Unfortunately I don't have time to reply for the next few days. I don't think there is much more that I can say than has already been posted by myself already. I suggest that anyone reading this thread, read our posts for the last few days and decide for themselves what is best and why we are trained the way we are(and what the legalities are)instead of this thread going on
forever, basically saying with us all saying the same thing in a different way.
Perhaps I have misunderstood your whole arguement. I believe I did say that there is a risk of collision in the scenario that actually happened that night but that it is an odds game which I believe you agreed with. Following the RA reduces your chance of collision especially at high altitude on a dark night where VFR traffic is a non-issue and all aircraft are or should be under ATC control.
I have mentioned a disaster(over Europe), a near world's worst disaster(over Japan) and linked to a Eurocontrol newsletter that gives multiple examples of closer than necessary near misses due to not following the RA. That is in reality all I can do to prove my point. Perhaps you could prove yours by showing me some articles where lives were saved because the pilots ignored their RA. I suppose you will point out that the DHL pilots would be alive today if they had ignored the RA. But I don't think that is enough evidence for us to realistically consider doing this as a regular procedure or consider it at all.
All I can do is ask that everyone out there FOLLOW THE RA.
Thank YOU