Internet flight plan filing coming soon

[IO540]

http://flightplanningonline.co.uk/

This is a new service, for UK resident pilots, and they are collecting applications at present.

The form asks for a CAA license number but I gather FAA pilots are allowed too but they will get a longer verification process in due course, presumably to check they are UK resident.

There will be NO geographical restrictions on the start and end points of the flight plan so not just in the UK.

[autothrottle]

The old system was far better, and this one has cost people their jobs.

[172driver]

Isn't that the same service homebriefing.com (http://www.homebriefing.com) have been providing for years?

[fernytickles]

Why do they have to have your licence number?

Have been using fltplan.com and prior to that, good old FSS to file for years and never once required to give a licence number.... Ditto when I've filed a flight plan in Canada.

And prior to that, work flight plans on the UK would never have our licence numbers...

Why do you have to be a UK resident? Lets say I came home for a couple of weeks, wanted to go flying and decided to file. I'm British, but currently non-resident, with both US & UK licences. What does residency have to do with flight planning?

[IO540]

The old system was far better, and this one has cost people their jobs.

What old system? Can you elaborate on the exact job loss problem?

The UK has never provided a free web based flight plan filing service. The only service I know of has been www.homebriefing.com (http://www.homebriefing.com) (run by Vienna ATC) which charges Euro 37/year flat rate for the first 10 flight plans. HB does work and I've been using it for years, as have many others.

Why do they have to have your licence number?

My guess is that since this will enable people to file flight plans via a direct internet gateway to the AFTN, and thus could be used to file bogus flight plans, they want to be sure that the login details go to a real pilot and not some hacker.

They don't actually need the CAA license # because you could for example be flying under a German PPL, or an FAA PPL/CPL etc. But they will want to verify your ID.

This is not the same thing as faxing a flight plan to Heathrow, where if some tw*t faxed a load of bogus ones then recipient will just bin them. I have heard a rumour that the services such as Heathrow may disappear in the future and we will all need to use online sites like this. Personally, I have never used anything but the internet - it is virtually mandatory already for notams so there is nothing new to learn.

The whole issue of online flight plan filing has been neck deep in politics for as long as anybody can remember. The speculation has always been that the powers to be dragged their heels because of the abuse fear. The UK notam site www.ais.org.uk (http://www.ais.org.uk) has been thought to always have been capable of the function but it was never implemented.

This dragging of heels is what enabled Homebriefing to start up and make money with a premium rate service - for doing nothing more than they were doing anyway, but they got some software which links their web interface to the flight plan entry desk and does the addressing via some sort of address database (which is tricky for VFR).

[Foxbat01]

Reading the AIP, as one does when it's wet and windy outside, flight plan addressing is covered in ENR_1_11 (http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/pdf/enr/EG_ENR_1_11_en.PDF)

For VFR pilots the obvious addresses are for Departure, Destination and Alternates but also additionall addresses for FIR.

For IFR it's the two addresses for IFPS and that's it.

[Maoraigh1]

I've just tried to sign up. When I click "submit" my Vista laptop does not use my Tesco email, but tries to set up a new connection, demanding information which I do not have,even if my tesco email is open. Looks like print out and post.

[youngskywalker]

Or if I recall correctly from my ATC days, just the one collective address for the Euro IFPS zone is required if IFR: EGZYIFPS

[Maoraigh1]

Saved the filled-in form. Copied the address that shows at the bottom when you hover over submit. Tried to send the Microsoft Office OneNote Section file as an attachment to that address, using my Tesco email. System showed an error message.
I notice I cannot post, only fax a copy.

[S-Works]

Applied. Form worked fine for me.

Now to wait and see what we get. Seems liek a good idea to me and will make life a lot easier for those of use filing flight plans all the time.

[FlyUK73]

I'm one of the NATS personnel involved in the project, if you have any queries, feel free to ask and I'll answer as best I can.

:)

Edit: Thanks for changing your link IO540. :)

[wsmempson]

I've just applied for this and have just received this reply:

"Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your application for an AFPEx account. The system is now in operation and we are concentrating on migrating aerodromes and companies who are currently on legacy systems, which are due to cease. The timescale for GA pilots going onto the system is expected to be in early May. Please be assured that we will handle your application on a strictly "first come first served" basis and you will be contacted in due course. Your patience is appreciated

Kind regards,
NATS AFPEx Team"

In the meantime, I'll carry on using the superb French system, OLIVIA - which has so far worked pretty flawlessly for me over the last 2 years.:hmm:

[autothrottle]

IO540,

Exactly how long have you been filing FPL's in the UK? It appears from your reply not very long , or if you have then paid little attention to the procedures to be followed and badly understood the flight planning system.

The old system I refer to was by submitting the flight plan to a FBU where professional flight planners would correct mistakes, something that at least 40 per cent had, correctly address it, initiate overdue action, provide advice and as ATC professionals made a system where the average PPL who has relatively little flight planning training, work.

I know as a licenced Professional pilot and having worked in a major fbu for 15 years. The new system has to be adressed by the pilot and is not checked for accuracy( something important if someone ditches 28 miles from start point) to anywhere the levels pre internet filing. The reason? The workers who manned the FBU's are nearly all gone. Not long and there will be none. To save money.

Believe me , I have relied on FPL'S submitted by pilots who have no experience in flight planning who file it 10 minutes before departure and then get airborne without checking its been processed. I feel there is now more room than ever for someone to go overdue and not get noticed.

