Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
I know how IFR FPs work in the airways system; they go to Eurocontrol (you check them with CFMU, etc) and if the FP passes the CFMU check then it is accepted, and you get what amounts to an IFR clearance for the entire route. They will never suddenly say "remain outside controlled airspace".
However, what happens if somebody (say an IMC Rated pilot) files an IFR-OCAS FP like for example
EGHR MID CPT BZ SWB TNT EGSY
I made that one up, but in general there is not a hope in hell in getting something like that through CFMU. Yet, you can file it and fly it. You will get the departure clearance (if the dep field is ATC). Such flight plans are routinely filed in the UK.
Clearly the FP has gone nowhere near Eurocontrol.
Q1: what determines whether an IFR FP gets submitted to Eurocontrol? My guess is that this is triggered by a bit of the route being "obviously" in Class A. Not sure how this works abroad though, because in many places one can fly pretty high in Class C/D.
Q2: how is the FP addressed? Let's say that one of the waypoints is in Class D. Does the FP get addressed to the ATCU for that airspace? IME it doesn't; they know nothing about it. It gets treated just like a VFR flight plan (in the UK).
However, what happens if somebody (say an IMC Rated pilot) files an IFR-OCAS FP like for example
EGHR MID CPT BZ SWB TNT EGSY
I made that one up, but in general there is not a hope in hell in getting something like that through CFMU. Yet, you can file it and fly it. You will get the departure clearance (if the dep field is ATC). Such flight plans are routinely filed in the UK.
Clearly the FP has gone nowhere near Eurocontrol.
Q1: what determines whether an IFR FP gets submitted to Eurocontrol? My guess is that this is triggered by a bit of the route being "obviously" in Class A. Not sure how this works abroad though, because in many places one can fly pretty high in Class C/D.
Q2: how is the FP addressed? Let's say that one of the waypoints is in Class D. Does the FP get addressed to the ATCU for that airspace? IME it doesn't; they know nothing about it. It gets treated just like a VFR flight plan (in the UK).
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
Ans1: The way it is addressed by whoever submits it into the system. If the FPL is obviously not an "airways" FPL, it will be addressed in the same manner as a VFR plan, with no notification of enroute agencies.
Abroad is a different kettle of fishies. In most cases you can't file IFR without being instrument rated, so the issue never arises. All IFR plans will go via CFMU and you will be expected to follow CFMU compliant (and SRD) routings.
Ans2: See Ans1. No notification of enroute agencies unless you explicitly ask for the relevant address to be included... in which case the aforementioned agency is likely to disregard the plan in any case.
Abroad is a different kettle of fishies. In most cases you can't file IFR without being instrument rated, so the issue never arises. All IFR plans will go via CFMU and you will be expected to follow CFMU compliant (and SRD) routings.
Ans2: See Ans1. No notification of enroute agencies unless you explicitly ask for the relevant address to be included... in which case the aforementioned agency is likely to disregard the plan in any case.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
2D
Re Ans2. Are you saying that it goes to Eurocontrol only if some waypoints lie inside Class A? How is the interesection determined?
Let's say I route via CPT and I have filed a general level of FL060 (Class A is 4500ft+ at CPT), does somebody *really* look at the chart, and seeing that FL060 is above the base of Class A, addresses it to Eurocontrol?
I would be amazed if this actually happens, because one could route between two VORs with neither being anywhere near Class A, with the route intersecting a bit of Class A if it's high enough, and it would not be obvious unless it was plotted.
Are you saying that all IFR FPs with waypoints outside the UK FIR go to Eurocontrol automatically?
Re Ans2. Are you saying that it goes to Eurocontrol only if some waypoints lie inside Class A? How is the interesection determined?
Let's say I route via CPT and I have filed a general level of FL060 (Class A is 4500ft+ at CPT), does somebody *really* look at the chart, and seeing that FL060 is above the base of Class A, addresses it to Eurocontrol?
I would be amazed if this actually happens, because one could route between two VORs with neither being anywhere near Class A, with the route intersecting a bit of Class A if it's high enough, and it would not be obvious unless it was plotted.
Are you saying that all IFR FPs with waypoints outside the UK FIR go to Eurocontrol automatically?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
Are you saying that it goes to Eurocontrol only if some waypoints lie inside Class A? How is the interesection determined?
