As usual, Dick is confusing me. I never quite know what he really believes.
On September 1st, he said (my bolding):
Yes, C will be safer than E if it is properly manned.
In the Australian system most often one controller is responsible for all of the D and then huge volumes of C.
Accidents are most likely to happen in the D as the aircraft are most often closer together.
However a controller in Australia has often to take attention away from traffic in D to procedurally separate a VFR from IFR in the huge amount of C airspace above.
This increases the risk of an accident in the D and is the sole reason that countries like the USA and Canada do not have C above D.
My points:
- Dick appears to state that STAFF are required to provide a service
- Dick appears to state that diverting a Controller's attention between two different services or areas is unacceptable
Yet, he is now touting the introduction of "something new" that will undoubtedly require staff we don't have.
He has also been touting the need to have
enroute controllers provide an additional
approach service.
It is very difficult to take your views seriously Dick, when you are so contradictory in your ideas
