DFC, in my last post on this thread I suggested tht you look out the ICAO reference for ATS message addressing. In response you mentioned the Random FPL address book - which IIRC gives collective addresses for non-standard airways routes - and the AIP.

As you clearly can't be bothered to refer to the definitive document, I'll do it for you.

It seems to me that the flights that you are talking about fall into category e).

I don't imagine that you will change your opinion simply because I have pointed out the definitive rules for FPL message addressing. Nonetheless, the theoretical answer has now been provided and you have a multitiude of people who know how the system works in practice telling you that you are wrong. The simple fact is that, in normal operations, the only unit that is obliged to take overdue action if you don't turn up at the appointed time is the destination aerodrome.

I suggest you learn to live with reality and try to understand why you re wrong (and to help you along, try to understand the difference between a filed FPL and the basic information needed by an ATS unit to process your transit through their area of responsibility). And before you get on your high horse again, yes, once you have established communications with a unit, you will get flight informtion and alerting services - but if it's not your destination aerodrome, you get the services because you're talking to them, not because you may just happen to have addressed a flight plan to them.

The general sentiment quoted by Chilli etc;

No sh1t sherlock! We're not in Alaska, we're in the UK. The procedures work in the UK

Anyone who thinks that parts of Wales, large parts of Scotland and the Lake District are more surviveable than Alaska when one is forced to spend hours trapped in a downed aircraft during the winter months needs to have a rethink.

A number of aircraft have disappeared in the Highlands.....some have been found.............in the following spring thaw............................would it not be a shame if a flight from Inverness to say Blackpool via GOW did not receive an alerting service from Glasgow when they failed to turn up at the zone boundary as expected?

Spitoon,

e) does not really apply because the flight will be subject to an ATC clearance for that part of the flight within controlled airspace......hence ATC service.

------

Shame people resort to childish rants when they have not got the ability to debate an issue........roll on mode S and mandatory flight plans.......then perhaps those that shout loudest can be quiet while they learn how to file a flight plan! :D

The CAA have no data on which to require an AIP change.....yet!

:E

Regards,

DFC

DFC, I was going to retire gracefully from this debate but ...

If e) doesn't apply to the flights you are talking about, which paragraph does?

As I mentioned before, you have to understand the distinction between a filed FPL and the limited info needed by an ATC unit to give clearance (or not) through a particular piece of airspace that is along your route. It is sometimes difficult to map ICAO regs to a national system but I'm afraid that on this occasion it doesn't fit what you think should happen.

The present ICAO rules do not specify that a FPL should be sent to aerodromes along the the route FOR ANY FLIGHT. You may not like the rules, they may be outdated, they may not fit many of the types of operation that take place today, but that's what they are and the UK doesn't differ to my knowledge. So accept it.

By all means try and change the rules through the appropriate channels but don't try and tell the rest of the world - and some of the people who have taken the trouble to answer you are very experienced in the way that ATC works - that they are wrong simply because you think the rules are wrong.

Now I'm bored with this and I will retire gracefully.

Me too, before I wake up to find I'm losing the will to live.....

DFC, Have you been introduced to Walter Kennedy, on the Chinook thread? I have a feeling you and he might get on like a house on fire..... ;)

And except for one case I can think of, all these missing aircraft have been raised as missing when they became overdue at the DESTINATION airfield.

The case I am thinking of was the one that brought about the establishment of the 'responsible person' as I recall, after the aircraft crashed on Jura and lay there for a few days before it was noticed it had not returned home.

Every reference in the AIP to the responsibility for taking overdue action refers to it being the responsibility of either the destination airfield, or the parent ATSU if there is no ATC unit available there (having been notified by a responsible person of course). Absolutely no inference that it applies to en route ATC agencies in reference to solely the flight plan.

Having spent 20 minutes of my life reading the latter part of this thread, I find that I am asking myself "Why did I bother?" :ugh:

Spitoon,

As I mentioned before, you have to understand the distinction between a filed FPL and the limited info needed by an ATC unit to give clearance (or not) through a particular piece of airspace that is along your route

I am well aware of the difference.

Let me say again. It is not mandatory to file a flight plan prior to departure on a national VFR flight in class G which will transit a zone. One can choose to make a radio enroute call and file an abreviated plan. Sometimes that is actually better than pre-filing - flexibility of route.

