Are the beloved RIS vs RAS debate. I am relatively new to the business so excuse me if i say anything inaccurate. Having very recentlly studied this area so in depth as an approach controller heres my understanding. Why do the "big bods" insist on making it more complicated than it really is.
In the simple form, my understanding is thus:
RAS will only be provided to IFR when requested. (because of turns/climbs into IMC)
This is Traffic info PLUS any associated Avoiding action if it all goes tits up. Until conflict (if any) is resolved. Seperation: 5nm or 3000ft vertically on Mode C (unknown tfc) 1000ft/5nm (Known traffic)
RIS To IFR or VFR when requested. Traffic Info ONLY wll be provided. Continually updated (if practicable) No sep reponsibility for ATCOs.
RAS Vs RAS = not an issue unless the controller has lost the plot or an unuasual situation arises.
RAS Vs RIS = TI & AA to RAS a/c. TI to RIS a/c. but as both are "known" again shouldn't be an issue.
RIS Vs RIS Vs FIS TI ONLY
Duty of care is the ONLY caviat. As a controller, if i see a situation that i COULD do something to prevent of course human instinct should prevail, and you wouldn't just sit and watch. Downgrading of services will only occur when the controllers primary function (controlled airspace) is compromised due to traffic levels.
Being a wee PPL holder also i have great concerns over how little (at least i was) taught about radar services etc. I think there is a huge knowledge gap in the training of weekend pilots etc. And no i'm not biased as i can see the side of the story from both aspects. Hopefully things have changed since i got my licence.
81