The "more advanced aviation country" is most likely using the 1930s dirt track pen and paper system which is more flexible for handling pop-up flighplans. You're still being a plonka. Maybe Aberdeen allows a flight data record to be created with far less input? Does it really matter? Ask a bit earlier if you think you're going to be delayed.

Get over comparing different places - it's apples and oranges. Have you compared the workload per controller, sector sizes, complexity, different systems, yadda, yadda, yadda?

I don't moan and bitch about someone in their 172 being unable to do everything a 737 can do - because they're different.

And Aberdeen has a lot more movements does it? I don't think so.

I have visited ATC at Aberdeen.... Not just the tower, but the room full of controllers below....not a paper strip in sight...all electronic flight strips...

My question is why Perth not only has difficulty with pop up requests, but the AIP actually disallows VFR transits except a few tourist routes that do not actually allow a complete transit? The traffic volumes are similar....

Maybe the "room full of controllers" is a bit of a hint? Maybe we're making do with fewer resources. Maybe it's a similar question to why can't your 172 indicate 300 knots? I don't work Perth and have never been to Aberdeen so can't say.

Fair enough.... Maybe they need more resources....

I don't have a 172 but I can fly my Mooney at 140-150 kts down the ILS if asked to keep up speed on the ILS with an A320 behind me! 😀

awqward, there is a massive lack of service to VFR's in this country, most of it is due to an ingrained culture within ASA and training officers teaching ATC trainees to do so, regardless of whether there is a plan in the system or not.

There is a 'they donot pay for a service so why should we provide one' attitude. Ignorant & wrong, they do pay whether they use a service or not. It's embarrassing to fly in the States and realise just how backward, beaurecratic & lazy the Australian system & culture is. It wouldn't be tolerated over there.

Having said that, ATC is massively under resourced in this country, by the numbers Australian controllers control more traffic than most, some sector sizes are huge, done by one person with no inky. They do, at times get pretty busy.

Fair enough.... And for the record I am not having a go at controllers.... I have never met or spoken to one I didn't like and have great respect for the job they do...

The more advanced aviation country:

Why 40-Year-Old Tech Is Still Running America's Air Traffic Control | WIRED

Porter, my dear chap, ATC apply AIP mandated priority.

As previously explained...I was not comparing computer systems....maybe Australia has 90s technology compared to 80s technology....so what? Especially if it apparently requires so much effort to enter a pop-up...In the US they seem to have enough resources and more importantly to me a political mandate to cater for ALL traffic...

Jedman, old fruit, I know they do. Sometimes it is used as an excuse, sometimes they are busy.

Where does it state VFR have less priority? Real question!

The FAC for YPPH for a start:

http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/...8-May-2015.pdf

Flight Procedures, point 4....

Capital city priorities are ENR 1.4-18.

Not sure if that's what he was referring to or not.