Originally Posted by
chevvron
See #71 above.
I think the problem with the previous system was that at some units 'FIS' traffic was identified, becoming 'known traffic' and hence passed 'generic traffic info' but at others they weren't, making them total unknowns and the passing of traffic info 'blurred' the border between FIS and RIS; introduction of Basic and TS was supposed to stop this but obviously hasn't as at some places, traffic requesting basic still needs to be identified to produce a 'known traffic' environment.
Years ago we did try doing this at Farnborough ie not identifying traffic requesting FIS but had to abandon the trial within days because it meant there were too many 'unknowns' and we couldn't clear IFR depatures from either Odiham or Farnborough.
Chevron I am somewhat perplexed by your post above. Their is no requirement to identify ac under a basic service / FIS nor has there ever been. Even when identified it does not constitute known traffic cause it can change level / heading with out telling you. There is no such thing as a 'known traffic environment' in class G airspace. These days there is only co-ordinated and uncoordinated traffic.
From the CAP774 Basic Service
A controller may identify an aircraft to facilitate co-ordination or to assist in the provision of generic navigational assistance, but is not required to inform the pilot that identification has taken place. Identification of an aircraft in receipt of a Basic Service does not imply that an increased level of ATS is being provided or that any subsequent monitoring will take place.
At our unit the boundary between Basic and TS is a pretty clear, you call relevant traffic for one (TS) - only collision risk for the other (BS) IF you happen to see it.
If a controller/ FISO considers that a definite risk of collision exists, a warning shall be issued to the pilot (SERA.9005(b)(2) and GM1 SERA.9005(b)(2))
With both the pilot remains solely responsible for separation. However when vectoring to final approach we DO NOT vector into conflict - that does not sit within an appropriate application of duty of care.