The AIP clearly says that for a planned zone transit - the options are;
1. Full flight plan
2. Ring the ATC unit concerned prior to flight and pass an abreviated plan.
3. Abreviated plan in the air.
It is clear from Chilli's and Vintage ATCOs remarks that they will ignore option 1. I doubt if they would like lots of people taking option 2 cause this is posibly harder to deal with than option 1 and only gives them the same info........so they arbitarily force pilots to use option 3 despite what the AIP and the MATS says.
1. Logistically impossible to deal with. Now, if we had a completely integrated ATC system like the U.S it would be a different matter - but we haven't. Moving into the 21st century would achieve this - but it isn't happening just yet. If it's any consolation the plans don't just end up in the bin - they are kept available, just no strip is produced. Effectively therefore you are getting what you want in the ATC unit fulfilling their responsibilities.
2. Feel free - though I suspect if you're going to do this and you get through to some people you're more likely to be told "Yes - thank you very much" without anything being done about it. You'll have achieved less than option 1 in that case.
3. Yes - you are forced down that avenue. Sorry, it's a fact of life and until we get the same processing and integration as airways flights for flights which transit outside CAS with the occasional zone transit then that's the way it's going to be. It might dent your thoughts on what the relevant ATC units should be doing. However, it's the only sensible way of approaching the problem
within the current system.
Yes, the system is at fault. Yes, it does need changing. Yes, some of what is written in the manuals when it is disected (as in forums like this) shows very large holes in the
practical application. People on both sides of the fence may not like it, often some of those people try to change things for the better, even when at times it seems like you're pushing sh1t uphill!