The whole point I have been making is that a pilot requesting a clearance to cross a zone must pass flight plan details to the appropriate ATS unit.
Using the FPL message addressed to that unit is internationally and within the UK AIP accepted as having communicated the required details to that unit.

An alternative is to pass the details by telephone in advance.

How can anyone deny knowledge of a flight after receiving a flight safety message?

--------

PPRuNe Radar,

You confuse me;

The case I am thinking of was the one that brought about the establishment of the 'responsible person' as I recall, after the aircraft crashed on Jura and lay there for a few days before it was noticed it had not returned home

The responsible person was brought in to remove the requirement to close a flight plan with ATS on or just before arrival at an airfield with no ATS.

If there was no flight plan then there would be no requirement for a responsible person even today.

If there was a flight plan and this was prior to the "responsible person" then ATS were seriously at fault for missing the fact that a flight had not arrived.

The consensus seems to be that many UK ATC units simply can't be bothered with flight safety mesages and UK pilots have no problem with that.

How many countries have ATC who are proud to announce that they ignore Flight Safety Messages?

Regards,

DFC

I don't think there is ATS at Colonsay (or whichever unmanned island strip he was en route to). That's kind of the point. No one to close the plan with .. but also no one to take action on non arrival either. The pilot was not in contact with any ATC unit at the time of the crash.

I really suggest you have a read of this GA Safety Leaflet. It tells it the way it is (for VFR flights). Namely that if you file a flight plan then your arrival airfield and alternates will get it (no mention of a requirement for transit airfields to have it too, let alone do anything with them). It also explains in detail who is responsible for Alerting action and how this works depending on whether your departure and arrival airfields have ATS or not. As it's written by the CAA I expect they know the way the UK system works. And one which everyone (except a solitary individual) seems to accept and live with.

Paragraphs 3,4,5 & 7 are the relevant ones (it even mentions mountainous terrain flights .. where once again, surprise, surprise, the Alerting action is placed on your arrival airfield or a parent ATSU (having been told about your non arrival by a responsible person).

The CAA also put their contact details on this leaflet. So if you can't accept the way they think it works (which has been iterated here by many other people), then get in touch and put them right as well :8

In the meantime ... units in the UK will deal with 'transit' Flight Plans as they always have. ;)

CAA GA Safety Sense Leaflet 20A VFR Flight PLans

Jeeeesus is this thread still going ?? :zzz:

DFC if you want to complain about (perceived) vagueries of the UK AIP start your own thread or write to the CAA.

The original query by the threadstarter was answered long ago (by around page 2).

Stop hijacking threads to continue your usual sniping at the UK ATC system.

Here's something to think about:

He snipes at the UK ATC System as I sense he is a frustrated ATCO. Isn't that right, Da, er, DFC? ;)

DFC, I note from your profile that your position is P1 but maybe you can enlighten us a bit further on your experience and what you do.

The impression that your postings evoke is that you are very good at quoting chapter and verse but have no experience in operating in the UK.

Why are you so convinced that everything and everyone is wrong with the current UK system.

Or is it just a case of sour grapes as alluded to?

PPRuNe Radar,

Bit of history,

Prior to the "responsible person" situation, if a flight was flying to an aerodrome with no ATS then that pilot had to "close their flight plan". They did that by making an R/T call to the FIS/adjacent ATSU prior to landing or by telephone after landing. If they did not "close the plan", alerting action was initiated..........basically the current system in the rest of Europe.

Is it not true to say that provided pilots do what it says in the AIP then they can not be at fault?

If as one is lead to believe, so few pilots file full flight plans in the UK and how few of those address them to extra enroute ATC units.........then ATC can not claim that they are overloaded with paper flight plans for transit flights.

Anyway, we have discussed this at the company almost as long as here. We are obvously worried about being overdue but ATC not taking alerting action due to ignoring a flight plan. The suggested solution is;

Flight from Welshpool to Exeter via BRI - File Welshpool to Bristol (Alternate Exeter) on contacting Bristol ATC announce diversion to Exeter. In that case should we fail to turn up at the Bristol zone Bristol will start alerting action and later if we fail to turn up at Exeter, Exeter will start alerting action.........thus we have the required alerting action normally expected.

It's no problem for us......would it make any more work for ATC than simply not ignoring transit flight plans?

---

Squibbler,

I was sure that this was about zone transits.......and one needs a flight plan for zone transits...still talking about zone transits.

Thankyou for the quotation, I will considder myself a wise man. :)

-----

Vintage ATCO,

That old chestnut gets trotted out by UK ATCOs everytime someone fails to say how wonderfull UK ATC is.

