If they didn't want separation are they prepared to erode against traffic that obviously does? If yes, then I refer the Rt Hon Gent to the answer I gave earlier - slack airmanship. These guys need educating and reminding that one day THEY will be the ones being cocked about by others 'not wanting separation'.
I assume you're not a pilot then Canary Boy ?? Class G requires no separation standards to be provided between any aircraft (go look at the Airspace Classification Chart in the UK AIP). The ultimate responsibility lies with the pilots involved. That's us who sit up in the pointy end up there, not anyone down here. ATC might try to provide some to one (or both) parties with their agreement through ATSOCA, but it can't enforce any requirement on a third party who does not require it. No one 'controls' or has jurisdiction over Class G airspace, just an equal responsibility to prevent collisions. And it does open the whole can of worms up about the majority possibly being 'cocked up' by the few you provide a service to. Look at how many aircraft operate in UK airspace. Look at how many are commercial and how many are private or military. Majority should perhaps rule ?? Oh, and airmanship actually still applies to traffic receiving a RAS. Just because the pilot is receiving a radar service, it doesn't absolve him from any of the facets of airmanship which you project, nor from their responsibilities for collision avoidance as per the ANO. I'd suggest taking a fam flight with a commercial operator outside Controlled Airspace. The lack of lookout might be an eye opener !!! It has even been highlighted in one of the RAF Safety mags I believe if you don't believe me.
The rules are plain - under RAS achieve standard separation between participating traffic and information (and avoiding action) against non participating traffic in order to resolve the confliction. How does IFR or VFR modify these requirements?
So if I am flying VFR, am known traffic to you outside Controlled Airspace because I have called you (though not obliged to do so), have the other aircraft in sight and assess that I am in no danger of collision, have called said traffic as being in sight .. and you will try and vector me 5 miles away from it or else question my airmanship ?? The fact is, I don't need 5 miles, or 1000'. I just need to avoid a collision using the Rules of the Air. In fact, if your commercial RAS aircraft is approaching me from my left on a crossing track, who are you going to move out of the way ... and why ??
I can't help wonder if such instances and attitudes displayed by some ATC 'over controllers' put off more GA pilots from talking to ATC when they are not obliged to, rather than encouraging them that it might be in their interests to communicate with us.
Class G is not Controlled Airspace. The 'separation standards' in RAS are aims, not requirements. The standards are actually set by the pilots themselves. They are up there and operating in the environment. They can judge what is safe and what is not surely ?? And the vast majority of us winged sky gods are also personally paying for the privilege as well
