Originally Posted by
thinkofdolphins
To save money he wants to extend oceanic airspace at night to close RADAR covered sectors to save money. How is this contributing to safety? Is he slightly retarded? Did he miss the whole Uberlingen incident? <snip> I would love him to justify this in court when 2 planes collide in one of his new "budget sectors" when a fully servicable radar feed could have been used. :
Is the use of procedural on the Oceanic routes currently unsafe? obviously not so why would extending its use to other bits of airspace with exactly the same separation standards suddenly become unsafe?
Anyone who does nights will know that even if you only have 2 on freq that they will inevitably pass over each other 1000" apart even though they have 1000's of miles of airspace to use. Garbling won't be an issue when you can't see them at all!
Oh my god! Only 1000' apart, I hope the regulators aren't reading this, sounds a bit too close to me
BD