A/C type FPLs
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A/C type FPLs
Just a query for you ...
We use RPLs for our flights. A/C types are either B733s or B737s. These are RPLd according to the 'standard' line of flying set up by commercial etc.
However, we often obviously need to change the type allocated to each flight for various reasons, ie tech or operational.
SOP for us at the moment is to cancel and refile the FPL with the correct type. With the amount of sectors we fly, this can be quite time consuming. Also, we stand to lose an allocated slot if it's a change within STD-2hrs.
My question is this : will a simple FPL change message suffice - negating the need to cancel and refile, bearing in mind that the performance characteristics of a 733 and 737 are very different in flight profiles ? How much of an impact could this have on ATC seeing that an RPL may indicate FL310 for example, whearas the a/c may well request FL410 etc, and have a higher cruise speed than indicated ?
Thanks in advance.
We use RPLs for our flights. A/C types are either B733s or B737s. These are RPLd according to the 'standard' line of flying set up by commercial etc.
However, we often obviously need to change the type allocated to each flight for various reasons, ie tech or operational.
SOP for us at the moment is to cancel and refile the FPL with the correct type. With the amount of sectors we fly, this can be quite time consuming. Also, we stand to lose an allocated slot if it's a change within STD-2hrs.
My question is this : will a simple FPL change message suffice - negating the need to cancel and refile, bearing in mind that the performance characteristics of a 733 and 737 are very different in flight profiles ? How much of an impact could this have on ATC seeing that an RPL may indicate FL310 for example, whearas the a/c may well request FL410 etc, and have a higher cruise speed than indicated ?
Thanks in advance.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Near Stalyvegas
Age: 78
Posts: 2,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ghost,
A "CHG" {change message] is far FAR
FAR better than a Cancel and refile!
On a change, all we do is input the said change [A/C type, Flight Level or even route] into the Host Comp. and it "adapts" your type, for speed, and I think climb rate.
On a refile, as you say, the plan is removed from both Brussels AND our ATC compy, ergo, instant delay
file a CHG not a DLA[delay]
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy
A "CHG" {change message] is far FAR
FAR better than a Cancel and refile!
On a change, all we do is input the said change [A/C type, Flight Level or even route] into the Host Comp. and it "adapts" your type, for speed, and I think climb rate.
On a refile, as you say, the plan is removed from both Brussels AND our ATC compy, ergo, instant delay
file a CHG not a DLA[delay]
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Chiglet.
Just to clarify then ( excuse my ignorance ) : if I send a CHG for type, are you saying the host comp will automatically update the flight profile ? ( so we don't need to include the amended level or speed ? )
[ 28 July 2001: Message edited by: ghost-rider ]
Just to clarify then ( excuse my ignorance ) : if I send a CHG for type, are you saying the host comp will automatically update the flight profile ? ( so we don't need to include the amended level or speed ? )
[ 28 July 2001: Message edited by: ghost-rider ]
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ghost.
To answer the other part, its really important that the change is put in, especially in this case due to the different performances involved. As the 700 can climb and cruise with a greater ground speed, the FIR exit levels can be altered. ie, the 700 can be put across 10 miles in trail infront of a 757/767 easily, where as a 300 will be held down lower due to the catch-up. The alternate is that a 300 will be given the same as other 737/MD80, but if its behind and actually a 700, paperwork can result after a nasty has occurred. Also, filing the correct cruising level is nessessary so we know and don't have to waste time finding out, or saying 'no' as its too late and another has already been cleared there. A new directive has just come out concerning cruise levels for a/c going south from the UK, that they must NOT be climbed above the filed level due to overloads occurring within the French FIR. So if you file FL330 for the 700, it shouldn't get any higher.
To answer the other part, its really important that the change is put in, especially in this case due to the different performances involved. As the 700 can climb and cruise with a greater ground speed, the FIR exit levels can be altered. ie, the 700 can be put across 10 miles in trail infront of a 757/767 easily, where as a 300 will be held down lower due to the catch-up. The alternate is that a 300 will be given the same as other 737/MD80, but if its behind and actually a 700, paperwork can result after a nasty has occurred. Also, filing the correct cruising level is nessessary so we know and don't have to waste time finding out, or saying 'no' as its too late and another has already been cleared there. A new directive has just come out concerning cruise levels for a/c going south from the UK, that they must NOT be climbed above the filed level due to overloads occurring within the French FIR. So if you file FL330 for the 700, it shouldn't get any higher.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
5milesbaby,
That makes sense completely.
I think the reason we were cancelling and refiling was for that very purpose, as by the time we had run the CFP ( computer generated flightplan ) to ascertain levels and speed, it was just as easy to file it direct from there as to type out a seperate CHG message. It also alleviates the margin for error with the CHG.
One related question : if we send a CHG for type / level and speed only ( ie not a route change ) and a slot has already been issued - will we be classed a 'late updaters' ( ie 'LU' in RCA ) and penalised accordingly ?
That makes sense completely.
