Barry wrote:

No doubt about its usefulness in areas with limited, or no, radar coverage.
But, I doubt that offset tracks would do much good there. Where the terrain
environment would permit parallel tracks, the publication of parallel tracks
as separate database routes would probably be much safer than issuing
parallel offset tracks in a non-radar environment.

I doubt the industry will buy into that. Too many opportunities for errors.
Plus, the parallel track has to have the same obstacle assessment as the "primary"
track, so it would be better to have them published and in the database; i.e.,
Track Bishop Alpha, Track Bishop Bravo, etc.