anotherthing:
I agree that the sentence which you've highlighted, when removed from everything else I've been saying, would suggest possible reckless flying!
Rest assured that I am fully aware of the untrustworthy nature of the lateral display on TCAS, but it does give a decent distance readout to help one's situational awareness!
However when you couple your cherry-picked phrase with:
Originally Posted by kharmael
"Because when the controller tells me what traffic is about I would have an idea where everything is relative to me and my routing in my head and whether it's going to be a factor or not. So if the traffic is in my way or poses a confliction I will know what direction to turn or if it all gets too much I can ask for a suggested heading or upgrade to deconfliction service."
things become a bit clearer, no? This coupled with the fact that I would be at an independently calculated safety altitude would reinforce big-sky theory since it's unlikely anything else would be at that level enroute.
My MO is to have the
least possible interference with my plan, but not at the expense of the safety of the aircraft and this quick check of TCAS and deciding in my head whether things are a confliction or not means the difference between sticking with the Traffic Service and continuing on my planned route only losing a minute or two versus taking a deconfliction service and potentially losing tens of minutes in vectored manoeuvring.
