Kangaroo Court,
Tell me again why anyone is opposed to ATC and radar coverage for RPT arrivals and departures? You've got to pay the piper eventually...or risk hitting one-right?
Because keeping the tower open is cheaper and achieves the same aim. For goodness sake, the system does not need a full-blown radar approach service if there are two flippin' jets arriving at the airport.
If Dick gets his way, the cost of keeping the tower open (or CASA having the balls to mandate the tower being open for jet operations) will pale into insignificance compared to creating and manning the extra ATC consoles just to provide ATC remote "approach" services at jet airports around the country, even if only at surveilled airports.
The other big issue is ATC control of an IFR that also has to manage a CTAF arrival. That will unnecessarily increase risk.
This is simply another disgraceful attempt by the NAStronauts to get E airspace, nothing else. Why else would they not just scream "keep the tower open"?
As for the Virgin pilot mentioned above, I'd strongly suggest you take a look at the standards of your pilots before sledging the airspace system. I'm not a rocket scientist, but it strikes me that holding in the middle of the Missed Approach path
at the Missed Approach altitude is not the smartest idea in the world.
And CASA/Jmac, grow some balls and mandate tower services for jet ops where a tower is established.
