ARFOR
I did not state that in FAA D that IFR and VFR are separated.
I did state that IFR could get a safer service when VMC exists. This is because in FAA Class D (and in ICAO D) if two aircraft remain IFR they must be separated by ATC. At the present time in our GAAP this does not happen. Of course, in the FAA Class D, one or the other pilot simply cancels IFR or changes to VFR and they then get the equivalent service to what we now offer in GAAP.
Just because we have not had an accident between two IFR aircraft operating in and out of GAAP does not mean we won’t have one. The US FAA with fifteen times the traffic density can offer an ICAO separation service between IFR in all of their 350 Class D non-radar towers. Why can’t we?
We have never had a fatality from a mid-air airline crash in Australia. Does that mean we don’t need air traffic control?
Of course not.
ARFOR, you also say “why change something that is not broken”. For good reason. Pilots from anywhere else in the world would have no idea what GAAP airspace is. If it’s marked as Class D, they know what the procedures are. That was the whole reason that ICAO changed all the many airspace descriptions to the ICAO alphabet classifications.
If I go to the USA, Canada, or indeed France – look on the chart and see an E or a D and I know what service I will get. If a French or American pilot came here, they would have to learn what GAAP was. If we can have an international road rule and sign system, why can’t we have something similar in aviation?