You write WPT1 DCT WPT2 in the flight plan and then obstacle clearance and airspace structure is your responsibility.
No, it doesn’t work like that. If it’s valid IFR plan in controlled airspace and you get ATC clearance then you can’t infringe any restricted area.
You write WPT1 DCT WPT2 in the flight plan and then obstacle clearance and airspace structure is your responsibility.
In my very limited and mainly French experience, you can’t do that. The auto-generated route uses airways, except at the very beginning and end. Then what you typically get is direct routing avoiding numerous kinks and dog legs. On my last IFR flight from Arcachon to Beziers my filed route included numerous kinks and one 50 NM dogleg. I was cleared direct to somewhere sensible before I even took off, and direct to destination within minutes of take off. But the filed route was on airways.
Emir wrote:
I don’t want to sound harsh but that’s exactly the reason why you think what you listed within #1 and #2. It simply doesn’t hold because the things function differently and it has been explained in this thread by few IFR pilots.
Thanks Emir for clarifying. (and you didn’t sound harsh, btw.) Still, double-checking the output of an automated system just seemed like plain common sense to me…
Well, for now I’ll refrain from participating any further to this discussion for lack of relevant qualification. And make an opinion for myself when/if I do an IFR at some point. (Seriously thinking about it)
UdoR wrote:
@Airborne_again you missed the point. The problem comes when you file a direct between two waypoints and not when ATC gives you a direct.You write WPT1 DCT WPT2 in the flight plan and then obstacle clearance and airspace structure is your responsibility.
Obstacle clearance, yes. That’s what my quote from part-ATS above implies. As regards airspace structure, it is certainly my responsibility to stay in CAS if I want to stay in CAS, but R-areas? That’s not obvious if I have a clearance. If I have a Eurocontrol-validated flight plan then I will fly my clearance and I don’t care about any R-areas along the way.
johnh wrote:
In my very limited and mainly French experience, you can’t do that.
Whether you can do that or not entirely depends on what the country in question has told Eurocontrol. Some countries essentially don’t allow any directs, some countries essentially allow arbitrary directs.
johnh wrote:
The auto-generated route uses airways, except at the very beginning and end.
Not always. You can have DCT in autogenerated route if it’s allowed in particular airspace. If your plan is valid and you get ATC clearance then you don’t care what’s below you.
There can be a case that you submitted the plan earlier and it was valid at the time of submitting while later on some restricted area was activated. Then you get notification from Eurocontrol on invalidating your plan and you are supposed to submit new plan. However, you can miss this notification but then you won’t get the clearance. On India or Yankee plan you’ll find out this before take off while on Zulu plan you can get this info in the air and then it depends on ATC (and your negotiating skills 
) if they are willing to submit modified plan for you and whether you can get some conditional clearance. However, this can happen with any flight plan and it doesn’t have anything in using DCT in particular.
Still, double-checking the output of an automated system just seemed like plain common sense to me
Problem is, this isn’t practical. Look at e.g. this one
EGKA N0146F050 DRAKE/N0146F070 DCT SITET/N0149F110 A34 LGL/N0152F110 H20 BENAR A34 AMB R10 SOPIL A34 OLINO R10 BALAN A34 LMG G36 PPG A27 KANIG KANIG2F LEGE
Now, you could plot it onto a series of VFR charts, using various tools. You could do it in FF, Skyvector, etc. Like we used to do in the old pre-IR days. Then you would need to get enroute notams (which you can do in FF except that FF doesn’t display notams until EOBT minus 2hrs!!!). But IFR in the Eurocontrol system already takes into account the day’s notams; ATC are notam-aware when they send you around the sky (otherwise the system would collapse). Another way, from the old VFR long trip across Europe days, was to get the narrow route briefing from say NATS (works worldwide) but the big advantage of Eurocontrol IFR is that ATC take care of all that.
So what else could there be to check? Obviously you need to check the length of the filed route re your fuel capability, and possibly your spouse/passenger tolerance. You could do a terrain/obstacle check, but AFAICT that has already been done in the validation (it seems impossible to file say across the Alps below the MEA etc). If you ask for a shortcut, ATC won’t give it to you below their MRVA and that has already been obstacle-surveyed.
So… these days, it is a pure “software world”
Here is another post, done shortly before the guy who set up the Autorouter bought himself a TBM and left here
The big remaining problem is that sometimes you can’t get a route at all, or a usable one. But that’s another topic.
You still need to check out any VFR sections e.g. Z and Y plans, I plans if you depart VFR or cancel IFR, etc, and you do need VFR charts for the VFR sections there, but that’s another topic too.
@Peter, nice summary with the strongest emphasis at “check your spouse/passenger tolerance” simply there’s nothing to check within positively validated IFR route. The rest is what it is, normal stuff that you always do for the parts of the route which are not validated by Eurocontrol system. However, we’re still waiting the source for the claims that pilot is responsible for avoiding restricted areas on previously validated and cleared route.
Maybe there is such a rule, but it should not be enforceable in any country which holds the legal principle that a citizen is entitled to rely on information from an official body to be accurate.
The UK goes further in that you can rely on information from a source like an airport even if not govt owned. Fairly obviously Germany does not have such a rule otherwise this could not have happened. Obviously I think that is unfair because of the excessive due diligence burden placed on the citizen, but different countries’ legal frameworks have evolved along different routes, amid the troubled 20th century events.
Peter wrote:
Maybe there is such a rule
If there is then there must be a place where this rule is written. German AIP is pretty clear on this showing no surprises or some doggy rules. ICAO differences, flight plan rules, IFR rules, regional supplementary procedures etc. don’t show anything that could support OP claims. And finally ENR 5.1 related to “Prohibited, Restricted and Danger Areas” is absolutely clear.
ED_ENR_1_1_en_2022_06_16_pdf
ED_ENR_1_3_en_2023_11_30_pdf
ED_ENR_5_1_en_2023_11_30_pdf
