"time 1009"
TYNE 1009! Regional Pressure
(the transmission was not that clear)
When the RAF replaced their ATC radios they thought they could save money and retained the old headsets which explains why so many ATC units are difficult to understand.
If they are that concerned they would have made the next 500ft Class D or made the whole area above it a TMZ
I regularly fly near or over the Brize airspace, being based at Gloucestershire. EGBJ DCT GWC is my standard route to the south-east, which just avoids Brize, but if either of the parachute drop zones are active I parallel-track east and over Brize.
Strictly speaking, at 3600 ft I don't need to talk to Brize. However, I always want the status of the drop zones, so it makes sense to work them. Also, if you've ever had a VC10 or C17 (or on one occasion a B52) pop up through an undercast near your track, you'll be grateful that you were warned about it :)
If they are that concerned they would have made the next 500ft Class D or made the whole area above it a TMZ.
I disagree.
The UK CAA, for all its faults, is quite aggressive in removing controlled airspace for which a case has not been made.
It has often been argued that there is too much Class A too low down, etc, and that is probably true, but on the whole the UK has very little low level CAS and it is very easy to fly around wholly in Class G.
The reason why e.g. Brize or Farnborough don't have Class D all the way up into Class A is because they don't have enough traffic to make the case. It's not that they don't have any traffic. So assisting in a "known traffic" environment is in the pilot's benefit too, because if say some Brize traffic gets into trouble and has to climb above 3500ft in a hurry, at least ATC can coordinate it more easily. Same goes for Odiham etc traffic.
IMHO there are far bigger fish to fry than calling up a radar unit with one's route and flying on.
But to do so is daft.
But it is only daft because Brize has both a LARS (i.e. en-route) function and an approach function. :) If they are that concerned they would have made the next 500ft Class D or made the whole area above it a TMZ.
I believe the bottom line is that if you're en-route, talk to en-route if you want traffic info and let them co-ordinate with approach where the controller sees fit.
If you're on approach/departure or suddenly require a transit of terminal airspace, talk to approach.
IMHO it is just "smart" to let the radar controller responsible for the MATZ know that you are transiting.
So, like this morning when I flew EGKA MID CPT EGBJ, speaking to Farnborough 125.25, and giving them the MID-CPT route, they can see what one is up to and they will coordinate with any Odiham etc traffic.
In return you get the peace and quiet which one expects from a radar unit which can see you 
No need to ask for "MATZ penetration". The controller is in no position to "clear" you anyway - it's in Class G and not within an ATZ so a "clearance" is not possible.
Same thing is e.g. overflying Brize EGVN at 3600ft. Their Class D goes up to 3500ft and - exceptionally for the UK - there is no other controlled airspace above that, so you can just fly over the top non-radio. But to do so is daft.
It is a bit like flying over the top of Oxford without talking to them (or anyone) at 3500 as someone did while I was in the approach last night. Not a great idea in my view given the altitudes used for holding aircraft.
I'm personally irritated of hearing people call up way too many miles away from some zone boundary when they have no intention of transit and they don't intend to be anywhere near it. It creates workload for all and ties up the radio waves.
If they want a known traffic environment they need to make it Class D. Otherwise don't bother speaking to approach. Talk to en-route/LARS instead.
You should request MATZ ... penetration.
Ignore this. It is completely stupid. I might as well not call up than to do so and add superflous RT.
I would phrase that somewhat differently (while agreeing.)
If you cannot deal with a small diversion, do not plan to go through any restricted airspace (including MATZ.)
That also begs the question of what happens if the weather becomes an issue, but I guess that a student on a first solo cross country could then use D & D.
Even forgetting the legalities, surely it is about fitting into the system and if you can't cope with a small diversion, should be you out there anyway? It is a bit like flying over the top of Oxford without talking to them (or anyone) at 3500 as someone did while I was in the approach last night. Not a great idea in my view given the altitudes used for holding aircraft.
There is no legal obligation to comply, however such instructions should be seen as for your own safety.
hmmm....maybe not as such, but Endangerment is a catch all.
According to Cap 413 (Supplement) While it is not mandatory for civilian pilots to establish radio contact with the appropriate military unit when entering a MATZ, if your planned track passes through or near one, it is strongly recommended that you call on the published VHF zone frequency at least 15 miles or 5 minutes flying time before the MATZ boundary, whichever is sooner. You should request MATZ and, if you intend to route through it, ATZ penetration. When crossing a MATZ or Combined MATZ (CMATZ) it is the responsibility of the pilot to ensure that permission is obtained to transit each individual ATZ embedded within it. You may ask the controller to obtain these clearances on your behalf.
Military units use QFE in the circuit area, instrument pattern and, except for a small number of units, for MATZ penetration.
