Perhaps an option would be to have our controllers trained on higher volume scenarios. With a mix of GA and RPT.
You can train as much as you want. That doesn't particularly change the level where saying "no" is sensible.
If we don't have enough controllers say something. Don't use that as an excuse to provide a poor service, instead speak up and say something or how could anything change?
You're talking to the wrong end of the animal. We know we need more. It just ain't going to happen because the accountants are simpletons and understand nothing other than averages.
Isn't there a national traffic Center in Canberra that is supposed to be looking at volume and controller numbers? Obviously not working out to the benefit of service paying customers. Why is my $ worth less than someone else's?
Because it's so much smaller? The problem is the system is built around what the vast majority of the customers are doing. RPT & such flying SIDs and STARs which make an integrated system with built in safety features such as level requirements. I'm sure you'll agree this is a "good thing" as it makes things safer for the flying public. Unfortunately it makes things less flexible for those wanting to do something different. The vast majority win and the small minority lose.