[IO540]

autothrottle

I suggest you give me a little more credit for elementary IQ :)

I am too a "licenced Professional pilot" you know ;) Is there such a thing as an "UNlicensed professional pilot"??? Or a Licensed UNprofessional pilot?

The difference is that I live in the 21st century, where we have this new fangled thing called the "internet". And you can do some real amazing stuff on da internet, u know. I know it baffles a lot of people but, trust me, it is real handy for some stuff.

I happen to know about Eurocontrol, CFMU, how to design airways flight plans, how to validate them, how to file them. I just prefer to use a website service (homebriefing.com to date) which gives me a flag to say it has been accepted or rejected, sms/email, etc, over faxing the thing to some ATC unit and then having to phone them to check if it was OK. Modern pilots carry laptops with internet access and this is how things are done. One can fax from a laptop and indeed I can too but it isn't a first choice because GSM fax does work too great if the signal is less than 100%. Email/www is a lot better. I use fax for PPR to 3rd world airports (anywhere south of the Alps) though.

I know lots of people still fax flight plans to say Heathrow and it's very nice of the people there to accept them and type them into the system, but they have never guaranteed to accept flight plans from anywhere to anywhere (outside the UK).

You probably still live in the goode olde world of aviation, when boys were boys, gurlz were gurlz, and life was real, and a real professional pilot would walk up to the tower and do his stuff there. That is a great way to waste an hour or two, having to be escorted around the place by "security".

Actually, professional pilots have not done that for decades - their ops dept does it for them (online) and the pilot is just handed an info pack as he steps onto the plane.

I am sorry people are losing their jobs but I don't think banning internet access to some function which so obviously should be online is the way to stop it. It merely creates an opportunity for somebody else to do it - often in another country, as has happened here.

Anyway, most flight plans are probably filed by airlines and they file them directly into the system, sometimes (AIUI) using foreign units to inject it into the AFTN. Firms like Jepp provide this service. I don't really think a major airline is still faxing flight plans to Heathrow.

Is the FBU staffing (i.e. union opposition) the reason why it has taken so long to get this function online?

As for search and rescue, did you know that in the UK you are assumed to have arrived safely, by default? Your flight plan doesn't need to be closed. They start looking for you (and dig out the flight plan) only if somebody reports you missing.

[david viewing]

As for search and rescue, did you know that in the UK you are assumed to have arrived safely, by default? Your flight plan doesn't need to be closed. They start looking for you (and dig out the flight plan) only if somebody reports you missing.

Not everyone knows that. Especially not the chap I heard the other day on London Information anxious to close his plan in the air before landing. But the real situation is worse. The only reason, IMHO, for VFR FPLs in the UK is for border crossings. These plans are even required between Schengen countries.

Fortunately there are foreign sites (Olivia, Netherlands AIS) that accept UK arrival or destination and allow you to file online without having to understand addressing or give a licence number.

[IO540]

Fortunately there are foreign sites (Olivia, Netherlands AIS) that accept UK arrival or destination and allow you to file online without having to understand addressing or give a licence number.

It's a good question as to how much one should get hung up about this supposed limitation, but none of these sites offer (or guarantee) to accept flight plans wholly outside their own country.

I vaguely recall the Netherlands one actually says they don't. Olivia, I have never used.

It may well work in practice but I would not go off on a long trip abroad without being sure I can file a flight plan somehow, sitting in the hotel the night before.

Some pilots have more slack and they can mess around. I see them hanging around airports, getting weather, area notams maybe, filing flight plans by filling in the forms by hand.

I guess the online services (homebriefing.com being the only one currently running that I know of, but I believe there are others well higher up the price scale, Jepp included) are aimed at pilots who like to be all sorted by the time they leave for the airport and they just want to walk up to the plane and go. Historically this is what one paid a handling agent to do but nowadays it's possible to do it all oneself - in civilised parts of Europe anyway. And most GA airfields thankfully don't have handling agents (yet ;) )

[pelagic]

"I know lots of people still fax flight plans to say Heathrow and it's very nice of the people there to accept them and type them into the system, but they have never guaranteed to accept flight plans from anywhere to anywhere (outside the UK)."

IO540 - just to clarify, if you use homebriefing to file a VFR flightplan for, say, LFPG to LEMD, what addresses are used by homebriefing? (ie - who receives a copy of your FPL?)

[mm_flynn]

IO540 - just to clarify, if you use homebriefing to file a VFR flightplan for, say, LFPG to LEMD, what addresses are used by homebriefing? (ie - who receives a copy of your FPL?)

I don't know but used to assume that homebriefing addressed 'correctly' until I had a Y plan go wrong. My transition to VFR was supposed to be around Dover (I was struggling to get it accepted out of Venice and Ying at DVR made it work??) coming in from KONAN. I got my SMSed ACK and a small amendment - then flew a much more Southerly route until I was handed over to London by French ATC, due South of Gatwick, 40 miles still to run to the French coast (i.e. 150 miles and 90 degrees from where I flight planned to change to VFR)

Something went wrong somewhere because London's normally cheerful greeting was 'Who?... Where are you??... I don't have a strip...Is that you squawking 2601?... Damn that's nowhere near my airspace... standby let me find someone for you to talk to'

[IO540]

IO540 - just to clarify, if you use homebriefing to file a VFR flightplan for, say, LFPG to LEMD, what addresses are used by homebriefing? (ie - who receives a copy of your FPL?)

For IFR, they send the FP to the standard Eurocontrol address and it then gets distributed in seconds along the route.

For VFR, I have had conflicting replies from them.

