Originally Posted by
Talkdownman
In Class G unregulated airspace the VFR pilot under a FIS decides the appropriate course of action. All that is necessary is traffic information. If VFR then own separation in VMC is acceptable. If the IFR CAT flight requires radar separation from the VFR then it is up to the approach controller to provide the IFR flight with vectors accordingly, not the other way round.
But we have experienced instances of the VFR traffic being vectored away from the IFR traffic
a) because it is easier
b) because the IFR traffic 'asked' the controller to do so from a TCAS contact
c) because the IFR CAT didn't want to lose it's slot
Normally this isn't too much of a problem, but trouble came on the day when the vectoring put the GA traffic into an area of low cloud and hills. It was an experience that cured any constipation I might have had.
Interestingly, we (and others) heard on the radio that GA traffic were having difficulty maintaining VMC and asking for an alternate routing. This was denied them, as by that point the safe route would have taken them into the ATZ.
When I called to to say I would be passing clear of the ATZ on the safe side, the ATCO refused that too, as he had a commercial jet about to take off and turn in that direction.
So, we had roughly 10-12 aircraft willingly cooperating with the controller, but being placed in a risky situation because the controller didn't want to delay a CAT departure, or to 'knit a hole' for us to pass safely by.
Once they get their massively extended Class D, they'll have more power to exclude VFR from the area and ease their workload. Trouble is, the VFR traffic will be squeezed closer together.