Dick, in reference to the following:
As I’ve said, I support Class C airspace if it has a proper approach radar facility and adequate Controllers.
It is quite clear - there is a Minister’s Directive telling Airservices where they are to have Class C airspace above D to provide an approach radar facility and the proper manning.
The very fact that this Directive still remains and has not been reversed shows that there are many people who know that if you are to provide Class C airspace and give a high level of safety, you cannot do it at no cost.
The 'directive,' as I recall, was signed off by a Minister that I believe you may have described as being (not the exact words) 'the worst Transport Minister we've ever had.' I don't agree with that entirely; I just thought he was an amiable dolt.
In my opinion, he was conned because he was thick. The argument, in my view, would have gone something like this:
- Minister, in the US there is no Class C airspace that is not serviced by radar.
- Consequently, you can't have Class C without radar.
- Therefore, Minister, if Airservices requires Class C airspace at those locations, it must install radar.
Once again, my opinion, but the deception was in the second point, and the amiable dolt swallowed it; just as he was meant to.
From my perspective,
Dick, the so-called 'radar direction' letter was a very neat piece of manoeuvring. I do admire the way it was done, but let's admit it; the amiable dolt could have been sold a bridge in Sydney 'going cheap.'
Radar with Class C was never the desired end-state from my perspective, despite the letter; and this is where the plot was extremely neat. The end-state was always E over D at places like Launy, Coffs and Alice. The 'radar direction' letter, that the amiable dolt signed off on, was designed (in my opinion) to put an additional cost impost on Airservices, thereby forcing them to reverse the reversal and reinstitute E after the NAS 2b rollback.
Radar Class C was never the end-state was it
Dick? It was forcing Airservices to reinstitute E to avoid the 'mandatory' radar that the amiable dolt was convinced is necessary if you have Class C.
Once again
Dick, I do admire the thought processes that went into that one. But it must have been like shooting the proverbial 'fish in the barrel.'
The last point I'd make is that, in a 'first-world' country, maybe we should spend the money and introduce radar services at some of these locations. However, that is not tied to what I regard as a duplicitous strategy to con an amiable dolt.
There is no connection between Class C and the need for radar services. If there is, please refer me to the appropriate reference in ICAO SARPS.
I suppose,
Dick, that this will just be another question (conveniently) left unanswered.