FL,
Does your post mean you considered my suggestion about re-thinking the Heli-Lanes structure and procedures?
I did do that about a week ago and since have drawn some flak from Bronx and some others as I they think I should not offer up comments about the Lanes and things in Europe and the UK and should leave it those who run the lanes frequently.
That post.....
I would suggest the Heli-Routes control could probably be eased by adopting a single ATC function similar to Approach Control. Define the Airspace by track and max/min height, define a few reporting points, perhaps even make some of the tracks one direction only. The trick would be to facilitate departures and arrivals at Landing sites that underlay or very closely adjojn the Heli-Routes.
If one had to file a flight plan prior to entering the Controlled Airspace with that ATC unit...avoided the restricted Altitudes until in radio contact with the ATC unit...it would be a lot easier for all concerned (IMHO).
Actually that is far more restrictive than most high activity Offshore Oil Field Operations as we usually did not have an ATC service except for Flight Following and the odd Traffic Advisory.
Sometimes taking a big step back and thinking about how it "could be done" might work better than trying to figure out how to modify and existing system.
But....knowing the Bureaucracy.....that ain't gonna happen.
An example....require traffic to hold to a 1,000 feet one direction, and 1500 feet (or say....700 feet and 1200 feet) the other and that would grant traffic separation by height and still leave some room for landing and departing traffic while ensuring a 500 foot Rule margin under VFR conditions.
If the Weather goes below VFR....then ATC turns it into a positive control zone for all traffic and issues SVFR clearances.
Just a thought....what you think?