If you can try to organize a radar frequency before departure. FIS might not be available at some times and you might be stuck without a frequency for the pick up.
If everything else fails, call the tower of the nearest controlled airport. They can give you the right frequency. I needed that a couple of weeks ago when the radio operator of an uncontrolled airfield gave us a wrong radar frequency. Flying low level at 250kt (which means covering almost 8NM every minute) in marginal weather with no VFR chart and no idea what terrain, obstacles and airspace might look like stops to be funny after the third unsuccessful call ... so one always needs a plan B on hand.
Flying low level at 250kt (which means covering almost 8NM every minute) in marginal weather with no VFR chart and no idea what terrain, obstacles and airspace might look like stops to be funny after the third unsuccessful call
I find it to be rather annoying that there is no clear source of ATC frequencies. Garmin devices contain a list of frequencies for each FIR but that's like 20-30 of them without any indication what they actually are. The situation you described is actually one that I am afraid of. Trying to find a frequency while you're in a difficult VFR situation without being prepared for VFR is not nice. I don't have a good strategy what to do other than what you suggested, find a tower or get the FIS frequency from the VFR charts (I always carry all VFR charts on my iPad). My last resort would probably be 121.5MHz.
Yes that is a very dangerous phase of flight.
You may be planning to be "IFR" but you need VFR charts, need to watch obstacle clearance, cannot (in theory, hey) enter IMC...
I had one weekend departure in France, St Yan LFLN, where I could not raise anybody for ages (maybe 20 mins). Luckily I eventually did.
Another was an "IFR" flight in Greece, from Messalonghi to Corfu, where I took maybe an hour to raise somebody, eventually landing in Corfu with a 7000 squawk, some 2hrs later.
A few IR holders have been killed waiting for IFR clerarances, though not necessarily in this phase of flight.
If you don't know the appropriate frequency forthe IFR pickup, the best thing is usually to look at the approach plates of the nearest IFR airport.
I agree with Peter re VFR charts for Zulu departures. Even commercial pilots ought to have them ;-)
In conclusion, today's restriction on IFR in G is mostly an issue for foreign IFR pilots. Local pilots learn how to deal with flight rule changes after they get their IR ticket.
And this is because the Germans are happily breaking the law, while the foreigners try to stick to it? What is the world coming to.... ;-)
And this is because the Germans are happily breaking the law, while the foreigners try to stick to it?
Not long ago I had just landed at a small airfield in Germany in - let's call it "less than ideal" VFR conditions. Luckily this airfield has a GPS approach which took us safely there. Not long after us a jet from the UK landed also. One of the pilots complained that the stupid British regulations forbid standalone GPS approaches forcing them to cancel IFR and fly the approach "visually". So it looks as if every country has invented it's own special way to break absurd laws ;-)
If you don't succeed in getting the right frequency, go on the guard frequency 121.500 and you will get someone (hopefully, can also take some time) and they will ask you to switch to another frequency. The airliners always have guard standby and if they make a mistake in switching frequency, ATC will call them on guard as well.
Not long after us a jet from the UK landed also. One of the pilots complained that the stupid British regulations forbid standalone GPS approaches forcing them to cancel IFR and fly the approach "visually".
There are many reasons why a commercial operator might have restrictions on GPS approaches. It requires an operational approval, which the operator might not have bothered to get. That's an ICAO rule, not a UK one. There might also be issues with equipment approvals and crew training. In principle, operational approvals are also required by ICAO Annex 6 Part 2 for non-commercial operators, though I've never seen that enforced within Europe.
It goes without saying that what starts as a sensible requirement placed on the use of a novel technology has become a major barrier to the adoption of important safety enablers. But I'm afraid that's the way global aviation politics works.
What political factors would stop an AOC operator flying a GPS/RNAV approach?
The operator can fly whatever he is willing to spend on supporting avionics and whatever he can get inserted into his national-CAA-approved ops manual - correct?
Is it even possible to get CAA approval to operate a commercial service (which for a jet has to be IFR, I would think) to an airport on which the only approach you are ops manual authorised is a visual approach?
Maybe it is possible if there is an IFR alternate, but it's certainly an interesting proposition, considering the human factors in the cockpit if the wx at the destination is, ahem, close to VFR 
That is one way:
