor all these approaches- screen scale, sector sizes etc etc).
Before you launch tirades against other posters for lacking understanding, how about
YOU gain a bit of understanding about ATC, and how the practicalities of its provision exist in Australia's unique environment?
DONE TO DEATH.