mjbow
Apology accepted, my age is correct though - Ive been in ATC for 11 years!. And though I dont claim to know everything, never will, I have a fair bit of experience behind me.
Thanks for being man enough to admit your error. I also was a bit hot-headed in my response, for which I apologise.
My posts from the FAR & USAIP, was not a contradiciton to what you have said, it was just me posting what I could find about the subject from US regulations - trying to find the answers for myself rather than relying on second.third hand information - from whoever it is. I could not/can not find anything about if an IFR departs without being able to gain a clearance its by definition VFR.
My main issue with class E is, why E?. Why not D?
Having seen E at Willy today it was a right buggers muddle, IFR (an RPT) turning for finals without a clearance, a VFR going through right in front of an IFR (the VFR was doing the right thing and listening out, so I managed to pass TI and they sorted themselves out) but a lot of VFRs dont, and not all of them have transponders (some of them do but they dont work or have incorrcet mode C). At least if they were identified and verified we'd know.
In what we are talking about on this thread is Willy. Why not have D down to sfc, with 'recommended' VFR transit lanes set up to transit through the overhead (when RAAF active then its the coastal/inland route), rather than have a lot go coastal straight thru' 12 climb out/30 short finals.
With D we will know about all traffic, can plan accordingly. Departures will get a clearance on the ground, with clearance expiry times if required. VFR will still have to miss the IFRs but a full & comprehensive traffic service can be provided to both.
There is always more than one solution.
And why we are at it, why dont we have proper segregated departure & arrival routes, so we can give the clearance without having to double guess where they *might* pass. It will be much easier to give clearance.
It is not always a good idea just to copy what someone else does verbatim.
Assess whats best for the traffic situations in Australia/or the particular airport & adapt to best suit your needs. What is good for the goose is not always good for the gander.
I think what a lot of people worry, is that not enough forethought has been given to all the implications. Its just a case of that looks good and works for them so must work for us.