I can count on one hand the number of ATCOs I know (I am not one) and only 2 are from the UK........all except 1 are retired........so I doubt if I know you but please email me if you do!

Judging from the various forums we must have a lot of disgruntled Pilots, ATCOs, Engineers, Spotters and Pimply bums with noting to add to the debate! :D ..................

Flyin'Dutch,

Hier is het bericht in onze taal. U hebt geen bijdrage tot het debat geleverd. U weet wat niet wij spreken over zodat maakt u eenvoudig kinderachtige persoonlijke aanvallen.

There is a lot right with the UK system. This is probably one of the few places where the AIP says one thing but it seems practice is something different.

You still can't help having a look tho!

Regards,

DFC

Gelieve te kunnen wij de Engelse taal voor kinderaanvallen gebruiken, is het veel plezieriger.

Nu nu, dacht ik de taal van Luchtvaart het Engels was:}

NO! It was about zone infringements, it's entitled zone infringements. The first mention of flight plans on this thread was by..........well YOU actually way back on page 2 by which time the threadstarter's question / query had been more than adequately answered. You started your whinge when someone had the temerity to question the need to bring flight plans into it

Like I said, you've hijacked the thread.

You're incorrigible.............

Wise man my :mad:

Thank you for that DFC.

Your attempt at being derisory is noted, but you still fail to make it clear where you fit into the bigger picture.

So come on and lift a tip of the veil which one fits you:

Your clues thus far:

and

Are not enough for us to decide whether we need to take you serious or you are just a broken record that we should ignore.

;)

DFC has gone VERY quiet since he/she was asked what he/she does regarding aviation. Makes me think it's just a sad person with to much time, the internet and a pile of books, maybe even someone who couldn't hack it in the aviation industry.

Looks like DFC didn't stand for Distinguished Flying Cross then.....

Almost prophetic, I wish I could remember where I read that... :rolleyes: :)

DFC was quiet because like most other people, one has to work from time to time. However, there has been no postings relevant to the debate so why should there be a response.

With an aircraft down off the West of Scotland, perhaps alerting action will be reviewed as part of the investigation although it appears from news reports that in this case the flight was departing the zone.

I must however point out an error regarding the point previously where I said;

Flight from Welshpool to Exeter via BRI - File Welshpool to Bristol (Alternate Exeter) on contacting Bristol ATC announce diversion to Exeter. In that case should we fail to turn up at the Bristol zone Bristol will start alerting action and later if we fail to turn up at Exeter, Exeter will start alerting action.........thus we have the required alerting action normally expected

It has been pointed out to us that there is no requirement to go to such drastic measures and that such measures are not appropriate if one knows in advance that a diversion "may be a posibility for operational reasons" i.e. not weather etc.

The way to correctly do the above is to file a flight plan with a RIF in item 18.
This I am told will acheive the exact same result i.e. Bristol will be required to keep and act on the flight plan until such time as they are told that the destination is changed to Exeter and then Exeter will have and act on the revised flight plan. The diference being that Exeter will not be required to inform the arrival of a diversion as per the diversion procedures.

Seems that there may be times in the UK when we have a flight plan with several RIFs when hoping from zone to zone looking for transits!

-------

squibbler,

A zone infringement is a zone transit without the required ATC clearance is it not? :)

To avoid infringements, always get an ATC clearance before entering and to get an ATC cleaarance, file a flight plan or abreviated plan as per the AIP!

Regards,

DFC

Flyin\'Dutch,

Being P1 of a Maule or a B757 makes little difference to the argument that international alerting standards need to be followed for the safety of us all.

Same as a surgeon and a GP debating the requirements to wash one\'s hands to avoid passing on MRSA.............would you like the Surgeon discounting your argument simply cause you are a mere GP?

No. So I won\'t either if you ever put one forward. :D

Regards,

DFC

:yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

Err yes I know that thankyou (being an ATCO).....what do you do again.......?

Missed the point again.......:rolleyes:

I expect you'll be posting again (you can't seem to let things drop) but I won't be.......you're a hopeless cause. Like to see you argue your case in a room full of ATCO's but I get the feeling you'd prefer the safety of your study/bedroom behind your keyboard :E:p

The way to correctly do the above is to file a flight plan with a RIF in item 18

Excuse my ignorance but what is a RIF ?

No, and neither would they do that.