On one occassion they told me that they send it to

- departure
- destination
- enroute FIRs (but only if I specified a waypoint in each such FIR)

and the ends addressing was modified according to the old ATC addressing manual e.g. if going to LEAX the FP would get sent to LEMG.

On another occassion they bluntly told me they address it to the departure ARO and let them do the addressing.

I think both approaches are correct - depending on where you decide your responsibility lies :)

VFR flight plans (over long distances) have always been problematic, because whoever does the addressing often gets it wrong. On one occassion, I filed four FPs (for a long VFR trip to Spain) and only the 1st one didn't get lost.

I've heard various amazing tales, e.g. the /DOF (date of flight) parameter is implemented by the filing office sticking it on a nail in the wall and checking the nail every morning for FPs that come up on that day and filing those. Homebriefing appear to implement /DOF (for VFR anyway) by keeping the FP in their database and injecting it into the AFTN on the appropriate day.

ISTM that Homebriefing's failures have been mostly due to errors in their computer version of the flight plan addressing manual.

It's a mess really.

However I have not filed a long international VFR FP (UK-Italy kind of thing) since 2005. The IFR ones don't seem to get lost.

[TotalBeginner]

The old system I refer to was by submitting the flight plan to a FBU where professional flight planners would correct mistakes, something that at least 40 per cent had, correctly address it, initiate overdue action, provide advice and as ATC professionals made a system where the average PPL who has relatively little flight planning training, work.

I haven't seen or used the new AFPEx, but I would doubt very much if it's a simple "mask", whereby you fill in the blanks and hit submit. I would guess that the fields must conform to standard FPL syntax or it will be rejected. Maybe FlyUK73 can comment on this?

As for filing a FPL at ETD -10, surely a web based system could quite easily prevent such a late FPL submission? With the old system, there's nothing to stop someone sending a fax, whenever they like!

[IO540]

There is no problem error checking the fields. One already has to do this in e.g. the CMFU validation form (http://www.cfmu.eurocontrol.be/j_cia_public/cia_public/pages/ifpuv-structured.jsf) which is used for validating IFR flight plans.

As regards filing a valid IFR route, the pilot has to work out the route correctly else it gets chucked out ('re-route accepted' option excepted) and that will not change with the new system. If they were offering automatic route generation, that would be the Holy Grail but I don't think that is coming (despite Eurocontrol promising public access to their in-house routing tool as far back as 2005).

In VFR, nobody looks at the filed route anyway, man or computer. It gets looked at only if you vanish. Currently, in the UK anyway, pilots file stuff like village names, and ICAO airfield designators as enroute waypoints (which are disallowed; not a lot of people know that). I reckon the format of the route field is free-format; you could stick a VOR in Mongolia in the middle and nobody would notice.

As regards filing time:

IFR flight plans can be filed seconds before departure. If you can get it into the system, it is distributed instantly and you are good to go. The 3hour official requirement is in practice nonsense. There are some quirks which encourage earlier filing e.g. slots are allocated during the 2hrs before EOBT and earlier filers get preference (or something vaguely like that, to prevent airlines playing last-minute tricks to get around slots). But in principle if you have AFTN access then you can file and start the engine, and the tower (IFR airfield!) should have your flight plan on the screen.

With VFR, there is a delay in distribution. I don't really understand this but the distribution isn't computerised like the IFR ones. It should go instantly to the addresses specified but if e.g. you are departing from an airfield which is not on the AFTN then they may receive a copy by fax which may take time. Basically you cannot depart until the tower has a copy, but after that you can just go and if the FP got lost you discover this only enroute - but nobody cares and you can always bluff your way along (in Europe). My impression of VFR flight plans has always been that nobody really gives a damn once you are airborne, because they get lost so often. And with the crap which pilots routinely put on VFR flight plans, units like Heathrow aren't going to type them in in a hurry.

[TotalBeginner]

I don't really think a major airline is still faxing flight plans to Heathrow.

I'd be interested to know how this actually works.

I always thought that airlines use repetitive flight plans for their scheduled services. Are these activated and/or modified by the transmission of MVT messages?

[IO540]

It is indeed interesting (up to a point) but there is a lot more to airline ops than just filing flight plans.

For example, lots of little airlines fly into Greek "military only" airfields which need X days PPR. Somebody has had to agree all this, and presumably keep it running.

I should think that sticking a Eurocontrol flight plan into the system is the simplest thing of what has to be done.

[david viewing]

IO540 said:

none of these sites offer (or guarantee) to accept flight plans wholly outside their own country

Quite, but that was not my point. Both sites mentioned (Dutch and French) accept a VFR plan from or to UK to airfields in those countries. Olivia (I haven't tried it with Netherlands) won't allow a domestic UK plan, but since UK internal VFR plans are a waste of time anyway then that doesn't matter.

Of course, UK VFR plans should be implimented properly by the 'authorities' (and open/closeable from the air) and we should all use them but that's another matter in the crude, expensive and amateurish UK environment.

So my point was that you already have adequate on-line filing resources for when you actually need it, ie flights to French or Dutch FIR. And for other countries: Ireland did try an online form but reverted to that very nice lady in Shannon who you can phone up. I believe you can file online at Belgian AIS. Spanish AIS I believe you can file online but can't find the page and Germany I'm not sure of and that's about it excepting IOM and CI as far as a PA-28 VFR is concerned!

Closing thought: if you are not sure if a particular state's online FPL works then why not file an outbound plan and see if it turns up in your own tower?

[dublinpilot]

I have heard a rumour that the services such as Heathrow may disappear in the future and we will all need to use online sites like this.

