The above frequency congestion was 'well flagged' before what were then 'FS' freqs / transmitters / receivers being 'taken over' and re-allocated to ATC freqs as / when FS was 'wound down'.
There was 'no fat' left in the system for future contingencies.
In WA, there were just 3 VHF freqs 'surplus to requirements', so these were allocated to 'Flightwatch'....2 in the Kimberley and 1 at Parkerville in the hills just east of Perth if I remember correctly.
That is, in WA, there were NO freqs left other than ATC ones for GA to call on, or to talk to each other, - initial call - except for these 3.....
'Tis a looong waaay from the Kimberley to Perth in a GA aircraft.
So, what was GA to do?
In announcing 'intentions' approaching a country aerodromes, not in a CTAF, they had, by necessity, to be on the local VHF so that other aircraft in the vicinity could hear the call.
Hence, the request to re-insert the VHF freq areas on the charts, or at least, insert the location and freq of the VHF outlet so that pilots could see which one they might be closest to...
Sure, when in the CTAF, they were on the discrete freq., but descending into and climbing out of the CTAF, these calls were on...ATC freqs.
Nobody in the airspace design team took any notice.
They just 'ploughed on'.
And lo and behold...it came to pass....
The 'solution' of course, is to install new VHF equipment / outlets in areas selected by traffic volumes for GA to use, say at or below Alt 10,000ft, and leave the ATC freqs for use for those aircraft that fly in the Flight Levels above 10,000ft.
But, this would cost, and is Airservices willing to spend...??
Whaddya rekon....??
No Cheers
p.s. That may have been 1 in the Kimberley at Argyle, I think, and 1 at Hedland, on reflection.... I think.....my 'electrons' are fad i n g ....