Mike Smith
I note that your website contradicts Mr (Dick) Smith’s version of events in relation to the ‘downfall’ of LAMP. It would be prudent to get the facts straight on this issue – to avoid upsetting the wrong people.
LAMP downfall?
This change to MBZs was the LAMP downfall. CASA refused to allow MBZs to be changed to even larger DAFs and
did not accept the safety case that was prepared.
Dick Smith's website
In a subsequent development, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority provided
feedback to Airservices that it was not prepared to sign off on the LAMP
design case
in its current form, particularly in relation to the proposed increase in size of MBZs.
Airspace Reform Site
To have gone from “did not accept the
safety case” to “feedback… that it was not prepared to sign off on the …..
design case
in its current form” is a seriously different version of events.
If the author is asserting that CASA did not in fact reject a safety case, then I am sure that Mr (Dick) Smith would be extremely upset that his reputation for honesty has been so sullied.
PS Your “Frequently Asked Questions” page appears to be missing some!
