LTP, so long as you insist on arguing with things I have not said, there is little point in continuing this discussion.
Well, that's rich. I spent a good proportion of my last post defending myself against the somewhat inaccurate quotations that littered yours. If you can find an instance where I have misquoted you or taken your words out of context, I apologise.
You've now said on more than one occasion that I have no idea of regional airliner operations in class G airspace, and yet you refuse to enlighten me - isn't that what the forum is here for? I know what my ideas on the subject are, and contrary to your belief I have every interest in hearing your opinions (and anybody else's for that matter).
But it appears that I am not the only one here that needs to be educated. It is a fact that every time you venture into class G airspace you are at least partially responsible for your own separation, even if you are under a RAS. The see and avoid principle DOES apply.
You have said elsewhere in other posts that your airprox occurred in 2001 and was one of the "hairiest" you'd ever had. Did you know that arguably the most dangerous airprox in 2002 also happened just south of Newcastle, when an RJ85 and a Jaguar nearly collided? Just coincidence, or a pattern as a consequence of the whole operation being a bit questionable in the safety department? The operator of the RJ85 concerned ordered its pilots to fly the airways for a period of time after that incident. I refer you to the "Tombstone Imperative". If either of these two quite serious incidents had developed into a situation where fatalities had occurred, all civilian traffic would be flying the airways today and you know it. So why is it acceptable to take shortcuts across class G when people only nearly got killed?
One conceivable solution to the now much-loved problem would be for the area of class G airspace south of Newcastle to be available to commercial traffic during "off-route" hours. Every day, the MASOR phones the civilian sectors to inform us of the start and finish of military operations. Outside of these hours you are much less likely to come into conflict with a fast-jet, and demand on the military controller is greatly reduced. During weekday daylight hours (generally speaking when the military are most active) the civilian operators would agree to stay on route and fly the airways. Slightly less draconian than flying the airways at all times, despite the fact that in my opinion civil operators would be well advised to do so.
Hugmonster, if YOU seriously wanted to be part of the solution, you would save the petty insults and get a grip. By being so resistant to change when it is clearly inevitable, you are more a part of the problem than I will ever be.
LTP