Thank you for all your helpful comments.
I have to say I still find the experience unsettling, I think, as irrational as it is, because it was so close - but
Saab the same thought occurred to me.
So far the rate seems to be around 1 every 500 hours, although the others were no no where near as close and one was in CAS due to controller error.
I would like to pick up on a few comments.
You were changing to a new LARS unit so not actuality getting a service? I assume you have mode C and that the other aircraft was doing 160kn + it probably had c or s. Mode C or Mode S are excellent ways of avoiding collision if the aircraft concerned are TCAS equipped, but of little value otherwise.
The previous unit was a LARS the "new" unit a radar service. The change over (a hand over was refused although requested) took maybe 5 minutes. I was mode S, and becasue the other aircraft was also a twin, I am guessing at least mode C. As I commented earlier I find it strange he was not receiving a service. I wonder whether as seems to be increasingly the case he couldnt be bothered to ask or had been refused a service. The same unit had flatly refused me a service on route to my destination. Is it the case that many are becoming reluctant to ask?
under a RIS you should ideally be getting handed-over unit to unit rather than a "freecall", and both controllers should be looking at your return & any adjacent ones.
I wish. In my experience hand overs are becoming increasingly rare.
and I'd suggest that radar is not a viable methodology. After over 100 ears of development a system has evolved in which the major means of separation is procedural, using controlled airspace, with aircraft flying along assigned tracks, separated by height and timing, rather than by a process of radar control.
The fact remains it is the best we have at the moment.
In my experience a RIS provides an excellent mechanism for reducing the risk of a mid air. Most fast aircraft are fitted with a transponder. There is more time to see slower moving aircraft (although I accept not necessarily that much). Some service providers have improved. Gatwick for example was often reluctant to provide any service and had to be coerced into doing so - that has improved enormously. On the other hand Farnborough (as helpful as they are) rapidly get overwhelmed, Thames are usually a right pain and Stanstead are even worse (shame on you), whereas Lyneham, Brise, Bristol, and many of those providers in the Midlands and further North are excellent. I recall returning from Dundee in particularly unpleasant IMC OCAS and Stanstead flatly refusing any service what so ever. I recall being less than pleased, but at least the weather was sufficiently poor that I doubt there was much traffic.
Any how shame on you - maybe we should start a name and shame thread in a similiar way that has happened with pilots being refused class D transits - and in consequence that has greatly improved.
I know of a number of airports that would gladly install a feed from NATS - it is the same story - they cant afford it. I believe Manston is in the process of doing so, I can imagine Lyd would benefit if for no other reason to assist with all the cross channel traffic and there are many others.
As others have commented NATS should be compelled by government to provide this data to any qualifying party at least at cost - their failure to do so is in my opinion a disgrace. I find it difficult to believe that any organisation can justify with holding vital safety data - which in effect is exactly what they are doing.
The thought of a mid air collision is horrifying, and brought painfully home to me by this experience. A collision of even two light twins over a built up area could have severe ramifications. Any efforts that can be made to ensure there is integrated coverage from service providers who are willing and able to provide the service in areas of conjestion and where air space is restricted should in my opinion be encouraged, particularly when it is the very presence of areas of CAS that are closely compacted with open FIR that so dramatically increases the risk of collision.