However I would fully understand that they would tire soon if I kept banging on over an issue on which they had far more experience than I had, and which in their experience had not caused a problem, other than that 'The Book' stated something different from what worked in 'Real Life'

True professionals never deride other people's views but are very good at listening to other people's views and assimilating those of proven value.

Anyway can we take it then that you fly 75s out of Welshpool?

Rustle,

Nice to see you around and honoured to be quoted by you, although not sure what contribution it makes here being a bit out of context.

Missed you at the AIS meeting in January.

lobby,

Since you are an air traffic person, I'll explain the flight plan;

There are a number of times when RIF is used. Basically the aircraft gets airbourne for one destination but knows in advance that for some reason the flight may proceed to another aerodrome.

The one I have come across before is on long range flights - one files to a destination that is conservative with regard to fuel and ensures reserves then if one has sufucuent fuel at the decision point, one can opt for the revised destination included in the RIF.

Example - old Atlantic flights eastbound when fuel was tight could file say Shannon as destination with Cork as alternate and then in item 18 specify;

RIF/54N15W Nxx STU G1 EGLL

This means that if there is sufficient fuel available at the oceanic boundary, the flight could (subject to ATC clearance in this case) be extended to Heathrow. If not then the flight refuels in Shannon.

Up until the RIF is acted upon, the flight is planned to Shannon and Shannon expect the flight. After the RIF is used, Heathrow becomes the destination and that is basically that.

These days the fuel available trans atlantic isn't a problem except for light aircraft ferry flights where the RIF can be used to overcome the legal reserve requirements i.e. flights on the atlantic must have large reserves.....thus one files as far as Shannon or Prestwick and then once across the atlantic, the reserves are not so critical (one needs 45 min as opposed to hours) and one can use the spare fuel to reach Paris or the UK or as far as one wants to try and push it with little sleep!

There is also the old fogbound airfield (below minima) - one files to a nearby airfield and RIF to the fogbound one if the weather clears.

It's all about passing on the intentions prior to flight thus keeping everyone in the picture.

Seems that it is also a neat way of ensuring that UK ATC can't simply bin a flight plan that one has addressed to them ;)

Regards,

DFC

By golly this gets more and more boring!

DFC

When are you going to give up? You have already reached the point of no return. Your arrogance is breathtaking and your downright nerve in trying to tell some good and great controllers how to do their jobs is..................well, it makes you look stupid.

Your arguments and your so-called debate is just pontificating rubbish. Ok, so you like ATC matters - so what! The problem is that you don't truly understand what goes on in the air - in the real world of day to day ATC. You completely ignore those who do. That is NOT a debate.

Funnily enough DFC I DO know what a FPL is and have filed probably more than most in my 15 years in ATC. I have yet to see RIF in item 18. You have still not told me what it stands for. I cannot find any reference to RIF anywhere. My other half who used to work as a International Flight Planner has also never heard of this.

As far as I am aware you are not allowed to get airbourne with the intention of going anywhere other than your filed destination. If then you find you have incorrectly calculated your fuel you divert.

I stand corrected, I have found a reference to RIF. Still never seen it or find anyone that has on a flight plan.

RIF/ changes of routing to the changed destination aerodrome and/or changed destination aerodrome

http://www.ivao.org/training/tutoria...lightplans.htm

The link above where you found RIF is one of these simulated internet ATC places, maybe that says something :)

Now, where's a sharp knife, I'm off to cut my wrists...

;)

WF.

RIF/ is nothing more or less than a field in which you may elect to enter the routing that you wish to use to get to a designated alternate.

I have no idea why DFC is quoting it in this context.

Perhaps he seriously thinks that the way to get service is to nominate a large number of alternates and to bounce between them on a RIF/ routing.

2D

I wonder why DFC is so coy to come out of the closet and share with us what he is doing and where he fits into the aviation spectrum as given by him:

an ATC wannabe I think !

Well if I was flying Welshpool Exeter I doubt I would take the route via the BRI either , but then I am a mere ATCO, and of course I ignore flight plans :p

Lobby,

I am reading the instructions for completing the ICAO flight plan form or CA48 or 2919 depending on where you are.

Take a look in DOC4444, Aerad, Jeppesen or even the RAF Flight Information Handbook whichever you have to hand.

