Civil on the other hand try and incorporate the rules that govern Class D airspace and take the PARTICIPATING to mean those ac that have elected to fly IFR as they are participating in the Radar Advisory Service, if an ac is unknown then they will provide advice to avoid but if an ac is known and operating VFR they will not
Sorry - going to have to disagree with the above.
As a civil controller I would not, under any circumstances, do what you suggest above with RAS traffic. The rules for RAS are unambiguous - attempt to achieve 5nm or 3000ft against unknown traffic, or 3nm/1000ft against identified and known being worked by myself. If the conflict is IFR v VFR it makes no difference - the IFR on a RAS will not have its protective "bubble" broken no matter what, and that goes for all civil ATCO's I know.
It's been often said that civil apply ATSOCAS, and especially RAS differently to the military, yet what I've written above looks like the same application to me. Unless people can state
actual ocurrences then I think this is an "urban myth" perpetuated by constant rumour and hearsay.