SINGAPURCANAC: As I said before, in the UK both military and civil ATC operate in class G airspace, there being little E and F, and any airport who the government decides needs it gets class D or higher. This means many airfields both ,military and civil with maybe 200 IFR movements per day each have NO protection, let alone class E like you have.

As has been clearly stated earlier, the UK treats this topic rather differently to many other countries. The problem is less that we have all these odd radar based services in the UK but, more fundamentally, that we seem happy to provide ATC services outside controlled airspace (a bit of an oxymoron creeping in there!) which as SINGAPURCANAC points out is not really what ICAO ATC has in mind.

If we stuck to ICAO rules and did ATC inside CAS and FIS if you want it outside CAS we wouldn't need all the odd radar services - but that would require far more CAS to be established. So, because we don't apply one bit of ICAO rules (about establishing CAS) we end up having to fudge other bits of the ICAO rules (about ATS) which assume the airspace is there.

So, all in all, the UK is not a good model for Slovenia. But it is why we make a big distinction between identification and provision of a service - and I'm not sure that that is the norm elsewhere. In the UK we might ID a VFR aircraft for our own purposes, perhaps to decide that traffic information does not need to be passed to an IFR flight, but without providing any service to the VFR flight. In my experience elsewhere, having told a pilot that he or she is identified they will automatically assume that they are getting a radar service (radar control often being the only one available) and also make assumptions about the responsibilities that the controller is taking on.

A quick look at the ICAO books (well Doc 4444 which is the only one I have to hand) is interesting - although not as helpful as one might like. At para 8.6.2.1.1 it says 'Before providing radar service to an aircraft, radar identification shall be established and the pilot informed. Thereafter, radar identification shall be maintained until termination of the radar service. This would seem to support the assumption that identification=radar service.

Later on in para 8.7.1 which deals with the Use of radar in the ATC service there is no mention of how radar could/should be used in the circumstances in question. However reference to para 8.11 about Use of radar in the FIS refers to providing information to 'identified aircraft' so, if Slovenia sticks to ICAO rules, I imagine your VFR aircraft calling up in Class E airspace should be identified and tolf that it is ID'ed and told it is getting a FIS.

FWIW, personally I have no difficulty ID'ing an aircraft simply to improve my situational awareness and without providing a radar service. In this case I would use the phraseology 'Identified, no radar service' or 'Identified, flight information service continues' to try and stress the point that I will not be providing a radar service to the aircraft. It doesn't matter to me what level the aircraft is at. If it later becomes helpful to put the aircraft under a radar service (and we've got lots to choose from in the UK, although as chevvron pointed out FIS with radar is not one of them) I might ask the pilot if he/she can accept this - although I recognise that I may have to fall back on my charm and personality if the pilot says "No, I'm happy to continue VFR thanks"! - in which case level, flight rules and pilot qualifications are all considerations.

One final point. Talkdownman says 'Jobsworth ticking of the CAA ATSD 'verification' boxes adds significantly to the RT congestion which in turn compromises flight safety.' In this particular case I'm not sure that it is box-ticking. If one assumes that the aircraft has been identified using a discrete code then any other unit can take vertical separation based on the mode C displayed. For this reason any aircraft on a discrete code associated with a particular unit and not nominated as conspicuity code should have the level checked. (P.S. This is a UK answer based on the 'Deemed verified' rules we have.)

It is probably question of money and consecutively profit. But my experience told me that D class of airspace for CTR and E for TMA is minimum. And above 190 C. I don't know the reason why it is not like this in UK or anywhere else, but this is my logic.
regarding military traffic I remember times where all military traffic was VFR but they separate each a/c as two IFR. So experiences all over world are different but if you follow ICAO rules in class D and E ( as it was in this topic) than it is as....

And one joke finally:
two Bosnian guys( Mujo & Haso) were travelling to UK by car. Somewhere in south England they switched radio to local station. There were warning: DRIVERS, DRIVERS WARNING! At the highway south of London one car using wrong direction. CAUTION!
"What one?", said Mujo, " thousands of them!"

On my one visit to Mauritius about 40 years ago(!) I was pleased to find that they drove on the correct side of the road like the UK.

I guess the UK could adopt the ICAO procedures in full ... and then the military could just operate under due regard, since the C in ICAO stands for civil. Our Middle East ATC colleagues could probably tell us whether that kind of a system is a goer or not in safety terms. :ok:

It's just a shame that there is a need to defend your country or fight wars, even in Europe in very recent times. Without them we would have no need for accomodating operational training by our military brethren and could all have one big happy airspace continuim :D

I'm from the same CTR as 1999, so I know the heat of the debate quite well :)

I have no problem indentifying VFR traffic, using correct ICAO procedure on the way. Identifying traffic doesn't mean taking over the whole responsibilty from the pilot...especialy of VFR flights, where it is clear, that PIC is responsible for separation from terrain. My million dollar question to those who refuse to identify VFR traffic was - what will you do with it in C airspace (in regards to separation of VFR and IFR flights)?