NCYankee wrote:
In the mountainous areas you can plan on airways, same in the Northeast triangle between Boston, Washington DC, and Chicago. The rest of the country is direct, just avoid restricted airspace.
Let’s say I want to file direct and avoid some airspace. Do I look for any convenient waypoint that will take me around it, and create a route like Departure DCT MYPOINT DCT Destination and then file that? What happens next – it is not “validated”, so the next person who sees it will be the controller that gives me the departure clearance, and if he doesn’t like it, he will give me a new route either at the holding point or in the air?
NCYankee wrote:
For filing purposes, there are preferred routes for city pairs.
Yeah, I think I saw them in the A/FD.
NCYankee wrote:
If you have ForeFlight Pro (150 per year)
As I said above, I renewed my ForeFlight subscription. But I didn’t take the “Pro” plan. Do I really need that? On their website, it says that Pro will give you everything in Basic, plus:
Geo-Referenced FAA Charts
Hazard Advisor & Terrain Profile
Cloud Documents
Flight Notifications
Weight & Balance
NCYankee wrote:
file direct and you should get an expected route back from ATC
So is this at the time when I file or when I am in the plane calling up ATC? Sorry for my stupid questions, but it is not clear to me.
NCYankee wrote:
Don’t setup DUATS, use Lockheed Martin if you use ForeFlight.
At what point do I need to use Lockheed Martin or DUATS if I have ForeFlight?
NCYankee wrote:
We don’t use DCT if you specify an ICAO flightplan, just specify the point to point waypoints or airports.
Don’t get that. Are flightplans usually ICAO? Do I have a choice? What’s the difference between a DCT and “point to point waypoints”? You mean I just don’t use the word “DCT” anywhere in my route?
NCYankee wrote:
In the mountainous areas you can plan on airways
That reminds me one question from my IFR exam way back. What parts of the US are considered mountainous? Turns out it is a healthy chunk of the 48 contiguous states…
My recent route was KUZA to 3MY. I used one waypoint, SUG which is a VOR. So my filed route on ForeFlight including departure airport and destination was KUZA SUG 3MY. The route portion was simply SUG. In the US, you can file using a domestic flightplan form or using the ICAO form. I used ICAO, but it is mostly transparent to the user of ForeFlight. The keyword DCT is rarely used in the US, it is assumed between two waypoints. In fact ForeFlight doesn’t even recognize it. So forget ever using DCT in the US. More than 90% of the flightplans filed do not use ICAO format flightplans, but rather use the domestic flightplan form, which is much simpler.
If you are going to file IFR flightplans using ForeFlight, I recommend spending the extra 75. All of your approach charts are geo-referenced, meaning your aircraft position is shown on the chart. Also with the pro version, you will get a message on ForeFlight from ATC indicating what your expected clearance route will be. This is nice for several reasons, if the route is complex, it is a simple tap to load the expected clearance into your ForeFlight Map view and route. Second, it is proof positive that ATC has your flightplan and when you call clearance delivery, they will have it.
As far as avoiding airspace, I usually pick a VOR, that way ATC has a better chance knowing where I am going and if the GPS fails, I can still navigate to it. But with GPS, any nearby waypoint of convenience will do. You can also just rubber band around the airspace or weather you wish to avoid and when you release your finger you have the option of selecting the nearest airport, Nav facility, waypoint or the latitude and longitude of the point your finger was at.
ATC will rarely if ever reject a flightplan because of its route. The only ones I am aware of are if the route passes thru the Washington DC area flight restricted zone. Other than that, most of my routes of convenience are accepted without modification by ATC. If they need to restrict my route, it will be when I get my clearance or later while I am airborne. The northeast triangle is notorious for amending routes, sometimes several times in a few minutes, but most of the country, if you are GPS equipped, routing is direct. Some pilots don’t bother with filing anything other than direct, figuring ATC will change their route if the want to or need to.
Stop by in Charlotte and I will spend some time training you on ForeFlight. A fair number of international non stop flights are available thru Charlotte using American Airlines/ US Airways, or Lufthansa (Munich).
OK, that makes a few points clearer to me. Especially good to know the difference between Foreflight Basic and Pro; the way you explain it, it really does seem to add a lot of value.
So ICAO refers to the flight plan format – of course I say now. I hadn’t tried the “file & brief” step in Foreflight yet, but now I see that I can choose between the ICAO and domestic form there. The main difference seems to be that if I use the domestic form, I cannot enter the color of the non-existent dinghy anywhere. :)
NCYankee wrote:
As far as avoiding airspace, I usually pick a VOR, that way ATC has a better chance knowing where I am going and if the GPS fails, I can still navigate to it. But with GPS, any nearby waypoint of convenience will do. You can also just rubber band around the airspace or weather you wish to avoid and when you release your finger you have the option of selecting the nearest airport, Nav facility, waypoint or the latitude and longitude of the point your finger was at.
Those are two very good hints. Neat feature.
Aviathor wrote:
What parts of the US are considered mountainous? Turns out it is a healthy chunk of the 48 contiguous states…
Turns out that we plan to cover almost all the area shaded in gray in the west – not surprising since that is the most scenic part. So it will be airways rather than directs.
NCYankee wrote:
Stop by in Charlotte and I will spend some time training you on ForeFlight. A fair number of international non stop flights are available thru Charlotte using American Airlines/ US Airways, or Lufthansa (Munich).
Thank you for your kind offer, but for this time all the flights are booked for quite some time. Maybe on the next trip, but by then I plan to be a Foreflight expert already. ;)
Foreflight is brilliant. I use it for all my flight planning purposes – I file IFR there, I plan, I look at weather and I get routes. Fltplan is also good. There’s an ongoing debate here about if you should file Direct and let ATC figure your routing out, or if you should do it old school. I tend to file maybe one or two waypoints I know they’ll need to get me out of LA (from experience), and then just Direct after that. Sometimes it can be good to include the IAF, so they know which approach you’re preferring.
Most of the times when I file direct I get cleared direct initially, but as I get closer to congested areas there’s always an amendment. But by that time you’re in the cruise and almost bored, so it’s good to get something to do.
NCYankee wrote:
As far as avoiding airspace, I usually pick a VOR, that way ATC has a better chance knowing where I am going and if the GPS fails, I can still navigate to it.
Is being able to use VOR navigation en-route as a backup actually a legal requirement that I need to consider during flight planning? The plane I’ll be renting has dual GNS430, but I think they are not 430Ws, so non-WAAS. AIM 1-1-18 says:
2. GPS (TSO-C129 (as revised) or TSO-C196
(as revised)) domestic en route and terminal IFR
operations can be conducted as soon as proper
avionics systems are installed, provided all general
requirements are met. For required backup navigation,
the avionics necessary to receive all of the
ground−based facilities appropriate for the flight to
the destination airport and any required alternate
airport must be installed and operational. Ground−
based facilities necessary for en route and terminal
operations must also be in service.
(a) A single GPS/WAAS receiver
(TSO-C145 (as revised) or TSO-C146 (as revised))
may also be used for these domestic en route and
terminal IFR operations. Though not required,
operators may consider retaining backup navigation
equipment in their aircraft to guard against potential
outages or interference
If I use direct routes, then in the case of GPS failure I would probably be able to rejoin another route that goes along VORs, but at the time of failure I may only be able to determine my position by doing manual VOR bearing checks on two different VORs (or maybe with DME, don’t know if the plane is so equipped). I know that a single VOR receiver is technically considered sufficient by the FAA for determining your position, but for actually flying an off-airway route, it would not work in practice.
A GNS430 non WAAS is not approved for sole source of IFR navigation using GPS as it is only approved for supplemental use. This means that you require a working VOR system on board. Since the GNS430 has a built in VOR receiver, that is a non issue. You can fly RNAV direct using the GNS430, but there are some limitations, particularly on the selection of alternates. Either the destination or the alternate must have an approach available that is based solely on conventional Navaids. The GNS430 may be used to substitute for DME, NDB, or VOR except when flying the final approach course of an instrument approach, unless the approach has GPS in the title (VOR or GPS, RNAV (GPS) etc.) The alternate requirement does not allow any dependency whatsoever on GPS at one of the airports (destination or alternate). This means that if the only approach at one airport is an ILS that requires a DME and the other is an RNAV(GPS), you can’t plan on using the GPS in lieu of the DME. Alternate requirements are planning requirements and you can fly whatever procedure the aircraft is authorized to fly once you arrive at the airport or the alternate. A WAAS GPS does not have these substitution or alternate limitations, nor is a VOR required. Get used to RNAV approaches as you are most likely to be flying one of those or an ILS.
Aviathor wrote:
I am not sure they have Y and Z plans in the US. I cannot remember having heard of such thing.
To answer this question: It’s called a “composite flight plan” in the US, and it looks to me that it is like having two different flight plans, an IFR and a VFR one. It is well described in AIM 5-1-7:
5−1−7. Composite Flight Plan (VFR/IFR Flights)
a. Flight plans which specify VFR operation for one portion of a flight, and IFR for another portion, will be accepted by the FSS at the point of departure. If VFR flight is conducted for the first portion of the flight, pilots should report their departure time to the FSS with whom the VFR/IFR flight plan was filed; and, subsequently, close the VFR portion and request ATC clearance from the FSS nearest the point at which change from VFR to IFR is proposed. Regardless of the type facility you are communicating with (FSS, center, or tower), it is the pilot’s responsibility to request that facility to “CLOSE VFR FLIGHT PLAN.” The pilot must remain in VFR weather conditions until operating in accordance with the IFR clearance.
b . When a flight plan indicates IFR for the first portion of flight and VFR for the latter portion, the pilot will normally be cleared to the point at which the change is proposed. After reporting over the clearance limit and not desiring further IFR clearance, the pilot should advise ATC to cancel the IFR portion of the flight plan. Then, the pilot should contact the nearest FSS to activate the VFR portion of the flight plan. If the pilot desires to continue the IFR flight plan beyond the clearance limit, the pilot should contact ATC at least 5 minutes prior to the clearance limit and request further IFR clearance. If the requested clearance is not received prior to reaching the clearance limit fix, the pilot will be expected to enter into a standard holding pattern on the radial or course to the fix unless a holding pattern for the clearance limit fix is depicted on a U.S. Government or commercially produced (meeting FAA requirements) low or high altitude enroute, area or STAR chart. In this case the pilot will hold according to the depicted pattern.
I should clarify my comment on expecting airways in mountainous areas. That mostly applies to routes where you are overflying mountains in the west where flights must be conducted above 10,000 MSL. I get direct routeing all thru the South East in or over the mountain areas as the minimum IFR altitude is around 8000 MSL. There are many areas in the West where direct routeing is the norm. If you can easily get to the mid teens, then direct routing is available even over the tall mountains.
Thanks Rwy20. That now rings a distant bell. I never used that possibility though.