I can't see how that could happen.

A visiting pilot is not allowed to register on this new service, yet UK AIS is obliged to accept his outbound flight plan. (Outbound from the UK).

How else can they meet that obligation without the fax based service, unless they open up the internet based service?

dp

[dublinpilot]

ps. Olivia will not accept a flight plan unless either the departure or the destination is in France.

Netherlands AIS is about to restrict use of their internet service to Dutch resident pilots. (From June 08)

dp

[FlyUK73]

I haven't seen or used the new AFPEx, but I would doubt very much if it's a simple "mask", whereby you fill in the blanks and hit submit. I would guess that the fields must conform to standard FPL syntax or it will be rejected. Maybe FlyUK73 can comment on this?
Yes, the fields are checked for syntax and most are checked for content, most fields have tooltips and there is context sensitive help. There are lookup databases for type of aircraft, airfield identifier and addressing is assisted.

[IO540]

How else can they meet that obligation without the fax based service, unless they open up the internet based service?

A very good point. However, there is no ICAO requirement to provide a fax #. They can fulfil the obligation by making everybody go up into the tower at the airport of departure.

Olivia will not accept a flight plan unless either the departure or the destination is in France.
Netherlands AIS is about to restrict use of their internet service to Dutch resident pilots. (From June 08)

Oh well, there go those two then. No wonder Homebriefing is raking it in. They have just changed their pricing so that the E 37 / year covers unlimited FPs ending in Austria, and only 10 FPs wholly outside Austria. So it's effectively E 3.70 per flight plan. Still nothing on the scale of flying costs.

But the NATS service looks very interesting. I wonder if it will allow handy stuff like re-filing an old FP with changes - saves a lot of typing potentially. Or deleting an FP and resubmitting it later. The Q really is whether the AFTN access is accompanied by a database of recent flight plans and a means of editing them. HB have that.

[FlyUK73]

I wonder if it will allow handy stuff like re-filing an old FP with changes - saves a lot of typing potentially. Or deleting an FP and resubmitting it later.

Yes.

The Q really is whether the AFTN access is accompanied by a database of recent flight plans and a means of editing them. HB have that.

Flight plan templates can be saved and retrieved between users, but you are unable to view other peoples sent messages.

[pelagic]

"I have heard a rumour that the services such as Heathrow may disappear in the future and we will all need to use online sites like this."

I have also heard this, and I am concerned about the possible loss of a "human element" in NATS flight planning service. I have also commented on this on the other "idiots guide" thread.

Also, there appears to be a lot of editing/deletion going on over these two threads - even one of my own posts has disappeared! Whats the reason for that - is somebody's cage being rattled?

[IO540]

I am concerned about the possible loss of a "human element" in NATS flight planning service

Firstly, I was not aware that NATS even offered a "flight planning service". Where is this service??

Secondly, one needs to ask what function does the human element serve, if the website actually works AND (IFR context) there are adequate tools available for developing a CFMU-aceptable route.

I have filed many VFR and IFR flight plans via homebriefing.com since around 2005 and have had to phone them on just one occassion, which was when a route was being rejected by the CFMU validation website, all my attempts to fix it failed, so I tried to file it with 'reroute accepted' (which I never do otherwise, because I like to have the filed route early so I can load it into the GPS etc), and Eurocontrol refused to do the reroute as well. On that occassion, HB were unable to help because they delegate the route mods to Eurocontrol anyway and provide no route development assistance.

Only the Eurocontrol desk itself could have (in theory) helped and this desk does in fact have a public phone #; I didn't have this at the time...

For VFR flight plans, I cannot see what human assistance is required once the pilot knows how to fill the form in. Nobody looks at the flight plan anyway, in modern Europe. The only time I have ever had any comeback on a VFR flight plan was trying to fly past Montenegro or something like that - they insisted on a specific route.


Personally I would much rather have a good online tool than somebody I can phone or fax. Current support for private pilots is pretty poor.

[pelagic]

IO

have you ever had recourse to file flight plans via the Heathrow FBU?

[IO540]

have you ever had recourse to file flight plans via the Heathrow FBU?

No, never had a need. VFR flight plans I used to file locally (like most people) at the departure tower, and by the time I got the IR I was already using Homebriefing.

[autothrottle]

.....and those departure units sent the plan to heathrow FBU for filing. Even aerodromes on AFTN would just forward them to Heathrow for filing, the only exceptions were EGLF,EGFF, EGGD,EGHH AND EGHI. However when these units removed the ATSA role and FBU , leaving only VCR/APC ATSA staff they would fax or AFTN these plans. 3,500 plans a month in the summer.

[Cobalt]

A "personal" service can be handy. I once was stuck on the motorway going to Biggin (delay of over an hour). Due to this delay my original destination would have been closed, and filing a new flight plan from scratch on arrival at Biggin was out of the question - I had just enough time not to rush the checks and departed 5 minutes before Biggin closed.

So I called Homebriefing from my car (hands-free of course) and said, in effect, "Help! <callsign> EOBT xxxx, need to re-file, please change destination to EHBK; same route until it hits a SID for EHBK, can't do anything myself as I am in a traffic jam". 5 Minutes later I had the ACK.

Full marks for that!

With a proper on-line service I would never touch a fax, but for that 1-in-a 100 problem case human backup is required.

[FlyUK73]

The NATS AFPEx helpdesk is manned by system specialist ATSAs 24/7. ;)

[IO540]

I agree with Cobalt - it's handy on occassions (and I now recall having phoned Homebriefing once or twice to cancel or delay a FP when I was stuck somewhere. But it sounds like there will be somebody there on the new system.


and those departure units sent the plan to heathrow FBU for filing

I am astonished.

