The basic situation in Class G , without blaming professional pilots , private pilots , military pilots , procedural ATCOS or Radar ATCOS, is that Class G & the attempt to provide any sort of competent ATC service within it, IS dangerous.
This is so because in this day & age "see & be seen" is an anachronism. It was fine in the 30s & 50s; even in the 60s & 70s, when there were fewer high performance a/c about & pilots had a reasonable chance of seeing other a/c. Nowadays, this simply is not the case. Giving traffic information cannot guarantee avoidance of collisions. It was given by Coventry ATC to both a/c involved in a fatal collision . It did not work !
There is often too much traffic about for the ATCO to accurately assess just what he has to do & do it ; even if he gets his assessment & actions broadly correct he cannot know what unknown traffic is doing, or going to do; & very often he cannot identify which aircraft is which on radar to do anything effective in the first place.
In short, he has NO CONTROL over the situation he finds himself in. And CONTROL is precisely what he needs to be able to do anything effective.
So, if he has no control over a situation , how can he do anything positive about it ?
Take Coventry. Almost totally in Class G , with the exception of a small portion of Birmingham's Class D to the North & West & over the airfield. Aircraft bound to & from NW & SE in the DTY area between East Midlands & Birmingham CAS & below LACC's CAS ( & there is an awful lot of it at times); some of which call for a RDR service & others which don't. Some of the a/c in the vicinity call on frequency others don't. Some have SSR others don't. Some comply with ATC requests others don't. The radio freq., nevertheless, swamped with a/c & ATC transmissions.
Please tell me how the ATCO is going to be able to deliver a 100% effective & safe service in that situation.
In short, he can't.
I've seen it at first hand & tried to deliver what is considered to be a safe service. I was largely unable to do so. I don't mind admitting it.
I grew up & worked for 37 years in Class A. To my mind, that is the ONLY type of ATC (emphasis on "CONTROL" & safety) service that should be provided. Because, if you want 100 % safe ATCS that IS the ONLY airspace within which it can be guaranteed (if the ATCO doesn't make a mistake).
One in which the ATCO knows which a/c is which, the pilot has to be in r/t contact & has to do what ATC tell him, ATC knows what the pilot is doing & that he will comply with instructions etc.
I am a PPL, also. I never felt over controlled in Class A & when I questioned other local PPLS in Jersey, they never felt over controlled either. They said that Class A made them feel safe. &, based on my experience at Coventry, so they should have done !
I have vectored 737s for the ILS on 25 at BE skilfully, & with luck, at times, avoiding unknown a/c outside CAS by the required margins only to have to issue emergency avoiding action to them when they were in descent on the ILS within 7nm of touchdown because a microlight (or what might have been a microlight) suddenly popped up in the vicinity of Wolvey ( about half a mile to a mile west of the 25 ILS path) without calling me. & the CRIMINAL aspect of this is that THEY WEREN'T REQUIRED TO CALL ME !, or to do anything which I might have asked them to do !
On occasion, having given the 737 avoiding action (sometimes against spurious traffic which was, in reality, not there !), I was faced with the situation of having nowhere to go with the 737 where I could apply the appropriate separation from other unknown traffic, which had previously not been in confliction with it (before it turned off the ILS).
How can anyone expect ATC to provide a safe service in that situation ? How can the ATCO do it ?
Any attempt to provide "separation" in Class G is threatened by all these types of scenarios. It CANNOT be done with anything like a guarantee of success being given, or with a 100% success rate being achieved !
Get real & embrace this FACT.