Matz calls

[Ian_Wannabe]

Hey there,
Whilst on my second solo nav talking to Shawbury radar, I dialed up, requested lower airspace radar service, and asked for Matz penetration and all was ok....

However, listening out on the frequency I noticed that some call signs did the above, but then re-requested permission to enter the matz. I could only think that they were doing this whilst on the perimiter of the Matz zone?

Am I right? Because I got a niggly feeling inside me that I should have done the same thing prior to entering the Matz zone, despite being told by my instructor I just need to make that initial call and fly my route through the Matz after getting permission the 1st time.

Thanks in advance.

Ian

[Chilli Monster]

Ian what you did was fine - BUT

A request

Please could anyone reading this Stop asking for a Lower Airspace Radar Service on the initial call - it means nothing!

You either want a FIS, RIS or RAS. I know what the CAP413 says but ponder this comment:

You call up, you ask for a LARS. Controller says pass your message when you re-iterate you want LARS. He then says what type of service, you say FIS.

What's the definition of a FIS? A non-radar service.

You see the point

[Ian_Wannabe]

Thanks Chilli you've put the confidence back into me

I see what you mean aswell about the lower airspace radar and FIS not being radar.... but why am I taught to request lower airspace radar service if its not right??

[High Wing Drifter]

I think the best explanation of what is what can be foun in the AIP ENR and the Safety Sense leaflets.

[Andrew Sinclair]

Here is the link to the Safety Sense Leaflet No. 8

Air Traffic Services Outside Controlled Airspace

and the AIP ENR

Lower Airspace Radar Service (LARS) AIP ENR 1.6

Worth reading and studying several times if you are learning to fly.

Ian_Wannabe,

I think the reason you are being taught it is because as Chilli Monster says that phraseology is stated in paragraph 15.2 of The Radio Telephony Manual CAP 413. Your instructor is teaching you correctly by the book but what Chilli is saying is that in his experience (if I remember right Chilli you are an ATCO at Filton, please correct me if I am wrong) this it is not good R/T phraseology in practice in the real world for the reason he states.

This could be fed back and included in the next update of CAP 413 but as it stands, that's what the book says. I tend to modify my R/T a little based on my judgement where there is no safety impact.

So the bottom line is when in the exam do as the book says but when PIC out there aloft use your own safe judgement.

[Ian_Wannabe]

Hey again,
Thanks all this is a great help - tis all a learning curve as they say

[PhilD]

Having read these docs and Chilli's post it's as clear as mud to me.

[Ian_Wannabe]

lol - Yeah PhilD I see what you mean

I see what Chilli means and its a valid point, but i'm afraid i'm gonna stick to the books on this one until it changes in the official publications.

Best to stay on the right side of the "verbal law" just incase something crops up... you never know.

[javelin]

Don't get too confused - MATZ penetration request is a nicety, RAF aerodrome ATZ penetration is a necessity. I am not going down a path of being beligerent, my brother was an RAF controller for many, many years and agrees. MATZ penetration has an aura about it that is perhaps over emphasised. If the station is known to be very busy, with lots of circuit and approach traffic then common sense would dictate that you give them a call to let them know that the maggot they are looking at is you. If it is not that busy, then listen and watch and continue.