1. The incident investigations of all those incidents would have determined a number of causal factors that contributed to the incident occurring. Many of these factors are system based, and some would be based on actual deliberate or accidental non-compliance by aircrew or ATC. Without that reporting by the investigating team, merely listing the incidents has no useful purpose and neither supports nor contradicts your position.
An excellent post from Dirty Pierre, and I'm sure one that resonated with many reading the ludicrous posting of irrelevant incident reports. I believe however that it runs the risk of being lost in the hot air pervading this topic, so I took the time to analyse those reports a little deeper. Of the 79 incidents investigated and quoted for whatever reason, a reasonable summation can be made thus:
.....In Class C or D controlled airspace, total incidents caused by error by either pilot or controller: 6.
1 (ATC), 7 (Pilot), 8 (Pilot), 10 (Pilot), 68 (ATC), 76 (Pilot).
.....Impossible to tell from the data given: 9.
2, 5, 6, 8, 36, 51, 53, 62, 73
Instances where other measures had been taken to assure separation, giving an unrealistic RA: 7
9, 50, 52, 70, 72, 74, 77
Total Non-sequiturs: 1
79
Instances occurring OCTA due to poor airmanship, faulty procedures, incorrect or non-use of transponders, and overwhelmingly, incorrect frequency selection: 56
3, 4, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 69, 71, 75, 78.
In only one of these (57) was the air transport pilot apparently the offending party.
Instances where the replacement of Class C airspace with Class E would have made the slightest bit of difference: ZERO
If the purpose of quoting these incidents were to show what an effective and indispensable last-resort tool TCAS is, it would have been a remarkably successful strategy. In fact the post is a piece of meaningless folderol designed to divert attention from the real issue, and it demonstrates clearly why nobody bothers taking up Dick’s offer of phoning him. It has nothing, diddly squat, zilch, nada, to do with the Class E argument, which is the one most controllers want resolved.
Dick, your constantly repeated refrain of diverting controller attention to where it is most needed has been addressed already by those whose job it is to survey Class E airspace, and shown to be invalid. Additionally, in the history of your posts, the closest I can come to your addressing the LT incident is that it could have happened under Class C because after all people make mistakes and the VFR pilot may not have called for a clearance. This is irrelevant, dangerous and malicious nonsense. If you can’t address the subject at hand, stay out of it.
Your simplistic and repetitive arguments fly in the face of almost everybody on this forum except a few private pilots. If we get to the stage where such vested interests determine aviation policy in this country, it will be an extremely sad day.
The Class E changes are self-evidently less safe, and provide no benefit. Please refute that with facts or be exposed as an ego-driven ideologue.