"RIF/ The route details to the revised destination aerodrome, followed by the ICAO four-letter location indicator of the aerodrome. Example: RIF/DTA HEC KLAX"

-----

Flower,

It is an example!
I have never knew that Seaton had an airport yet the R/T manual constantly refers to it and some ATC people have spent a long time learning it's runway and taxiway layout. :)

---------

2Donkeys,

I seems that in the UK that such drastic measures are required for the time being! :(

------------

One must wonder what happens to transit flights that say fly Bournemouth to BRI and back to Bournemouth......do Bristol get a copy of the flight plan?

If what is said here, they do not and if they did they would bin it...............how then do they seem to know the details when Examxx calls up for some holds at the BRI and an ILS before return to BIA...............could it be that either a flight plan has been filed or a telephone call received and details recorded?

Regards,

DFC

DFC, strangely enough I didn't start this thread for you to have a terminally boring diatribe on the merits and minutae of filing flight plans. Please start a flight plan thread if you feel so strongly about it.

My original intention was to get the opinions of ACTCOs and pilots on the reaction of the second ATCO. I thought the first ATCO handled the situation admirably; the infrigement (minor and no risk) was noted, apologies were made and that was it. The second ATCO made no contribution to flight safety, ATCO / pilot relations, or ATCO / ATCO relations in the way that he dealt with the already solved problem. Ah well, maybe he's just the kind of chap who needs extra vineger for the chips he obviously has on both shoulders.

Is this still going on?

Give me strength............ :ugh: :ugh:

Perhaps the mods would like to split this discussion up to zone infringer's and flight planning ?

Regarding the comment about Bournemouth to BRI trainers, i am not sure why on earth you think DFC that we bin every flight plan.
Training aircraft generally want a period of time in Class A airspace as part of their flight. The most common route if training at Bristol is to route Bournemouth to EXMOR to gain an airways joining clearance then either a period of time within N864 before turning to the BRI for beacon training or turn at EXMOR for the BRI.
Flight plans are not discarded in anyway and both Cardiff ( who give the initial airways joining clearance ) and Bristol will have the information supplied to them as the Flight Plan will include the various reporting points, it is an IFR flight plan and all the appropriate people will have the information they require.

I really cannot figure the point you are trying to make BTW DFC. Flight plans with the correct addresses and reporting points end up at the correct units, we do not bin them.

Perhaps the mods would like to split this discussion up to zone infringer's and flight planning ?

Great idea....and another one for people who only deal in personal abuse! :)

You said;

Regarding the comment about Bournemouth to BRI trainers, i am not sure why on earth you think DFC that we bin every flight plan.

and

Flight plans with the correct addresses and reporting points end up at the correct units, we do not bin them.

So you are saying that for a training flight routing say EGHH dct BRI dct CDF dct BRI EGHH......with Bristol included as an addressee would result in Bristol retaining the flight plan and expecting the flight at some stage unless the flight plan is cancelled or changed. Bristol would never bin or ignore such a flight plan?.

If that is so then it is at odds with what Chilli etc have said.........I believe he used the term "logistically impossible" and said that with automatic procesing of FPL messages only inbounds and outbounds are presented.

Could it be that some units act on the flight plans which are correctly addressed to them and some do not?

Question for enroute people - if I file a plan prior to departure for the sole purpose of completing an airway crossing enroute. Is the flight plan put in the computer so that when I call up the FIR frequency, they can pull out the details or do I have to repeat the flight plan to the FIR controller?........Is this not a similar situation to the zone transit as I may choose to underfly the airway and not call for crossing clearance?

Regards,

DFC

DFC I suspect you are misunderstanding previous posts on this topic.

Any unit to which a flightplan is relevant will be notified in the form of a Flight progress Strip.

The important word here now is relevant.

I think , and i don't like making personal comments , that you choose to misunderstand the responses here as you have decided that ATC are not interested in you.
A correctly filed flight plan ( note the correctly), will have the appropriate addresses on it and those addressees will be informed . There is nothing complex about it, there is no collusion with units dumping flight plans and everyone who should be informed according to the flight plan will be informed.
We may receive FPS on aircraft which have no relevance to us and at that point we will Bin the FPS however the flight plan still remains in the system and should it become necessary a FPS can be obtained within moments.

Now I suggest DFC you accept what all the ATC professionals are saying to you and that all Correctly filed Flight Plans will reach the appropriate destination.

flower, you're wasting your time.....he's been told already - can't get his head round it - hence 8 pages of drivel :zzz: - don't let him make it 9; please!! :{

No page nine I am afraid. This is worse than the magic roundabout.............