So, let's say I am departing from some ATC airfield which has a flight plan filing terminal (actually a PC, hacked to run a fixed application displaying the FP form).

I type the FP into that terminal. It gets sent upstairs to the tower.

The tower looks at it.

The tower then faxes it to Heathrow???

Some poor b*gger at Heathrow has to read the fax and re-enter the whole lot into another terminal?

Is this really what has been happening all these years?

Why didn't Heathrow have a web gateway (like Homebriefing) where people (or airports) can enter the flight plans directly, avoiding the fax step?

[autothrottle]

IO540, come on.

Places like Headcorn, Lydd, Biggin Hill to name but a few didn't have any of this. Pilot fills in FPL, by pen and hands it over. Air Ground operator( Not always AFISO or ATCO) SENDS IT ON.

[pelagic]

"The NATS AFPEx helpdesk is manned by system specialist ATSAs 24/7."

FlyUK - I appreciate that you're one of the 'team' involved in this project, and so you are bound to big-up the capabilities, benefits etc of signing up for it, but, for the benefit of myself and all our fellow interested readers here on pprune, just to clarify - 'specialists' in what exactly? Your new AFPEx system, or actual hands-on advice, knowledge and skills in flight planning, addressing, etc etc.? Have your 'specialists' the same level of training, knowledge and experience in these matters as the staff in the Heathrow FBU, for example? And can the Heathrow FBU staff interrogate the AFPEx system in order to assist me if I cannot get the answers or advice I need from one of your 'specialists'?

I need to know that when I have a problem, I'm going to be able to talk to, or ask somebody for help and advice - and not just receive a referral to yet another website in order to sort it out for myself. The lack of clear and concise answers from you, or anybody else allied to this project, gives me cause to doubt the claims of how good its going to be.

At the moment, the service that Heathrow FBU provides can cover most, if not all, flight planning requirements. If this human-interactive element is lost by using AFPEx, and most importantly,if NATS is expecting AFPEx to completely replace Heathrow FBU and all other NATS ATSUs, and is promoting it as such, then I do not see this as a positive step at all.

[IO540]

Places like Headcorn, Lydd, Biggin Hill to name but a few didn't have any of this. Pilot fills in FPL, by pen and hands it over. Air Ground operator( Not always AFISO or ATCO) SENDS IT ON.I recall that Shoreham had a terminal - where did that go to?

As regards support, did Heathrow ever offer to develop a CFMU acceptable IFR routing? THAT is the real missing bit in flight planning. Everything else, the pilot should know how to do.

FLYUK73 - well done for answering questions on here. That is a major move forward.

[FlyUK73]

FlyUK - I appreciate that you're one of the 'team' involved in this project, and so you are bound to big-up the capabilities, benefits etc of signing up for it, but, for the benefit of myself and all our fellow interested readers here on pprune, just to clarify - 'specialists' in what exactly? Your new AFPEx system, or actual hands-on advice, knowledge and skills in flight planning, addressing, etc etc.? Have your 'specialists' the same level of training, knowledge and experience in these matters as the staff in the Heathrow FBU, for example? And can the Heathrow FBU staff interrogate the AFPEx system in order to assist me if I cannot get the answers or advice I need from one of your 'specialists'?


Whilst I'm not going to be drawn into a discussion about my neutrality, I will say I have worked in flight planning for over 15 years and personally would not have a problem using the system. Our specialist ATSAs will be able to answer your queries about the system, where to find information on the system about routing and addressing and any other APFEx related queries. As for the FBU, I can't comment never having worked there. Addressing is not the great obstacle you might think though, it's a concept many have got their head around in surprisingly little time.

I need to know that when I have a problem, I'm going to be able to talk to, or ask somebody for help and advice - and not just receive a referral to yet another website in order to sort it out for myself. The lack of clear and concise answers from you, or anybody else allied to this project, gives me cause to doubt the claims of how good its going to be.

My answers are concise because I don't beleive in fluffy words that say nothing. As I say, there will always be someone to answer your call, even on Christmas day.

At the moment, the service that Heathrow FBU provides can cover most, if not all, flight planning requirements. If this human-interactive element is lost by using AFPEx, and most importantly,if NATS is expecting AFPEx to completely replace Heathrow FBU and all other NATS ATSUs, and is promoting it as such, then I do not see this as a positive step at all.

I can't comment on this, I don't work in or for the FBU.

[FlyUK73]

FLYUK73 - well done for answering questions on here. That is a major move forward.
Although I am not officially sanctioned by NATS to discuss AFPEx, having rumour and 3rd party information banging around is not within the interest of those running the project. So here I am. :)

[TotalBeginner]

Pelagic, you seem to be condemning the system without having even tried it! Why not wait until it goes live and reserve judgement.

In the meantime, have a look HERE (https://ts1.flightplanningonline.co.uk/Help.html) and click on the "getting started guide". Maybe it will help to put your mind at rest.

[IO540]

I've got a feeling there are one or two NATS union reps posting here.

Everybody else would welcome progress.

The whole "private IFR" game in Europe is really crap at present. We have to scrape around various websites (nearly all unofficial ones; not that that matters; the UK Met Office has absolutely zero monopoly on accuracy) to get weather, we have to make do with a half cripped weather radar feed (because the Met Offices treat the data as a valuable commercial product (never mind that it was produced with taxpayer money), we don't get any means of generating Eurocontrol airways routings (other than one hobbyist website which happens to work most of the time) even though Eurocontrol have an in-house tool for doing it, we get mandatory Mode S without anybody providing US-style traffic info on the backchannel, and we are living under a constant threat of being banned from this and banned from that. So an online flight plan filing website is very welcome.

