silverknapper
All responses acknowledge the authority of ATC within the ATZ BUT
if you are unable to comply no problem. your release MAY take longer due to IFR inbounds.
Why should my departure be delayed by an IFR inbound in Class G airspace? ATC are not there to provide separation. They should pass the traffic information to me and then let me decide on acheiving separation.
There is, as everywhere, the small minded majority who try to be awkward for the sake of it. "we're in class G" etc etc. Interestingly usually the ones who fly bi monthly.
You know nothing about my background in aviation nor how often I fly, nor in what types of aircraft.
I personally would consider that compliance where possible
That is your decision - if you wish to allow ATC to provide you with separation where they have no remit to do so. Perhaps you are also happy to comply with them telling you when to turn onto base leg in the circuit, or when to switch on the pitot heater or, in extremis, when to 'just turn left now' whilst you are etablished at 300 ft on final approach. Personally when operating in airspace where it is MY decision I prefer ATC to pass me the information in accordance with procedures laid down in the Air Navigation Order and then I can make my own decision.
If everyone flying VFR were to take a negative attitude to it it may well result in incidents which would lead to further 'restrictions' and perhaps the accelerated introduction of Class D airspace to the highlands.
You have already effectively conceded the airspace if you accept that ATC are providing separation, but you have not put in place the underlying mechanisms to ensure that everyone knows what the situation is.
What happens if I follow the 2000 ft restriction but then have an AIRPROX with a non-squawking aircraft in the vicinity that is not talking to the ATC unit? Who is responsible? Because I have accepted delegation of my separation to ATC even though I am VFR, am I absolved of any responsibility?
ATSOCAS are defined so that, by and large, all participants understand their responsiobilities. ATSInsideCAS are similarly well defined. I do not believe that individual units should take it upon themselves to mandate changes (ie you may be delayed because of an IFR inbound inside our radar cover unless you accept an altitude restriction) to these procedures.
Finally you seem to see the introduction of Class D airspace as inevitable viz the accelerated introduction of Class D. Why?
Pierre Argh
Presumably there is other traffic to affect, and it would be quite simple for the Controller to hold you on the ground until that traffic is clear. Such restriction is given in the name of expedition, try to screw ATC by quoting regulations and legality and I suggest you might find yourself having a different arguement whilst still at the holding point?
If the conflict would occur outside CAS then the controller should inform me about the traffic and not restrict my flight as it is not his responsibility to provide separation. If he wishes to hold me for this reason is he willing to pay for the additional cost of my flight? To paraphrase your coment, may I suggest that if ATC try to screw pilots by acting outside their remit they might find themselves having a discussion with CAA SRG.
