Eyrie: Please name the places so that the facts can be checked.
You and others seem to be labouring under the misconception that if you prove me wrong on some fact, the area frequency boundaries will magically disappear from the charts and the AIP will be changed. Bad news: The area frequency boundaries will remain on the charts and the AIP will say what it says, no matter how many mistakes I make in a thread on pprune. I'm a nobody. (Oh, and BTW: I'm very happy for the area frequency boundaries to be removed from the charts and for there to be a complete separation of Centre and 'VFR OCTA' frequencies.)
If you and others want things changed, because 500 lives are at risk through broadcasts from all those operations at thousands of small agricultural and private grass strips that are not depicted as aerodromes on aeronautical charts,
it's up to you to show that it's true by providing "rational evidence".
As it turns out, the track record of nominations of these places hasn't been very good so far. Lots of factual errors through nomination of places that turn out to be depicted as aerodromes on aeronautical charts. (You have a chance to improve the track record....
)
And, in any event and more importantly, anyone with any experience in aviation knows that the number of movements by VHF carrying aircraft at these unmarked aerodromes is three fifths of five eighths of f*ck all.
That's why the then Minister for Transport asked this rhetorical question the last time Dick scaremongered himself into airspace oblivion: "Who listens to Dick Smith on airspace any more? Only Dick Smith."
That's why Dick's Media Release will be ignored by the people who have the power to change things. A frustratingly sad waste of energy and unique public profile that could be directed to far greater effect and benefit for aviation in Australia.