They just need to add an airways autoroute feature ;) Then, quite a lot of people would PAY for the site.

[FlyUK73]

I'd like to point out I am not a union rep, I'll be keeping this thread to the facts. :D

[autothrottle]

IO540,

NOT a union rep, and I welcome progress. However I did 15 years working in Flow management, Flight plan Reception and FBU. My post merely reflected that when the FBU'S close , the average PPL flying on a sunday will HAVE to file his plan on the internet. Having flown Citations, PA34, PA46 AND PA44 aircraft IFR and filed from a hotel room on the phone I can vouch from BOTH sides how usefull it is just to pick up the phone. IFPS reroute accepted would enable refiles to be done without having to contact me , and if I didn't like it I Phoned CFMU/IFPS. Simple.

The internet is a step forward but I still firmly believe that the loss of the NATS FBU's will be tragic.

[IO540]

Autothrottle

Fair enough. But can you explain (I really don't understand this) how PPLs file flight plans at present? What route does the FP take?

I am sure that very few "PPLs" fax to Heathrow. The average PPL today doesn't have easy access to a fax.

The vast majority of UK PPLs never file a flight plan because they don't fly abroad.

I think most of the remainder file flight plans via their tower. What do you say will happen to that facility? If the tower used to fax it to Heathrow and cannot anymore, presumably the staff there will have signed up to the new NATS facility as a corporate member, and will carry on as before.

Those who have the initiative to fax to Heathrow (or have to because they are flying abroad from a non-towered field) can certainly use a website. For most people, faxing is a PITA because they have to find a physical fax machine. To a small group, myself included, it's all a piece of cake because there is GSM fax (from a laptop) and email2fax gateways.

Unfortunately, few UK VFR-only PPLs do great long European trips - it's possible (I've done lots of them, all the way down the Greece) but it's a messy process under VFR. And if Heathrow accepts a flight plan from say Germany to Belgium, that is very nice of them but I think few pilots would be expecting it to work.

Most UK PPLs pop over to France (LTQ etc) and for that you don't need much flight planning help. In fact if the FP gets lost, nobody cares because a) nobody cares much about VFR traffic anyway and b) LTQ is too busy to care; they just let you land and they are happy.

The private IFR group is different. These people are the ones who potentially need assistance, but they have already climbed the massive ladder to getting an IR and logging onto a website is no big deal. What they need is perhaps CFMU-acceptable routing assistance (CFMU) because that is the real gotcha these days, but I don't think any AIS unit offers that. The 'reroute accepted' remark is processed by Eurocontrol, not by the unit filing the FP. And occassionally Eurocontrol wash their hands of amending the route... in that case one has to phone up the Eurocontrol desk on one of the two public numbers.

But I have written all this before... I just don't get the problem. And NATS will have somebody on this site who can be phoned and do basic FP manipulation. I doubt they will be developing IFR routings either - the tools for that are in Brussels.

[25check]

"Most UK PPLs pop over to France (LTQ etc) and for that you don't need much flight planning help. In fact if the FP gets lost, nobody cares because a) nobody cares much about VFR traffic anyway and b) LTQ is too busy to care; they just let you land and they are happy."

:ugh:
That statement just shows a total ignorance of the system - I just hope you never ditch mid channel if you believe your statements......

[autothrottle]

Like I said 3500 flight plans handled by Heathrow FBU alone each month from april to september. I don't work in an FBU anymore, but I know for a fact that there are still large numbers filing over the phone, faxing from home or departure aerodrome or recieving via AFTN from those airfields equiped with AFTN.

Look , I don't disagree that this is a step in the right direction and in some ways it is well overdue, but we need to remember one thing here. SAFETY. I disagree hugely with your satements about VFR flight plans. Of the 3500 plans handled each month at least half are PPL VFR flight plans. These are kept for 6 months and I can remember on more than one occasion when BREST, PARIS, AMSTERDAM, BRUSSELS, SHANNON etc have all requested supplementory Information as Alerting Action had started. Routes on VFR plans ARE important, ANYONE READING THIS WHO FILES VFR-GIVE A GOOD NUMBER OF WAYPOINTS. If , and I remember having to do this , we have to give SAR authorities waypoints, at least it is on the FPL. FBU staff will trace the route and contact ALL aerodromes near the route to try and trace the aircraft in question. More often than not...they have diverted to an airfield for a variety of reasons, and have forgotten to tell anyone. But at least we can advise the relevant authorities.

I agree with the subject of Private or small carrier IFR flight planning facilities...I should know.

MOST IMPORTANTLY-VFR FPL's
These PLANS ARE LOOKED AT( By security Services too). This is SAFETY.
They ARE NOT thrown away. Or DISCARDED .

[bookworm]

Our specialist ATSAs will be able to answer your queries about the system, where to find information on the system about routing and addressing and any other APFEx related queries.

From the little I've seen of it, the AFPEx system is a technical implementation of any ATS messages that used to be carried over AFTN. The layer that seems to be missing in terms of info (and that may just be bcause it's early days) is who sends what messages when.

I'm reasonably literate when it comes to this sort of stuff, and I can get my head round an FPL, DLA and CHG and even the ATFM set (SMM, REA, SPA, SRJ, FCM, RJT, SWM, RFI) because they're documented by CFMU. But I'm not sure I'd know if and when I should send a DEP, ARR, CPL, EST, CDN, RCF, SPL ... Is that something I'm going to need to understand if I use AFPEx?

