Hey NB I was closer to the system than you might have guessed!
I know. I'm guessing you are one of the three reasons we were short staffed about 3 months after WARRP
?
There are many route structures that accommodate a lot more traffic than Perth experiences in an efficient (debatable) and safe manner.
Everybody says that so it must be true. Nobody has ever explained how though.
and no defined outcome
Yes there was. We must do something, this is something, therefore we must do this.
the DCAF and the GM ATS being involved in the discussions.
You remember who the current GM ATS is. Do you expect he would involve himself in something as petty as airspace design?
the whole process was designed to fit a time line
There was an urgency to it though. After three years of lots of hard work for no results while the traffic got worse the chances of it going badly wrong one day were growing. What we got is far from perfect, but its miles better than what it was.
In an ideal world WARRP would have been an quick interim bandaid, followed by a serious project using people with airspace/procedure design expertise and experience (esp from overseas) with testing and feedback from pilots and controllers using a high fidelity sim. In reality, we were luck to get what we did. Now if it has been a NSW-RRP ....