Interesting reading from all the posters. As the Original Poster, may I graciously suggest the lost comm issue not be the main topic addressed in this thread, perhaps someone could start another if that is of interest? Thanks.
Insomniac, reference our posts 7, 8 & 10, I thought when you said “amendment” you meant on the initial clearance from the ground controller. You mean amendment in the air, OK.
And Insomniac, I have to agree with the intent of CJ’s post. While I don’t recall being vectored over half of the flight, I know an enroute controller has often given a further 2 waypoints to proceed to, neither of which are on my flight plan route.
Pprune Radar,
I understand what you mean but am not sure I’ve ever seen it in practice. The only time we’re given points to fly to are when they are not on the filed route, or we are bypassing some filed waypoints. The other times, with no atc directions given, we elect to fly the filed route, in which case the plan route held by atc may in fact be different from that held by the pilot.
As for the Scottish/Reykjavik question, I’ll check the latest jepp chart.
So….Ppruners, would the following points be considered an appropriate answer to the original questions?
1. Don’t expect “as filed” or “flight plan route” to be given in the initial or amended enroute clearance. But, once airborne, if given direct to a point on the filed route, and no further instructions from atc, then rejoin the route at that point. No queries from the pilot required.
2. If given direct to a point not on the filed route, ask for further routing as you approach.
3. Then, if unable to get a word in, proceed to the next appropriate point in your route, and continue to attempt clarification. But take into account the general direction of your flight. By appropriate I mean a point requiring a turn of say greater than 40 degrees may not be preferred, if the bearing to the following point is more or less straight ahead.
All Yea’s and Nay’s appreciated