Thanks for the feedback hatsoff – disappointed that you take a negative view of the report based on “a quick read and a first glance”.
If you read the report more closely you will see we have fully understood our brief, part of which was to find out what the operators wanted (not “our” ideas as you misunderstood), and translate the result into a structured set of recommendations.
We were not tasked to evaluate the feedback, other than to weed out obviously frivolous elements – not much of that appeared as it happens – the AIWG will assess the practicality of each recommendation.
As experienced professionals, we are aware of technical difficulties with transponder code allocation, but modern technology moves very rapidly and there may well be a fix available when the practicality of any changes are examined.
Incidentally, we did expect some reluctance to embrace change from some quarters, hence the caveat in the report:
“From the outset, it was recognised that pilots cause most infringements. The solution must therefore include pilot input, which may demand radical rethinking of existing views or procedures. If the safety benefits of the project are to be realised, it is essential that the recommendations and suggestions should be viewed with an open mind, without automatically restating existing procedures which may not be delivering the required safety standards.”
Oh, by the way the transponder suggestion was one of many received from ATCOs.