Internet flight plan filing coming soon

[IO540]

There is no problem error checking the fields. One already has to do this in e.g. the CMFU validation form 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.