However I go back to my original point which is that inappropriate airspace classification, in this case the fact the airspace is "uncontrolled", should not be used as a liability waiver.
Soaring - I don't disagree with your drift but you live in a theoretical world.
The UK airspace structure will never change to the US one. In the USA you have taxpayer funded approach controllers who service the extensive Class E airspace. This will never happen here because ATC is privatised and anyway has for a long time operated a policy of cost recovery, and
nobody is going to pay the very substantial ATC salaries which would be required for Class E on that scale.
Nobody is also going to pay for radar equipment and the extra cost of a "radar qualified" ATCO. Shoreham does have ATC but the same scenario is played out at the many non-ATC airfields, none of which could afford ATC salaries, never mind radar.
Class G is going to stay in the UK, and people have to live with it.
Most pilots who fly for real are actually completely happy with loads of Class G, with GPS etc making ATC assistance practically redundant, and by flying above 2000ft
you avoid nearly all GA traffic in the UK.
You just get the ambiguous separation issues at the airfields, but this can never be solved because even if the airfield has CAS (Class D) the controller is still not going to provide "guaranteed" separation between VFR traffic.
As I see it, the most important thing is to somehow get through to pilots (old ones and new ones) that climbing at say 2000fpm off the runway is not a great idea. By all means fly a tight circuit if you are sure there is no traffic around, but the rest of the time you should fly a proper rectangular circuit in which you climb "normally" off the runway, and you do the crosswind turn and commence the downwind turn well upwind of any traffic joining crosswind.