I enjoy reading about NAS and ADS-B in the same argument. So Mike Smith is now using ADS-B as a supporting argument for the implementation of NAS, or is it the other way round? Has he run out of rational supporting arguments for the implementation of NAS so he is resorting to futuristic what-ifs?
I could just as easily argue with ADS-B that we would be safer under the current system. It would be cheaper and more economical in the long run too.
ADS-B looks promising and there are certainly many people pushing for its introduction, but to justify NAS on the basis of possible future technology seems irresponsible and unprofessional.