Okay, that sounds better. I did want to have a proper look in MATS Part 1 but only having dial-up somewhat limits me at the moment. Like I said, what you're suggesting is certainly a common-sense approach. If it really is legislated in this way for you guys and different for us, I wonder if that's because mil ac are expected to follow unpredictable flt paths in all 3 dimensions conducting high energy maneouvers which could quickly see a confliction arise which was not there before??
The 'coordination agreed' statement is an old chestnut that constantly does the rounds. We (the mil) binned it sometime ago and any mil controller who still uses it is not following the standard. Anyone who dis-regards and breaks coordination because that phrase wasn't used will get themselves in trouble. If that was the only reason for breaking the coordination.
As far as your change of subject goes be careful of ex-squadron leaders who say they work hard. It depends on how hard he actually worked as a mil ATCO!
(tongue was in cheek, but now hunkered down preparing for incoming!)
Flower, do you have written silent handover arragements with other local units that you use following your ATSAs pre-note. Or is it a local ladies/gentlemens agreement?