pilotrobbie wrote:
does anyone know a list or of the various “Current” numbers for the various countries across Europe to get Slots?
As boscomantico said, fro France it’s managed by COHOR which replaced the previous CCAF = Orly, CDG, Nice..
Don’t get too excited about the concept, Bose Proflight 2 with Bluetooth phone call is not enough, you need a printed paper copy with stamps 
, the fine for missing these AD PN/slots may exceed the hull value of our GA aircraft 
Caen LFRK would be a good candidate: I would send an application on their behalf to join CCAF, as missing PN+2*slots for LDN/TOF during one single visit there from UK require 170kE deposit in cash & bonds (30kE PN fine + 2*45kE slots fine plus 20% VAT on your aircraft)
There is a generic law that was published in 2017 for blanket application of slot fees across all French AD (except Saint-Barths in Caribbean and Saint-Pierre near Newfoundland) but again an aerodrome needs traffic first before it needs coordinated slots…
https://www.ecologie.gouv.fr/en/slot-coordination-and-schedules-facilitation
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/JORFTEXT000033912872/
If you were clever and had good tools you could beat this
by changing the filed speed, presumably? Or does Eurocontrol disregard the filed speed and uses its internal (secret) performance model?
Peter wrote:
If you were clever and had good tools you could beat this
Why would you want to? It seems the slot fits very well with your EOBT.
Peter wrote:
Or does Eurocontrol disregard the filed speed and uses its internal (secret) performance model?
I think it uses your filed speed, but it rejects the flightplan completely if what you file is “too different” from their own model. I don’t remember what the exact leeway is, but I remember thinking it is quite large.
Here is another simple example where “IFR” was simply moved along the flight plan. It was moved from after BILGO to where shown in yellow
Crucially this is a kind of edit you could do on a phone when stuck somewhere with no laptop. It is even more possible because the original FP started VFR so “IFR” appeared somewhere early on. If the FP started IFR then you would need to change it from “I” to “G” and insert VFR and IFR later on which is more complicated.
A couple of identical threads merged. It is interesting how different people have different views on “conformity with rules”
I guess everything is related to this:
This is just the general EUROCONTROL area and saying that AFTM can apply. Not too different from other ICAO areas.
I find the initial network plan that gets posted at https://www.public.nm.eurocontrol.int/PUBPORTAL/gateway/spec/ to be a good starting point to see whether there might be bottlenecks that will lead to ATFM being applied. For example, here is the initial network plan for tomorrow: https://www.public.nm.eurocontrol.int/PUBPORTAL/gateway/spec/res/20230813/20230813-153238.pdf?APPID=initial_networkplan (manually copy the whole URL)
Emir wrote:
I guess everything is related to this:
What do you mean is new? It has been like that for decades – already back in 1984 when I first got my PPL. The difference is that some time in the 90s the IFPS was introduced so that traffic flow could be better optimised, particularly over central Europe with its many small FIRs. Whether AFTM measures are actually applied depends on the traffic density. It virtually never happens in Scandinavia.
It depends on much more than density. One might wish it depended on density… It depends mostly on ATC staffing rules around Europe. The idiotic rules implement a limit on planes in a sector regardless of altitude.
You have got to ask yourself how did the world get by before the mad IFPS software was brought in. It obviously did get by. The ATC unions were just a bit more relaxed And this is how it works outside Europe. ATC are paid lots of money to do their job and they just do it, mostly very well. They don’t need a million lines of code to space traffic out.
My last flight, 2 days ago, ~800nm, EGKA-LDLO, FL100-FL160. Guess how many targets I saw on TCAS (range ~15nm, +/-3000ft)? Zero! It shows there is simply nobody anywhere near. And I could repeat this any day, over central Europe, full of jets going to holiday destinations, etc.
The rules being implemented by IFPS are obviously inappropriate to reality, but somebody decided on XYZ so the coders at Eurocontrol went about implementing it, at 100 euros per line of code
That is why the system is defeated by somebody flying the exact same route, same level, under VFR. ATC call you up every 10-30 mins, sometimes with 100-200nm DCTs. Yet the same system generates crazy CTOTs when “staffing levels” drop below some rule.
The best bit is when you file VFR to get validation and then fly IFR anyway, just by asking ATC for an IFR clearance. It is pretty obvious that ATC don’t even know about these rules; they don’t need to because that TB20 is at FL100 and there is nothing under FL300 except in terminal areas. From GA POV there is almost nobody there, so an ATCO can immediately see there is nothing for him to do.
