hazek wrote:
And the answer I got is that I should list the airports in the route even if I don’t plan cross them exactly for better awareness so that they forwarded it to them but that generally they’ll do this regardless.
That’s interesting as it is contrary to ICAO standards and some countries refuse to accept a VFR flightplan with airport codes in the route.
Peter wrote:
In Europe, this “requirement” is disregarded practically everywhere.
Certainly not. A “flight plan” in this context is not necessarily the same thing as a full ICAO flight plan. If you want to cross CAS and give them your position, altitude and desired route, then you have “submitted” a flight plan.
Nothing new though. Every country says completely different things about what they want and don‘t want in VFR flightplans… ridiculous.
Exactly.
And not related to whether there is a right to a CAS entry. Obviously there is not.
Airborne_Again wrote:
s and some countries refuse to accept a VFR flightplan with airport codes in the route.Interesting. Can you give some examples? I think I very rarely use airports in my FPs unless I intend to land there- but I would , if airport is the only available point in vicinity (overflying some small island for example).
ivark wrote:
Interesting. Can you give some examples?
Sweden. It strictly requires adherence to ICAO standards for VFR flight plans. You can use lat-long or bearing-distance, of course.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
On the other hand, I overheard last weekend quite a few airspace D crossings in the rush hour in ZRH and they were approved without any problem. (Mostly S-W for those who know the airspace but also some E-W or E-S and vice versa). I doubt that any of them had a flight plan. I doubt that any of them had a flight plan.Do Swiss ATCOs ever look at flight plans for VFR traffic, when it’s not departure or destination airfield? The Swiss way of stating callsign, position, and request upon first call is a bit different from ICAO standard. As far I’ve learned, the ICAO standard is callsign only upon first contact (except when it’s a handover).
The right to CAS is obviously a given. It’s implicit in the definition of airspaces. Then there are airspace requirements, which is a different thing.
ivark wrote:
Interesting. Can you give some examples? I think I very rarely use airports in my FPs unless I intend to land there- but I would , if airport is the only available point in vicinity (overflying some small island for example).
This is what they said to me:
From our point of view, it is not important which points are used in the route, but how many points are used. Keep in mind that the main reason for filing flights plans IS for search&resue purposes (the whole flight plan).
Even for short legs, in case of an accident, the chances for being found are much higher if you insert 3 or 4 points instead of a DCT. DCT means that search&rescuers first will have a look at the missing aircraft on the direct line, starting from the aerodrome, or if known, from the VFR exit point of a controlled aerodrome.
Just specify in the FPL the same points as you use during your flight preparation. FOR VFR flights, you may use 5-letter-waypoints, NAVAIDS, bearings/radials from NAVAIDS, coordinates or references (in full name) such as cities, churches, highway intersections, aerodromes or other distinctive references. From the regulatory point of view, insert points normally not more than 30 min flying time or 200 NM apart.
Once you submit a flight plan, it is the aerodrome of departure’s ARO responsibility, to distribute it correctly to the concerned departure, en-route and arrival ATS units. Therefore, an ARO needs to have a precise route a much as possible.
If you fly from A to B with only a DCT in the route, and a controlled aerodrome would be crossed, the ARO normally addresses this flight plan to this aerodrome even if you decide not to cross it. However, for better awareness, it would be good to mention the crossed aerodrome in the route.
I’ve used both the airport’s ICAO code and its navaid, and each method has worked for me. Maybe the right idea is to mentioned the CAS we are likely to cross in item 18 Other information where I usually put in my phone number etc. But like I said, if you file via FF or some other online tool and you fly out of an uncontrolled field, which ARO handles that flight plan then? And how well is it handled? Maybe I’m spoiled for nearly always departing from ELLX with an ARO that does their job really well. I don’t know.
Maybe the right idea is to mentioned the CAS we are likely to cross in item 18 Other information where I usually put in my phone number etc.
Nope. That information goes nowhere.
Even if you mention airports in field 15, in no way does this effect that the approach /TMA controllers receive your flightplan.
But like I said, if you file via FF or some other online tool and you fly out of an uncontrolled field, which ARO handles that flight plan then?
With the exception of UK-originating flights, it is always sent by FF etc. to the responsible ARO for the country or the region.
Maybe I’m spoiled for nearly always departing from ELLX with an ARO that does their job really well.
Well, if you fly to say Germany, you will also have to fly back. And for the return flight, the ARO processing the flightplan will be the German AIS, which will generally not accept a flightplan that contains airport codes or location names.
