IFR Reporting Points
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mildura
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IFR Reporting Points
Hi,
I have a query regarding AIP ENR 1.10 para 3.4, re produced below;
"For flights not operating along an ATS route, reporting points should be provided in item 15 (of the flight notification) for locations approximately 30 minutes or 200NM apart."
Basically I hear aircraft depart all the time that are not operating on an ATS route eg. Mildura-Albury and they just give an estimate for the destination direct. The example route is well in excess of the 200NM and unless in a jet well over the 30 minute interval. Are they doing the in-correct thing but no one really cares? I will generally try and plan using existing waypoints within a few miles of track, or just use a Bearing/Distance eg. MIA104075, but planning would be a lot easier if i could just put DCT every time.
Is the reporting requirement a throwback to pre RNAV days where position fixes using NDB, VOR and DME were the only option and no one bothers now as the majority of aircraft have RNAV capability? Or is it that if you expect to be radar identified you dont bother?
Also if anyone knows of flight planning software that lets you insert bearing/distance into the plan, or if someone knows how to do it with command flight planner then please let me know!
Just something that has been bugging me for a while!
Cheers
I have a query regarding AIP ENR 1.10 para 3.4, re produced below;
"For flights not operating along an ATS route, reporting points should be provided in item 15 (of the flight notification) for locations approximately 30 minutes or 200NM apart."
Basically I hear aircraft depart all the time that are not operating on an ATS route eg. Mildura-Albury and they just give an estimate for the destination direct. The example route is well in excess of the 200NM and unless in a jet well over the 30 minute interval. Are they doing the in-correct thing but no one really cares? I will generally try and plan using existing waypoints within a few miles of track, or just use a Bearing/Distance eg. MIA104075, but planning would be a lot easier if i could just put DCT every time.
Is the reporting requirement a throwback to pre RNAV days where position fixes using NDB, VOR and DME were the only option and no one bothers now as the majority of aircraft have RNAV capability? Or is it that if you expect to be radar identified you dont bother?
Also if anyone knows of flight planning software that lets you insert bearing/distance into the plan, or if someone knows how to do it with command flight planner then please let me know!
Just something that has been bugging me for a while!
Cheers
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: East
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess like all airlaw questions it comes down to the exact wording..
You Should be providing reporting points up to 30mins/200nm.
It could be interpreted if you dont and all goes well CASA/ASA doesn't care.
If however it goes wrong and 30mins is wasted before the alarm is raised because your sarwatch is on a 50 min reporting time from not following the recommendation of the AIP they will probably try to charge you with negligence or something.
You Should be providing reporting points up to 30mins/200nm.
It could be interpreted if you dont and all goes well CASA/ASA doesn't care.
If however it goes wrong and 30mins is wasted before the alarm is raised because your sarwatch is on a 50 min reporting time from not following the recommendation of the AIP they will probably try to charge you with negligence or something.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Zoo
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could pick 100 things out of the AIP that I hear people not do on a regular basis, that doesn't make them right, and doesn't mean you should lower your standards to their standards.
The bible says every 200nm or 30 minutes, it's going to make it easier and quicker to find you if you can limit the search area based on you not responding.
Albury to Mildura I'd be planning via CALUM.
The bible says every 200nm or 30 minutes, it's going to make it easier and quicker to find you if you can limit the search area based on you not responding.
Albury to Mildura I'd be planning via CALUM.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Paradise
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the reporting requirement a throwback to pre RNAV days where position fixes using NDB, VOR and DME were the only option and no one bothers now as the majority of aircraft have RNAV capability?
I always (well, nearly always!) plan via an IFR route with designated waypoints. More and more, in a radar environment, ATC give me big chunks of "direct to" tracking.
A couple of years ago I planned IFR Toowoomba direct to Townsville, no enroute reporting points - got the clearance, nothing said!
BC
If however it goes wrong and 30mins is wasted before the alarm is raised because your sarwatch is on a 50 min reporting time
Do you think aircraft report every 30 minutes over the pond?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
It's a good question, Capt. CM tried it a while back, YCAB to YLRE direct, and the comment was that being outside ssr for so long they required via TAM.
Mr Conrod seem to have the same experience, as I do, such as YCAB to YMOR DCT even if planned via AMB and the airway, some times it is better for them also to give you direct, it may mean less crossing traffic issues in the terminal area.
J
Mr Conrod seem to have the same experience, as I do, such as YCAB to YMOR DCT even if planned via AMB and the airway, some times it is better for them also to give you direct, it may mean less crossing traffic issues in the terminal area.
J
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Nik320 is on the right trail...
Just had this one pointed out to me recently by a checkie after 29+ years of flying, the answer is in the preface of the AIP!
To paraphrase...
Should = Recommended or advisable.
Must = A regulatory requirement.
PS: After all these years it seems I could have been doing a lot less!
You Should be providing reporting points up to 30mins/200nm.
To paraphrase...
Should = Recommended or advisable.
Must = A regulatory requirement.
PS: After all these years it seems I could have been doing a lot less!
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: East
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you think aircraft report every 30 minutes over the pond?
The point was dont do it and all goes well, no problems.
Don't do it and it goes horribly wrong they will try to blame you for not following recommended procedure.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mildura
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok so "should" is the key word I figure..
As for the flight planner, I just figured out that Command Flight Planner is pretty smart at putting the lat/long for abeam points into the flight notification form which works a treat for direct tracking, bearing/distance would be even easier as it would save having to find abeam locations but its still good.
Thanks!
As for the flight planner, I just figured out that Command Flight Planner is pretty smart at putting the lat/long for abeam points into the flight notification form which works a treat for direct tracking, bearing/distance would be even easier as it would save having to find abeam locations but its still good.
Thanks!
Last edited by TriMedGroup; 2nd Sep 2011 at 04:57.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NTH&STH,EAST&WEST
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a thought from a practical and safety issue, for traffic information could I suggest some fixed ground references be used, even if there abeams.
I remember years ago getting traffic on a VFR aircraft who was tracking direct with his new fangle GPS and when I asked him for his position, he said, 350nm on the XYZ radial, totally useless to me. I then suggested he open his map and look at his ADF. Even in modern jets, we are always having to be aware of our situation and and surrounding traffic.
Sorry I'm not familiar with CASA requirements these days as I've been away for too long, but I'm sure with comonsense and and good SA, it can be done safely.
Happy flying
I remember years ago getting traffic on a VFR aircraft who was tracking direct with his new fangle GPS and when I asked him for his position, he said, 350nm on the XYZ radial, totally useless to me. I then suggested he open his map and look at his ADF. Even in modern jets, we are always having to be aware of our situation and and surrounding traffic.
Sorry I'm not familiar with CASA requirements these days as I've been away for too long, but I'm sure with comonsense and and good SA, it can be done safely.
Happy flying
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 56
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a recent trip from Moorabin to Mount Gambier I planned via a number of waypoints to comply with said reporting requirements .
I was surprised on my initial contact with Dep they offered me direct to Mount Gambier ,around 200NM or 1:40 in the A/C I was flying.
I accepted however 30-40 mins later they requested an updated estimate for Mount Gambier.
I was surprised on my initial contact with Dep they offered me direct to Mount Gambier ,around 200NM or 1:40 in the A/C I was flying.
I accepted however 30-40 mins later they requested an updated estimate for Mount Gambier.