[pelagic]

"Pelagic, you seem to be condemning the system without having even tried it! Why not wait until it goes live and reserve judgement."

TB

I have looked at whats on the AFPEx webpage. I am concerned that a fully automated system (or one manned by non-experienced staff) may just let me down when I need it most.

I would prefer to see AFPEx as an addition to the services which NATS offers (via the FBUs), rather than a moneysaving replacement, which I think is the real reason for its creation.

IO540

"Firstly, I was not aware that NATS even offered a "flight planning service". Where is this service??"

"Secondly, one needs to ask what function does the human element serve,..."

"In VFR, nobody looks at the filed route anyway, man or computer"

"And with the crap which pilots routinely put on VFR flight plans, units like Heathrow aren't going to type them in in a hurry."

"What old system? Can you elaborate on the exact job loss problem?"

"I know lots of people still fax flight plans to say Heathrow and it's very nice of the people there to accept them and type them into the system, but they have never guaranteed to accept flight plans from anywhere to anywhere (outside the UK)."

"Is the FBU staffing (i.e. union opposition) the reason why it has taken so long to get this function online?"


Having read over all your comments in the two threads, I would second what 25check has just written, and I would also add that for someone who has "never had a need to use them", you are very quick to judge/dismiss the efforts and services - yes, services - which the Heathrow FBU supplies.

Despite what you have to say about your knowledge of flight planning issues in general, it would appear that what you know about NATS and the Heathrow FBU could be written on the back of a stamp with a whitewash brush. :hmm:

forgot to say - I'm not a union rep either.

[IO540]

I don't doubt that if one is going to file a VFR flight plan then one should put one's intended route on it correctly, just in case one has an accident.

What this has to do with preserving the workload at the Heathrow fax filing facility, I still haven't worked out :ugh:

what you know about NATS and the Heathrow FBU could be written on the back of a stamp with a whitewash brush

I agree. A pilot does not need to know the internals of the system.

[pelagic]

"I don't doubt that if one is going to file a VFR flight plan then one should put one's intended route on it correctly, just in case one has an accident.

What this has to do with preserving the workload at the Heathrow fax filing facility, I still haven't worked out"

Its not just about putting an accurate and correct route on your FPL - its about all the associated messaging tasks, plus addressing, which have to be undertaken by the user rather than the service provider.

You can fax a plan to Heathrow, and they'll check and address it for you, forward it via AFTN or fax, or even phone somebody directly if there's a need to - all for free. They will also handle all your associated messaging tasks, refiles, cancellations, div arrivals etc on receipt of a call. Plus, if we mere mortals, (who do not possess the vast aviation knowledge and experience of somebody like yourself), want to ask a question, we can pick up the phone and speak directly to somebody who will try to provide an answer for us - not just refer us to the AFPEx user guide webpage, and then leave us to it.

Not everybody wants to be a website user - some of us actually prefer the existing method. At least we know it works.

FlyUK73 - is AFPEx designed to work alongside the current existing service (the FBUs) ?

[FlyUK73]

FlyUK73 - is AFPEx designed to work alongside the current existing service (the FBUs) ?

That's a question I don't know the answer to I'm afraid. :(

[pelagic]

maybe I should rephrase it - will we still be able to choose between AFPEx and the FBUs?

[FlyUK73]

maybe I should rephrase it - will we still be able to choose between AFPEx and the FBUs?
Same question, same answer. I really don't know. Maybe you should ring the FBU and ask, they are there 24/7 aren't they? :)

[autothrottle]

IO540 SAYS

"I agree. A pilot does not need to know the internals of the system"


OH DEAR.

Sir I notice that previously you asked what the 700 hour route to CPL/IR was.
It seems you may be new to all this and if the JAA way of doing things leads to this ARROGANT blinkered attitude then it is indeed a sorry state of affairs.

This is a question of AIRMANSHIP. An understanding of the workings of ATC helps peripheral understanding.

IO540 PM me and I will arrange a visit to Heathrow for you, so we can help you....its up to you.

[IO540]

I have a CPL/IR, thank you, and while a visit to Heathrow would no doubt be interesting, I won't be going for your somewhat tongue in cheek invitation :)

I barely recall asking the 700hr question; it was probably when researching the history of the CAA IR options in years gone by. Not sure what the relevance is to this.

[pelagic]

"Maybe you should ring the FBU and ask, they are there 24/7 aren't they?"

Another concise reply.

I have already done what you suggested, and spoke to somebody I know who works for NATS, primarily because I want to know whether my concerns about the new system are valid or groundless. I asked the same questions as I have asked on here, including some technical questions. The information I received would indicate that, as a member of the AFPEx team, you are either being kept in the dark, or far more likely, you do not want to discuss on here what is really going on. I also expect that, for the same reasons, anybody from NATS FBUs will not want to discuss this on here either - company politics, and all that.

With regard to having a new and useful tool being made available to the GA community, the introduction of AFPEx will be very welcome. However, with regard to how the new system will interact with the existing arrangements :rolleyes: , I can now see why you are reluctant to respond to my enquiry.

Maybe you should consider a career as a politician?

[FlyUK73]

Can I count on your vote? ;)

[pelagic]

"Can I count on your vote?"

Erm, I don't think so - but your 'spin team' are obviously doing a great job on the GA community behind the scenes!

Just to go back one step -

""Maybe you should ring the FBU and ask, they are there 24/7 aren't they?"

