Please, boys and girls; I honestly can't see the problem in respect of a Class E trial at one location and then doing a cost/benefit on the implications of rolling out the system further. See my previous - they have all been totally consistent in respect of cost/benefit and risk. Opinion does not suffice.
In addition, I fully agree le P's point on sector size in the contemporary environment. Where I disagree, is on the capacity of controllers, and resources available, to conduct a trial at just one location. No more than one provided by one sector. It'll either work or it won't.
If it works, in respect of 'safety enhancement,' then the numbers must be crunched as regards the additional cost of infrastructure/training versus the benefits of a wider roll-out.
This will come across to some as some sort of 'hero' comment from an 'old fart.' and I'll take the inevitable bagging. But when I did it for a living, and lost my oppo on a deployment to the middle-east without a replacement, I ran a one-man sector for six months.
That involved controlling with crap radar coverage because of the ranges west of BN on a 5rpm radar, so it was half procedural at lower levels out to 200 nm; over-water airspace to the east across four or five international air routes when the pigs were doing supersonic runs; Evans Head; plus APP control into AMB on Fridays when their radar was off for service. One bloke.
That was not a picnic and it was less than ideal, but I do not believe that any of the current crop couldn't stand up in the same situation - far from it.
I just believe that the talent and capacity are there to give this a run in one location and then assess the cost/benefit, risk management, and investment implications.
Just an entirely personal perspective. My 'opinion' counts for squat in this debate. It must come down to the fundamentals in respect of airspace change.