Creamy, all pretty valid points IMHO. I do not disagree with your contention that there is 'too much.' But that is perception on my part - opinion, if you will.
And without wishing to belabor the point, reliance on personal perceptions have led to the serial train smashes. It's like bloody Groundhog Day.
Even simple stuff, like mandatory/advisory calls in a CTAF, where the 'professionals' were pitted against the 'amateurs,' generated the same angst. And, before anyone takes offence with those terms, it's just a simple delineation to truncate the argument.
I remember going to an OAR sponsored meeting a few years back when CTAF procedures were the main agenda item - Leady was there. There were the protagonists for the pure US model and those that wouldn't accept anything less than mandatory calls. Anyone with a modicum of experience would have realised that 'never the twain shall meet.'
However, a young and well-intentioned lady announced at the beginning of proceedings that 'ladies and gentlemen, we are here to reach consensus.' No disrespect to her, but I damned near chucked because consensus was a pipe-dream.
On this most simple of issues what was required was facts-based analysis presented to the throng along with a decision from the Regulator - not a gabfest. It was a total waste of time and we've ended up with a hybrid that's neither fowl nor fish.
For the record, and also being military at the time, my personal
opinion favored the pure US model and I had no axe to grind either way. What was required was facts-based argument, no fears and no favors, and a decision based on rational analysis and presented to the meeting. 'Stow the objections, this is the way we are going and the numbers support our decision.'
Had that been done, I'm pretty sure we'd be living with a better CTAF system and the angst would have died eons ago.
But, but, that's just my opinion.
