Sorry, I mean in France…
Ibra wrote:
However, ATC loves 2*FPL back to back and will give you departure clearance as you approach and bin the first FPL,
Not permitted in my country. Ask me how I know…
How do you plan and fly cloudbreak or lowpass from approach in Sweden and depart IFR without landing?
You file some nearby fix on one IFR flight plan and ask ATC for an approach?
Ibra wrote:
How do you plan and fly cloudbreak or lowpass from approach in Sweden and depart IFR without landing?
You file via the IAF or other suitable significant point and use STAY and STAYINFO – or a RMK.
arj1 wrote:
MUST be able to fly the route you filed”, then it means that is no option for a SEP, right?
It’s perfectly legal for a SEP to fly outside of gliding distance of land. Depending on the country there might be a few additional requirements, such as lifejackets or a raft, but it’s not illegal outright. So the route can be flown as far as Eurocontrol is concerned, even in a SEP.
Whether you are happy with that route and whether you have the required equipment for the route is a different matter.
The other way ‘round is tricky though. I had a training flight a while ago from EHRD to EHKD. The direct route crosses the EHAM TMA almost straight through. I filed a route via the east of EHAM at FL70, staying well within gliding distance of land. But as soon as I entered the EHAM TMA I was told to remain at 2000’, and received a vector that took me well offshore and outside of gliding distance. Not anywhere near our filed route and altitude. And we did not bring lifejackets or a raft, so ATC essentially vectored us into an illegal situation. That took quite a few terse radio exchanges to sort out.
BackPacker wrote:
It’s perfectly legal for a SEP to fly outside of gliding distance of land. Depending on the country there might be a few additional requirements, such as lifejackets or a raft, but it’s not illegal outright. So the route can be flown as far as Eurocontrol is concerned, even in a SEP.
It is legal, but not safe (at least for me), so I was kind of expecting to see at least one other route that would be safe.
This is why I fly 100% with a raft on the back seat. Even on the 20 departure from Shoreham one is probably out of glide range for a bit, and if you turn right back over land you will conflict with inbounds / circuit traffic.
ATC’s job doesn’t include assuming that they can’t do this.
BackPacker wrote:
I was told to remain at 2000’, and received a vector that took me well offshore and outside of gliding distance
Isn’t that related? the only place where you can get vectored at max 2kft is over water I suppose (maybe NL is very flat)
BackPacker wrote:
Whether you are happy with that route and whether you have the required equipment for the route is a different matter.
I am always happy to fly over water than terrain in serious conditions (convective, icing, low clouds, low visibility, strong winds, night…), although mostly following the coastline: it gives more room without risk of hitting ground or nasty weather and probably way more forgiving to engine failures 
VFR and IFR in sunny days, I prefer terraferma but I can’t see a good reason to prefer flying over terraferma if you can’t see land surface? in the other hand, water surface is very “standardized”, even if you don’t see it it’s found at 0ft of on the altimeter
Say for en-route you have 100ft ceiling & 400m RVR beneath with freezing level in stratus at 3kft, would you love to fly SEP over land or over water?
Ibra wrote:
Say for en-route you have 100ft ceiling & 400m RVR beneath with freezing level in stratus at 3kft, would you love to fly SEP over land or over water?
:) I’d stay at home.
arj1 wrote:
:) I’d stay at home.
I was talking about what is beneath you en-route (while you are probably VMC over the tops at FL120), not at airport for takeoff & landing
In the strict sense, for en-route, you need 1kft cloud-base & 3km visibility to fly safely bellow clouds and successfully deal with any single engine failure, some would even say it’s 2kft cloud-base & 5km visibility, bellow that I am not sure how much it’s useful to “visually select field” or “visually avoid obstacles/terrain using the stick"?
If you think about it, this effectively kills the utility value of any sort of IFR in IMC in SE