If you file a flight plan which the person doing the processing thinks is ambiguous, you will probably be asked whether or not it was your intention to enter controlled airspace. If so, the person doing the filing will probably pull you up on your route and ask you to provide better particulars about your intended point of entry and exit from controlled airspace and the standard route you intend to take between those points.
More likely though, your plan will simply be filed as non-Eurocontrol, complete with stupid flight level and non-standard routing and if you intend to enter class A enroute, it will be up to you to negotiate a clearance enroute.
Don't forget that whether IFR or VFR, a basic non-Eurocontrol Flightplan within the UK is of very little practical value to anybody save SAR - we don't even follow ICAO practice and formally "close" flightplans in the UK.
Are you saying that all IFR FPs with waypoints outside the UK FIR go to Eurocontrol automatically?
Last edited by 2Donkeys; 1st Jan 2006 at 19:02.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
This confirms what I had suspected.
I have heard from people (with an IR although of course ATC is not in the business of questioning pilot ratings) who filed an IFR FP, within the UK, with say FL070, and they got pushed about all over the place, OCAS, for the first 50-100 miles. Nobody seemed to know why the aircraft was kept out of CAS (Class A) for so long - could not have been due to traffic.
I have heard from people (with an IR although of course ATC is not in the business of questioning pilot ratings) who filed an IFR FP, within the UK, with say FL070, and they got pushed about all over the place, OCAS, for the first 50-100 miles. Nobody seemed to know why the aircraft was kept out of CAS (Class A) for so long - could not have been due to traffic.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
The reason for them being kept outside is possibly because
1) The departure aerodrome, if not full ATC, did nothing to get them an airways joining clearance.
2) The airways joining point was more than 10 minutes away from the point of departure. If this is the case then it is the pilots responsibility to obtain the airways clearance, either by requesting it from the ATC unit they're working at the time, or from the relevant FIR "info" frequency.
Much of the airways system, especially with regard to joining / leaving, is now down to standard agreed routes and levels. If you're looking to do something which isn't encompassed by that then a little bit of "thinking outside the box" is required to get inside it.
1) The departure aerodrome, if not full ATC, did nothing to get them an airways joining clearance.
2) The airways joining point was more than 10 minutes away from the point of departure. If this is the case then it is the pilots responsibility to obtain the airways clearance, either by requesting it from the ATC unit they're working at the time, or from the relevant FIR "info" frequency.
Much of the airways system, especially with regard to joining / leaving, is now down to standard agreed routes and levels. If you're looking to do something which isn't encompassed by that then a little bit of "thinking outside the box" is required to get inside it.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
I have just used the Eurocontrol system to check on the flight plan proposed by IO540.
The errors created were:
1. mid dct cpt is not available.
2. SWB not recognised because it is not a civil navaid.
3. BZ in civil terms is a long way from the UK's military BZ abd thus the flight plan system thought that a the flight was going to take a lot longer than I said and that the direct leg (over 400nm) is too long for allowed UK directs.
Having changed the route to dct cpt dct tnt dct it worked with no errors.
If you really want to tell the system that you are routing via BZ and SWB then define these points as a radial and distance from CPT and TNT or HON.
All IFR flight plans are sent to Eurocontrol only unless you put another address in the plan. The Eurocontrol system knows a lot about the airspace - boundaries, base levels, allowed routes etc etc.
The best thing to do when filing an IFR flight plan be it within, outside or a combination of both inside and outside controlled airspace is to try it first at http://www.cfmu.eurocontrol.int/chmi_public/ciahome.jsp Click on the "Structured Editor" on the left menu
That system uses the full Eurocontrol current system to check your plan and if you can get that tool to say "no errors", your plan will be accepted automatically.
Regards,
DFC
The errors created were:
1. mid dct cpt is not available.
2. SWB not recognised because it is not a civil navaid.
3. BZ in civil terms is a long way from the UK's military BZ abd thus the flight plan system thought that a the flight was going to take a lot longer than I said and that the direct leg (over 400nm) is too long for allowed UK directs.
Having changed the route to dct cpt dct tnt dct it worked with no errors.
If you really want to tell the system that you are routing via BZ and SWB then define these points as a radial and distance from CPT and TNT or HON.
