Originally Posted by
6000PIC
... in the same context , only different ... why don`t ATC offer " direct - to ..." more often than they do at present. I`m always asking , and you may find it annoying , but after all , that`s why we fly , - the quickest we can get where we are going , the better for all , ...
SOP; generally controllers are actively discouraged from 'offering' track shortening; this isn't about maximising your flight time; but minimising conflict pairs. Most route structures are designed to keep separation from other (similar) routes, of course there are multiple crossing and opposite tracks... but you get the point.
The flex track / UPR and even standard non normal tracks are usually "best guessed" as the fastest way; we take you off by offering track shortening and cost you time; the most direct route is often not the quickest, of course there are many examples where it is.
I saved an aircraft 30NM once by cutting a dog-leg and cost them two minutes over the 250NMs from Point A to C instead of via B; courtesy of the jet stream winds etc.
As for military airspace; this is a world wide problem... But from what I see daily, I prefer the current situation of keeping civi's as far from military types doing military things in those types of airspace as we need.