Actually, assuming that the staff there are prepared to discuss it, this might be a very good idea for anybody who wants to know about NATS' visions for their flight planning service in the future. Thank you for that, FlyUK. :ok:

[FlyUK73]

Spin team?

OK, I'll stick to answering questions about AFPEx and ignore the comments aimed entirely at luring me out into a discussion I'm not taking part in. As I said before, I don't work for the FBU, I have no involvement in the FBU, have no idea about the future for the FBU and will not discuss what I don't know about.

If you get an answer from the FBU, feel free to enlighten me too. :)

[derekf]

FlyUK73 - thanks for providing input on this. I'm currently a user of homebriefing and also Jersey flight planning as flying from Jersey we always need to file a flight plan. Have also used Heathrow on occaision, including when stuck in a traffic jam - very helpful they were too (as have been the phone support from homebriefing and Jersey).

Looking at the FAQ on the new AFPEx web page I see the following:

Can I access my AFPEx account abroad?

Certain users will be set up for roaming access. This will allow them to access their mailbox from any PC worldwide with internet connection that fits the Java and Browser requirements. This includes internet cafes, libraries and hotels.

Does this mean we will need to request access if we want to access from a non-UK ISP (if we're in a Hotel in France for instance)?

[pelagic]

derekf

just bear in mind that if you sign up for AFPEx, and cannot access it either from home or abroad, for any reason, you will not be able to ask the Heathrow FBU to help - I am informed that they are currently denied access to any flightplans or associated information which you enter into AFPEx. Something which FlyUK has failed to mention. :hmm:

Same as he/she has failed to mention that it is the intention of AFPEx to entirely supercede the NATS FBUs, thus giving UK non-internet users/airfields/farm strips a problem when it comes to flight planning and messaging. Something else FlyUK has failed to mention. :hmm::hmm:

As to the comment "..have no idea about the future for the FBU ..", if this is the case (and I seriously doubt it is) then FlyUK is obviously not the mechanic in the project team, but the oil rag.

[FlyUK73]

Sigh.

derekf, that statement basically means the application will handle your login differently if you are a roaming user. Clearing cache on logout and implementing a more secure login method. This will ensure that your account isn't compromised on an insecure PC.

[derekf]

pelagic - you seem decidedly negative with your views on something that's been announced that a lot of people have been asking for for some time.

If I can't access AFPEx then I will contact the AFPEx helpdesk in the same way as if I can't contact homebriefing website I contact their helpdesk - why would I want to contact Heathrow if I was using AFPEx?

I've not seen anything else about AFPEx replacing FBUs, do you know where this has been announced, or shall we wait to see how it works? I see this as where somebody currently goes to a tower and has the flight plan faxed to Heathrow, this could now be done using AFPEx instead of the fax.

[derekf]

Sigh.

derekf, that statement basically means the application will handle your login differently if you are a roaming user. Clearing cache on logout and implementing a more secure login method. This will ensure that your account isn't compromised on an insecure PC.

I hope the sigh was aimed at somebody else :) I was just interested in a clarification of the remote access section as I do access remotely a lot and am very very 'pro' this and can't wait to get my hands on it :ok:

[FlyUK73]

Any question is a valid one derekf :).

There is nothing stopping a pilot fitting the eligibility requirements for an account using an AFPEx login anywhere in the world, for any flight originating in any country and headed to any other country.

[SwanFIS]

pelagic - "I am informed that they are currently denied access to any flightplans or associated information which you enter into AFPEx. Something which FlyUK has failed to mention."

I understand this system is purely a portal so that pilots can file flight plans and have them transmitted on the AFTN. Once these plans are on the AFTN any ATC unit with an AFTERM can access them and send related ATC messages e.g. DIV ARR, CNL, DEP etc.

I am only too aware of the strong feelings held in the tower concerning the loss of jobs, and the union involvement with it, but inaccurate statements and full scale attack on Fly solves nothing.

Swan OUT

[pelagic]

"pelagic - you seem decidedly negative with your views on something that's been announced that a lot of people have been asking for for some time."

you're dead right I am. I cannot see this project as a way forward for anybody other than an internet user - and this is not always available, nor is it to everybody's liking or choosing. The key element here is whether or not AFPEx is going to replace the current system entirely.

Customer choice would be preferential - both systems available together. You want to use the internet? Fine - I want to use the fax machine and/or speak to somebody directly on the phone. This system has worked perfectly well up to now, so why get rid of it?

I accept that it may not be as rapid, but I guarantee that my choice will prove to be more reliable than yours in the long run.

[pelagic]

SwanFIS

"but inaccurate statements.."

what statements are these, then?

" I am only too aware of the strong feelings held in the tower concerning the loss of jobs, and the union involvement with it,"

I don't remember mentioning any "loss of jobs", just "loss of human element", so it appears you are party to information which supports what I've been told. Why would there be a loss of jobs at the tower (you are referring to heathrow, I presume) if it wasn't planned for their tasks and functions to be removed, replaced or automated?

FlyUK

If the functions of the staff at Heathrow FBU are to be automated/replaced/removed, then are the experienced staff at the FBU being relocated to AFPEx (as your specialists)?

[autothrottle]

Not tongue in cheek. A friendly invite to ATC at Heathrow for a fellow ppruner. Come on , we don't bite and you might find it interesting and helpfull. This is a genuine offer.

[Sam Rutherford]

I'd be more than happy to come along to LHR for a look-see.

How open is your invite??!! :)

Sam.

[autothrottle]

Sam , PM me.