All IFR flight plans are sent to Eurocontrol only unless you put another address in the plan. The Eurocontrol system knows a lot about the airspace - boundaries, base levels, allowed routes etc etc.
The best thing to do when filing an IFR flight plan be it within, outside or a combination of both inside and outside controlled airspace is to try it first at http://www.cfmu.eurocontrol.int/chmi_public/ciahome.jsp Click on the "Structured Editor" on the left menu
That system uses the full Eurocontrol current system to check your plan and if you can get that tool to say "no errors", your plan will be accepted automatically.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
All IFR flight plans are sent to Eurocontrol only unless you put another address in the plan.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
On a slightly different tack, how does this tie in with IFR enroute charges?
Let's say you fly a >2000kg aircraft, at night, in the UK, outside a CTR (i.e. no SVFR possible). You "should" get a bill automatically.
Or, anywhere in the UK, on an IFR FP. It's common knowledge that 2T+ pilots prefer to not file flight plans and fly "UK style VFR" to avoid route charges. But if one does file an IFR FP (for search/rescue purposes), can the "flight plan filing mistakes" discussed in this thread be used to avoid charges? Perhaps 2T+ pilots simply don't file *IFR* flight plans if flying daytime; that would be simple enough and, in the UK, one could still end with an IAP if required.
If one does a flight, no FP, no radio, and terminates with an IAP (because the weather is solid IMC) what piece of the route (if any) gets charged for? And how is that determined?
Or, perhaps, there is no connection between a FP going to Eurocontrol, and getting billed?
The mind boggles how this is worked out (in the UK).
Let's say you fly a >2000kg aircraft, at night, in the UK, outside a CTR (i.e. no SVFR possible). You "should" get a bill automatically.
Or, anywhere in the UK, on an IFR FP. It's common knowledge that 2T+ pilots prefer to not file flight plans and fly "UK style VFR" to avoid route charges. But if one does file an IFR FP (for search/rescue purposes), can the "flight plan filing mistakes" discussed in this thread be used to avoid charges? Perhaps 2T+ pilots simply don't file *IFR* flight plans if flying daytime; that would be simple enough and, in the UK, one could still end with an IAP if required.
If one does a flight, no FP, no radio, and terminates with an IAP (because the weather is solid IMC) what piece of the route (if any) gets charged for? And how is that determined?
Or, perhaps, there is no connection between a FP going to Eurocontrol, and getting billed?
The mind boggles how this is worked out (in the UK).
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
This is much simpler than meets the eye - but not very satisfactory
First of all, a factoid. If any part of a flight conducted in the UK FIRs becomes chargeable (by virtue of being IFR and >=2t), then the entire flight within the UK FIRs becomes chargeable. In the world of Eurocontrol Flightplans, this means that Z and Y flightplans with an IFR element in the UK are billed at the same rate as I flightplans. Once a chargeable flightplan passes through a Eurocontrol address, an invoice is raised.
For IFR flights that take place outside the enroute system and/or without a flightplan, the process of billing is more haphazard. Many (but not all) Aerodromes report their movement logs to the CAA who in turn report them to Eurocontrol for billing purposes. Included in an airfield's movement log is whether or not each departure was IFR or VFR.
From personal experience, the accuracy of this log, combined with the reliability of the reporting of the log through the CAA to Brussels is very patchy with some airfields being worse offenders for mislogged flights than others. This is what lies behind the vast majority of false bills that I have received from Eurocontrol.
Quite how common this problem is varies widely in the telling. There are some around these parts who claim that they constantly need to file VFR flightplans to avoid all of their flights appearing as Eurocontrol Bills. Others like me have seen perhaps one or two errors per quarter - representing less than 1% of flights flown.
If you show up near a class D zone claiming to be "IFR" (having departed VFR) and asking for a RAS or RIS, there is no automatic mechanism whereby that will make its way back to you in the form of a charge. UK Arrivals under IFR that departed under "VFR" without a flightplan also seem to escape the invoice-machine.
