Feather #3
Just a random thought;
Wot if the ATCO had told
VB to level at FL185?
In that case, he would have been applying Class C procedures in CLass E airspace, which is against the intent and procedures applicable in NAS. If Class E is to work, it must be allowed to work on its own merits, not by ATC overservicing to compensate for perceived safety deficiencies.
The short answer, of course, is that everyone would have gone home safely and had a good night's sleep. (As they did prior to Nov 27th)
The inherent problem (apart from safety) as I see it in Class E:
1) ATC provides IFR with traffic on observed VFR and the IFR descends.
2) IFR pilot sees
an aircraft, and decides he can avoid it, coninuing descent. (IT can never be confirmed the the aircraft seen by the pilot is the same one the ATC sees on radar)
3) TCAS generates an RA.
4) IFR pilot
must respond to the RA, e.g. by climbing. (It can never be confirmed that the aircraft triggering the RA is the same one seen by either the pilot or the ATC)
Result: Less orderly descent profiles, less safety, more cost.
That's NAS for you.