I think the reason we were cancelling and refiling was for that very purpose, as by the time we had run the CFP ( computer generated flightplan ) to ascertain levels and speed, it was just as easy to file it direct from there as to type out a seperate CHG message. It also alleviates the margin for error with the CHG.
One related question : if we send a CHG for type / level and speed only ( ie not a route change ) and a slot has already been issued - will we be classed a 'late updaters' ( ie 'LU' in RCA ) and penalised accordingly ?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know nothing of the Jargon for changes and updates, but someone here from Flow or Flightplans would know. What I can say is that changing (CHG) the level would certainly issue a new slot (or cancel old one) as the levels can obviously take you into being flowed by another sector, or even centre. More and more companies are now playing around with their flightplans to find a different route or level which will give them an earlier slot. Still, can't get over the day we had a DLH Man-Munich via Veule at the same time as Bristol-Nice via KOK, surely someone could have intervened a bit (both after same cruise levels too!!!)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We're forever changing routes and levels to try and get around restrictions ( at least when we stand a chance and there aren't too many UK regs for example 
)
It was just the type thing that confused me.
Thanks again
[ 29 July 2001: Message edited by: ghost-rider ]
)It was just the type thing that confused me.
Thanks again
[ 29 July 2001: Message edited by: ghost-rider ]
It might help to see the following extract from the IFPS manual (v6):
"Certain key fields within a flight plan cannot be modified by a CHG message within IFPS as they are used for message association.
These non-changeable fields are :
−−−−Aircraft Identification (ARCID).
−−−−Aerodrome of Departure (ADEP).
−−−−Aerodrome of Destination (ADES).
−−−−Estimated Off-Block Date (EOBD).
To change one of the above fields it will be necessary to cancel the original flight plan and to refile a flight plan containing the corrected data."
You can change anything else with a CHG.
"Certain key fields within a flight plan cannot be modified by a CHG message within IFPS as they are used for message association.
These non-changeable fields are :
−−−−Aircraft Identification (ARCID).
−−−−Aerodrome of Departure (ADEP).
−−−−Aerodrome of Destination (ADES).
−−−−Estimated Off-Block Date (EOBD).
To change one of the above fields it will be necessary to cancel the original flight plan and to refile a flight plan containing the corrected data."
You can change anything else with a CHG.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As has been said filing a CHG for the different aircraft type will enable ATC to allow for your different cruise speed & climb performance. But you must also include in the CHG message the new cruise speed & requested flight level.
The computer isn't clever enough to work that out for itself as obviously even with the different aircraft type there are many other factors affecting your requested level.
The computer isn't clever enough to work that out for itself as obviously even with the different aircraft type there are many other factors affecting your requested level.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Near Stalyvegas
Age: 78
Posts: 2,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as I know,[famous last words] the Host Computor adapts each a/c type for speed. I also understood that it adapted climb performance as well. Yes, the final [requested] Flight Level must be input.
At EGCC we have directive as to who files how high to where.
eg, EGBB/CC/NM/GP etc to EGAA, FL240. into EIDW, FL220 [I may have got those the wrong way round
]
Soutbound, HON FL as requested, except if cruise level [if higher] can be made 50 DME/MID. Then we have the EBBR inbounds...
EGCC, FL290/HON then FL330 for cruise, then FL230/BIG FL190/VABIK for EBBR!
I know that it's as clear as mud, but I'm doing my best
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy
At EGCC we have directive as to who files how high to where.
eg, EGBB/CC/NM/GP etc to EGAA, FL240. into EIDW, FL220 [I may have got those the wrong way round
]Soutbound, HON FL as requested, except if cruise level [if higher] can be made 50 DME/MID. Then we have the EBBR inbounds...
EGCC, FL290/HON then FL330 for cruise, then FL230/BIG FL190/VABIK for EBBR!
I know that it's as clear as mud, but I'm doing my best
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: London
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be (slightly) pedantic...HCS (host) CAN adapt speeds, but filed speed should be input where possible. Climb rates ARE adapted for all "known" a/c types.
Requested cruise levels have to be input manually...
Requested cruise levels have to be input manually...
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just having had a look through the previous I woud suggest that because there are so mny sectors/centres split vertically as 5milesbaby points out - any type change that results in a requested level change should be considered effectively a reroute. There is a big difference in the sectors you could fly through between 330 and 410 and each of those sectors would have different flow rates. If you do a CHG message at a late stage the you could be flying through sectors for which you have not been flowed - and those sectors don't necessarily have that information and will endeavour to give a service; too much of that can result in an overload. So I'm afraid I would say a type change that includes level changes should be a refile. Probably means a delay - but not necessarily. Companies are always filing different levels to avoid restrictions. I know it doesn't say that in the book, but the book doesn't always keep up with reality - it was probably written when a lot of airspace was all in one sector from the ground up.
At Maastricht the computer will adapt the basic performance profile applicable to the type. It will not adapt/change the TAS. Therefore, change of TAS must be included in your CHG msg when applicable. Any change to your RFL as a consequence of your TYP change must of course also be notified.