First of all, a factoid. If any part of a flight conducted in the UK FIRs becomes chargeable (by virtue of being IFR and >=2t), then the entire flight within the UK FIRs becomes chargeable. In the world of Eurocontrol Flightplans, this means that Z and Y flightplans with an IFR element in the UK are billed at the same rate as I flightplans. Once a chargeable flightplan passes through a Eurocontrol address, an invoice is raised.
For IFR flights that take place outside the enroute system and/or without a flightplan, the process of billing is more haphazard. Many (but not all) Aerodromes report their movement logs to the CAA who in turn report them to Eurocontrol for billing purposes. Included in an airfield's movement log is whether or not each departure was IFR or VFR.
From personal experience, the accuracy of this log, combined with the reliability of the reporting of the log through the CAA to Brussels is very patchy with some airfields being worse offenders for mislogged flights than others. This is what lies behind the vast majority of false bills that I have received from Eurocontrol.
Quite how common this problem is varies widely in the telling. There are some around these parts who claim that they constantly need to file VFR flightplans to avoid all of their flights appearing as Eurocontrol Bills. Others like me have seen perhaps one or two errors per quarter - representing less than 1% of flights flown.
If you show up near a class D zone claiming to be "IFR" (having departed VFR) and asking for a RAS or RIS, there is no automatic mechanism whereby that will make its way back to you in the form of a charge. UK Arrivals under IFR that departed under "VFR" without a flightplan also seem to escape the invoice-machine.
Last edited by 2Donkeys; 2nd Jan 2006 at 09:17.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
The addressing of flight plans filed in the UK is covered in the AIP ENR 1-11-1.
All IFR flight plans within the IFPS zone are addressed to the IFPS system.
The filing of a flight plan does not generate a bill. Many flight plans are cancelled for various reasons including flow control measures. To tie billing to the filing of flight plans would create an admin nightmare. In the UK, for enroute services, the billing unit is located as West Drayton (unless it moved recently to Swanwick). At that unit, they use the ATC computer which records activated flight plans to generate the required billing and also use the paper strips from the FIR position to check on flights that were by night or declared IFR and should receive a bill.
Not talking to the FIR or any of the Airways sectors improves one's chances of avoiding a bill.
Why the system is "sketchy" in the UK is that many of the users do not operate the system properly (sometimes to their own advantage) e.g. filing a plan but not passing a departure message and the UK ATS network is so fragmented.
It is ironic that many LARS units complain about lack of funding but do not put any effort into making sure that IFR flights are properly processed and billed when appropriate. Or that non-LARS units who provide a service to transit flights do not ensure their income by making sure the flights are billed.
Of course, declaring to be VFR when actually flying IFR is breaking the law and putting other airspace users in danger for a number of reasons regardless of what class of airspace. It is also fraud if one makes a false declaration to avoid paying!
The French have reported some UK aircraft recetly for departing UK style VFR.
Regards,
DFC
All IFR flight plans within the IFPS zone are addressed to the IFPS system.
The filing of a flight plan does not generate a bill. Many flight plans are cancelled for various reasons including flow control measures. To tie billing to the filing of flight plans would create an admin nightmare. In the UK, for enroute services, the billing unit is located as West Drayton (unless it moved recently to Swanwick). At that unit, they use the ATC computer which records activated flight plans to generate the required billing and also use the paper strips from the FIR position to check on flights that were by night or declared IFR and should receive a bill.
Not talking to the FIR or any of the Airways sectors improves one's chances of avoiding a bill.
Why the system is "sketchy" in the UK is that many of the users do not operate the system properly (sometimes to their own advantage) e.g. filing a plan but not passing a departure message and the UK ATS network is so fragmented.
It is ironic that many LARS units complain about lack of funding but do not put any effort into making sure that IFR flights are properly processed and billed when appropriate. Or that non-LARS units who provide a service to transit flights do not ensure their income by making sure the flights are billed.
Of course, declaring to be VFR when actually flying IFR is breaking the law and putting other airspace users in danger for a number of reasons regardless of what class of airspace. It is also fraud if one makes a false declaration to avoid paying!
The French have reported some UK aircraft recetly for departing UK style VFR.
Regards,
DFC
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
In the case of the aircraft kept outside for long distances, this often happens to aircraft with a cruise speed of less than about 150kts if you file from an airfield west of the Heathrow CTR to route via (say) DVR, the reason being it would be 'difficult' to get that aircraft a climb in the middle of Heathrow departures all of whom would be doing over 250kts.
