Quote: “There are so many variations by countries”
Indeed! During my recent trip around 10 european countries, mainly eastern europe, I filed all my VFR flight plans via the local AIS websites. They all accepted as flight level “VFR”. My collegues who filed via fax or phone with the same AISs had to state several times a flight level, which is rubbish when flying VFR in mountainous terrain and low clouds. Same goes for waypoints. One has to adapt from country to country. It is feasable, but the slight local differencies remain a hassle in an “unified” europe.
Rwy20 wrote:
The best thing would be to do away with the mandate for VFR flight plans inside the Schengen/EU area
What are you referring to?
Airborne_Again wrote:
What are you referring to?
I don’t get your question, could you try to rephrase it please? I mean what I wrote there. We shouldn’t need to deposit a VFR flight plan at all for a local flight up the Douro, or anywhere else inside the EU & Schengen area.
Rwy20 wrote:
I don’t get your question, could you try to rephrase it please? I mean what I wrote there. We shouldn’t need to deposit a VFR flight plan at all for a local flight up the Douro, or anywhere else inside the EU & Schengen area.
I don’t see what you mean by “mandate”.
Generally speaking, you have to file a “proper” (not abbreviated) VFR flight plan only when passing a national border. Within Schengen this seems pointless, but it is a requirement (with a few exceptions).
When making a controlled VFR flight you need to file a flight plan for the same reason that IFR flight do – because ATC needs the info. But this can generally be done in the form of an abbreviated flight plan. (You pass the necessary info to ATC by radio when requesting clearance.)
Regarding the original post about the flight up the Douro, I can’t see that you have to file a flight plan if you stay below controlled airspace.
Maybe then I misunderstood something. I thought that by:
geekyflyer wrote:
3. You need to file a flight plan.
Geekyflyer meant that he has to file a flight plan before his flight, which brought about the whole difficulties of getting it accepted etc.
Compare that to the US, where you contact the corresponding frequency for class C airspace, and if they answer with your callsign then you may enter it. Even for flying through class B as a VFR, you don’t need to file anything in advance, you just call them up with your request and they will handle it in the air. Yes, technically this is also called a flight plan, but it’s much easier than filing your whole route before a flight.
Same thing where I fly, within 5 minutes you have 2 other countries, it is just cumbersome to be required to file a VFR plan if you want to cross the border.
Maybe that makes it more clear what I meant?
Rwy20 wrote:
Even for flying through class B as a VFR, you don’t need to file anything in advance, you just call them up with your request and they will handle it in the air. Yes, technically this is also called a flight plan,
No, it isn’t, it’s called ‘clearance through the Bravo airspace’. As I explained in the other VFR FP thread, ATC in the US does not handle VFR FPs at all.
172driver wrote:
No, it isn’t, it’s called ‘clearance through the Bravo airspace’.
Well, even better, that just confirms my point. In Europe, it’s called an “abbreviated flight plan”, and I was just anticipating the reply with that sentence, that this was still a flight plan.
Not quite sure, what you mean by this, Rwy20, but a Class B clearance in the US is NOT a flight plan, full, abbreviated or otherwise.
My understanding of the “abbreviated flight plan” nonsense is that it’s wrapped around an ICAO recommendation that controlled airspace should require a ‘flight plan’. To me that sounds like ancient history or the product of authoritarian government, but regardless in Europe they play games with words to cast an ATC clearance in Class D or higher as being an ‘abbreviated flight plan’. In the US nobody gives a rat’s ass about that charade [US controlled air space below 18,000 feet (i.e. not Class A) will never require a flight plan] so the US ATC clearance is what it is 
This is what SERA say
SERA.4001 Submission of a flight plan
(a) Information relative to an intended flight or portion of a flight, to be provided to air traffic services units, shall be in
the form of a flight plan. The term ‘flight plan’ is used to mean variously, full information on all items comprised in
the flight plan description, covering the whole route of a flight,
or limited information required, inter alia, when the
purpose is to obtain a clearance for a minor portion of a flight such as to cross an airway, to take off from, or to land
at a controlled aerodrome.
There is no such thing as abbreviated flight plan anywhere in SERA. But I must say that flight plans are one of the most confusing and obscure things regarding flying. There is no requirement to deliver a flight plan for VFR, except for crossing borders and to fly to/from certain airports (although I’m not sure a flight plan is actually required), night VFR and in coordination with military units to prevent interception (in certain areas).
One might argue that a clearance is some kind of flight plan (as the wording say), but a clearance is not something you file or submit. So there is no requirement to file or submit a flight plan to fly in controlled airspace, but obviously a requirement for clearance, which happen to be some sort of flight plan. Confusing.
