Routing Instructions by ATC

[fat'n'grey]

As we all know there are occasions where an operators filed flight plan and anticipated routing is different to that held/expected by ATC.

Experience has taught ATC to confirm a flight's routing. This may take the form of "Bigjet 123 route Alpha, Echo, Oscar, Delta, Maintain FL340..; or "Littlejet 456 route UL423, T421, UL987, maintain FL370"

From a pilots perspective, are waypoints or the route name best/easiest (or are both equal) to confirm your planned route is the same as ATC expects?

Thanks in advance for your replies....

[Check Airman]

Route name

[172_driver]

As we all know there are occasions where an operators filed flight plan and anticipated routing is different to that held/expected by ATC.

How that could be?

I have seen discrepancies between the Operational Flight Plan (OFP), what our fuel load is based on, and the ATS flight plan submitted. Perhaps that's what you meant?

It's doesn't ring well if what we file with Air Traffic Services is not what you expect us to fly?

From a pilots perspective, are waypoints or the route name best/easiest (or are both equal) to confirm your planned route is the same as ATC expects?

Depends. If only a waypoint or two then say the waypoint names. I take it though you might have a country/continent wide re-routing for me. Then the route names.

[fat'n'grey]

Thanks for the replies. There are, in many locations, preferred routes. Dependent on how sophisticated the IFPS and/or ATM system is it will flag/reject incorrect routes. ATC holds stored flight plans for scheduled flights, but on the day your company files a slightly different route and the system does not pick it up. Best practice requires ATC to confirm the route step by step. I am used to giving waypoints for my sectors and the first waypoint inside the next sector - and so on through the other sectors within the FIR. As a pilot you can look at your FMS and nav display and instantly confirm that we have the same waypoints/route, or not! But if I say UL423 - how do you instantly check and confirm that UL423 equates to waypoints Alpha, Echo, Oscar etc?

[Check Airman]

But if I say UL423 - how do you instantly check and confirm that UL423 equates to waypoints Alpha, Echo, Oscar etc?

As part of our preflight checks, we verify the nav database accuracy, so it should match. Furthermore, with the introduction of electronic charts, if it's already plotted on the chart, the route will be highlighted.

That being said, you're in charge of the frequency. If you need us to verify fix by fix, we'll have no problem with that. Thanks for taking the time to ask though!

[Uplinker]

Our PLOGs and what is in our FMGS should give the airway name and all the waypoints on that part of the airway that we are using, so we can verify what you are asking by reference to one of those. They should be both the same because we will have loaded the flightplan into the FMGS and checked it waypoint by waypoint with our PLOG.

Sometimes though, I have noticed some waypoint/s are missing along the route, even though the database is in date; the correct airway is showing, and other waypoints along the airway are correct, so always happy to check.

If you wanted to check the next few waypoints on one airway, then name those. If you are confirming a much longer segment of our routing made up from several airways, then probably better to use airway names.

[fat'n'grey]

Many thanks for the replies, all clear now!

[LMX]

Nearly every first call on a new frequency in France:

XYZ12AB: "Bordeaux, XYZ12AB FL360 direct BOKNO"
ATC: "XYZAB maintain FL360 direct BOKNO"
XYZ12AB:

Note the callsign abbreviation just to add some possible confusion.

Not to mention "as cleared"... :rolleyes:

[flyboyike]

How that could be?



Oh, you'll be surprised...