What is usually done in this case is to keep the aircraft below until it gets east of BIG when the Heathrow/City deps are well above.
What is usually done in this case is to keep the aircraft below until it gets east of BIG when the Heathrow/City deps are well above.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
DFC
You description sounds like a theoretical appreciation of what "should" happen, rather than an account of what actually happens. Regardless of the rights and wrongs of that, I believe that the fact is rather closer to my account. (Note in passing that I did not suggest that "filing" a flightplan led to a bill being generated").
Perhaps a kindly ATCO could confirm/clarify.
You description sounds like a theoretical appreciation of what "should" happen, rather than an account of what actually happens. Regardless of the rights and wrongs of that, I believe that the fact is rather closer to my account. (Note in passing that I did not suggest that "filing" a flightplan led to a bill being generated").
Perhaps a kindly ATCO could confirm/clarify.
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
My entry crossed with DFC's!
LARS units do not have the capacity to bill traffic for service; they have no mandate to either but are paid for LARS on an annual basis depending how many hours & days they provide it. How can a unit not having a copy of a flight plan know if one has been fled for a particular flight? If all pilots filed en-route LARS units as an additional addressee on their FPL's it would help.
LARS units do not have the capacity to bill traffic for service; they have no mandate to either but are paid for LARS on an annual basis depending how many hours & days they provide it. How can a unit not having a copy of a flight plan know if one has been fled for a particular flight? If all pilots filed en-route LARS units as an additional addressee on their FPL's it would help.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
They will never suddenly say "remain outside controlled airspace".
Having filed a FPL and having it accepted is not akin to having an automatic clearance into CAS.
Not uncommon at all to fly from an airfield without CAS to be told to remain clear until you get your clearance from an ATSU.
aceatco, retired
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: one airshow or another
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
DFC
It would really help the debate if you were to publish your credentials as to why you can pontificate on route charges. Much of what you publish above is complete tosh. I was the manager of a LARS unit for many years. There is no mechanism in place for LARS units to report on the individual traffic they work. LARS funding for a particular unit is not based on the amount of traffic they work (at least, it wasn't, and I suspect still isn't.) As for non-LARS units reporting on such traffic so that they receive the 'income', that is ridiculous. It doesn't happen.
And as for going through all the FIR strips . . . Please stop, I can't stand it.
I think you'll find 2D is a lot closer to the mark than you.
It would really help the debate if you were to publish your credentials as to why you can pontificate on route charges. Much of what you publish above is complete tosh. I was the manager of a LARS unit for many years. There is no mechanism in place for LARS units to report on the individual traffic they work. LARS funding for a particular unit is not based on the amount of traffic they work (at least, it wasn't, and I suspect still isn't.) As for non-LARS units reporting on such traffic so that they receive the 'income', that is ridiculous. It doesn't happen.
And as for going through all the FIR strips . . . Please stop, I can't stand it.
I think you'll find 2D is a lot closer to the mark than you.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
FD
I was referring to the fact that if one files an IFR FP for an airways flight (let's say Biggin to Edinburgh at FL160) then after departure (which itself will probably be vectors from Thames, not the Biggin SID, followed by handling by London Control) you will not ever get the "remain outside CAS" message. You WILL fly the route; almost certainly not the one on the FP but something like it.
Whereas filing the same IFR FP at some low level like 2400ft which "obviously" or "probably" puts the flight below Class A, this isn't the case because the FP didn't get addressed to the ATS unit(s) that look after the CAS in question (probably bits of Class D but it could be Class A).
Whereas if the same route was filed at FL150, or perhaps even FL100, it would go to Eurocontrol and be distributed properly.
It's interesting to discover the boundary.
Since the decision is made by the ATSU that gets the FP initially, I also reckon that perhaps they look for airways references etc. UK IMC Rated pilots will usually know nothing about airways names, so a VOR-VOR-NDB route could be a dead giveaway of an FP which is NOT going to Eurocontrol.
A further interesting thing would be how do foreign FP filing services like Homebriefing.com handle 100%-UK "IFR" FPs. The Austrian ATCO will probably say "IFR", send this to Eurocontrol. I will drop them a line.
