Originally Posted by
Capn Bloggs
That is not what I was getting at at all. That bloke didn't even make any calls on "Area"/the Class E freq until he was through 6000ft, creating a Mangalore-type scenario. But that's beside the point. My issue, and what an IFR Pickup procedure is, is when you ask ATC for a clearance, they so "not available" (obviously due to traffic in the proximity) and the pilot then changes to VFR so they can continue in E. It's as if, magically, all the separation problems go away and the other traffic disappears when they switch to VFR. This is of course nonsense, and the other aircraft (with the clearance) has now been put in a potentially threatening and certainly unknown situation because of the IFR Pickup pilot, until and if ATC hop in and start providing DTI to both parties so they (the pilots) can sort it out.
Capn - the issue you seem to have problem with is whether VFR works in terms of separation, if it does not then stay away from the Bankstown training area.
In Class E if a clearance cannot be given immediately, in the US, the controller is able to give the VFR pilot traffic advisories to assist with his/her visual separation with the conflicting traffic. (Don't forget the controller needs 3 or 5 NM separation to be able to issue a clearance, whereas two pilots just have to miss each other) Alternatively, once the VFR traffic is identified, a suggested heading can be given that would create the separation standard, and once the aircraft is seen to be tracking on the suggested heading and 3/5 NM from the conflicting traffic a clearance can be given.
As for the Premier jet not calling on the area frequency, in the US there is no VFR requirement for that. I suggest he would have been listening on his other radio, but why load up busy ATC frequencies with VFR aircraft reports? Australia has made a dog's breakfast out of this issue since the ATSB report in 1991 "the limitations of see and avoid"