Originally Posted by TangoZulu
After all what is it called again - ah yes, a MATZ - what does the M stand for - therefore should we really be surprised if the military choose to use thier bit of airspace as shown on a map?
Ultimately the information is there on the map and in my personal opinion it is fairly shortsighted, maybe even selfish for someone to operate in the MATZ without talking to anyone - just because they can - after all the controller is more likely to help you in my experience than the opposite (particular experience of MATZ controllers at Brize, Benson and Yeovilton all being very helpful when called).
But just my view for what it may be worth
Edited for spelling as I cannot type!
I don't think I have read anywhere on this thread anyone disputing the "airmanship" side of calling a MATZ controller prior to entering a MATZ.
It goes without saying, I would have thought, that that is a particularly
good idea notwithstanding that you are not
bound to.
The other side of this discussion has been about the airmanship of the mil crew who have elected to carry out high-energy manoeuvres when they had/have no idea what else is in the area...
Despite protestations from two posters here, I am unconvinced that descending at x000fpm through IMC in a MATZ
just because you can is clever or necessary, especially when it is known that primary radar cover is not available.
When discussions like this go on, I often think "what would the AAIB report (and/or the BOI report) read like"? IMO they would not be complementary about either the glider pilot
or whoever authorised the high-energy descent in IMC for the mil aircraft.
Realistically there is room for improvement in "airmanship" on both sides of this discussion: Glider in a MATZ without speaking to anyone AND Mil Jet in high-energy manoeuvres without primary radar cover or the benefit of CAS/DA/RA/TRA status.
Only one side is arguing the toss about that from what I can see...