I think this has been an illuminating thread. As for charges, it's academic to me since I am below 2T. En route charges increase the cost of flying 2T+ piston planes quite massively; perhaps this is why old dog twins are so cheap
I was referring to the fact that if one files an IFR FP for an airways flight (let's say Biggin to Edinburgh at FL160) then after departure (which itself will probably be vectors from Thames, not the Biggin SID, followed by handling by London Control) you will not ever get the "remain outside CAS" message. You WILL fly the route; almost certainly not the one on the FP but something like it.
Whereas filing the same IFR FP at some low level like 2400ft which "obviously" or "probably" puts the flight below Class A, this isn't the case because the FP didn't get addressed to the ATS unit(s) that look after the CAS in question (probably bits of Class D but it could be Class A).
Whereas if the same route was filed at FL150, or perhaps even FL100, it would go to Eurocontrol and be distributed properly.
It's interesting to discover the boundary.
Since the decision is made by the ATSU that gets the FP initially, I also reckon that perhaps they look for airways references etc. UK IMC Rated pilots will usually know nothing about airways names, so a VOR-VOR-NDB route could be a dead giveaway of an FP which is NOT going to Eurocontrol.
A further interesting thing would be how do foreign FP filing services like Homebriefing.com handle 100%-UK "IFR" FPs. The Austrian ATCO will probably say "IFR", send this to Eurocontrol. I will drop them a line.
I think this has been an illuminating thread. As for charges, it's academic to me since I am below 2T. En route charges increase the cost of flying 2T+ piston planes quite massively; perhaps this is why old dog twins are so cheap
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: 59°45'36N 10°27'59E
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
2. SWB not recognised because it is not a civil navaid.
Ridiculous..........
Edit: Come to think of it, I helped a RNoAF C130 Nav plan a FPL from us to EGDL last year, and it took a while before we found out that a "OAT" was required in the mix if you wanted to plan via MIL navaids in the UK. How on earth are the ATC service gonna cope with SES over there, if this is the level of integration today?
Last edited by M609; 2nd Jan 2006 at 13:04.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: U.K
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
M609.
Norway Seems to be quite relaxed with OAT IFR traffic i.e i think it was 1 extra address off the top of my head to add the the other addresses, however, if you think the UK is bad, try addressing a flight plan for an OAT flight crossing a few German FIR's via the North sea,then in land for landing at an airfield in the south.
Norway Seems to be quite relaxed with OAT IFR traffic i.e i think it was 1 extra address off the top of my head to add the the other addresses, however, if you think the UK is bad, try addressing a flight plan for an OAT flight crossing a few German FIR's via the North sea,then in land for landing at an airfield in the south.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: 59°45'36N 10°27'59E
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Treatment of IFR flight plans (UK, outside Class A)
That might be because it's the same controllers in the same control centers that control GAT and OAT traffic (When OAT is flying outside TSA's)
OAT is transparent to us controllers FPL wise, the SSR code assignment for ATO traffic is the only difference.
It's just ARR/DEP aerodrome + relevant ATCC(s) (3 in total)
The rest is transparent to the outside.
My point was more that it's impossible (correct me if I'm wrong) to file GAT IFR over a MIL owned/operated navaid via CFMU in the UK. The C130 flight I mentioned was a trash hauler GAT flight, but as soon as we tried to leave the Civ route system the CFMU reported "unknown navaid" if I recall correctly.
Problem solved when we slipped a "OAT" into field 15 at the point the route left the CIV routes.
In Germany MIL navaids are "CFMU compatible, as is the case in scandinavia.
OAT is transparent to us controllers FPL wise, the SSR code assignment for ATO traffic is the only difference.
It's just ARR/DEP aerodrome + relevant ATCC(s) (3 in total)
The rest is transparent to the outside.
My point was more that it's impossible (correct me if I'm wrong) to file GAT IFR over a MIL owned/operated navaid via CFMU in the UK. The C130 flight I mentioned was a trash hauler GAT flight, but as soon as we tried to leave the Civ route system the CFMU reported "unknown navaid" if I recall correctly.
Problem solved when we slipped a "OAT" into field 15 at the point the route left the CIV routes.
In Germany MIL navaids are "CFMU compatible, as is the case in scandinavia.