1. It has been clearly stated on this thread that all the submissions go to the CAA and the DAP, if you have any evidence to the contrary then you are perfectly entitled to make your complaint to the CAA.
I don't think this is the case. IIRC for the Stansted TMZ a summary of the main point from the objectors was sent not a copy of each submission. So if the same proceedure is followed then NIA will be able to write a summary of our letters. Hardly the same as 'all the submissions'
I don't doubt that the controllers at NIA have good intentions. However with dwindling movements do you think 'the management' are going to give you more resources (ie money) to handle traffic... and how do you intend to do anything other than ban non radio aircraft gliders microlights and others who currently operate freely and safely in this area? There are many more of them than there are commercial flights from Norwich.
This piece of airspace is out of all proportion to the number of movements you have and it will be uneconomic to provide a good quick free service to GA because of the limited revenue from the commercial stuff. So a poor service will result.
Its quite obvious, why would NIA management spend resources to provide a free service to GA? They are there to make a profit and if they could remove the need to provide a service to GA then I'm sure it would increase their profits. They will not be quite as explicit. They will only allow single controllers as that is cheaper. When there is too much to handle then you will have to issue ROCAS's. Any suggestion to employ more controllers will be met with a we'll take a look at that.
DJ