I am sure it is a requirement to speak to “somebody”, and going e.g. Shoreham tower to Le Touquer tower meets that requirement. Why would it not? Even if “FIS” was specified, a tower can offer an FIS.
I might be wrong, but I think it’s an ICAO requirement, so everyone copies it into their AIP. But in practice nobody seems to care.
It is probably a tribute to the qualities of my steed (and the ones I owned previously), but the majority of my border crossings have been made without FIS, or any other contact with ATC.
Now guess what? Yes, she kept flying beautifully 
AA, in my case these requests for adding the EET from the ARO have been for IFR portions of Z FPLs.
Funny thing is, from CZ to PL you don’t even need a FPL.
Peter wrote:
Secondly, “not possible to establish radio contact” and “should preferably” are vague. In reality this is not necessary. You can just change directly from departure airport to destination airport (if VFR). If the destination airport doesn’t like it, they will send you to another frequency…
It’s not clear cut to me why and how. I have always though this was more to do with customs. The customs regulations are usually worded so that the point in time of interest to them is not when you land, but when you enter the customs area. You certainly cannot simply change from departure airport to destination airport if those airports are not international customs airports. They usually are un-towered airports in my case, where I usually fly, and contact with Polaris/Sweden control is expected (it’s what the ATC say when leaving one area), and what I do. At first contact in the other area, ATC can simple say “contact XXXX” where XXXX is the “appropriate” international customs airport, but usually not the airport I’m going to.
Many places it’s not even possible to contact Sweden control right at the border, not at normal VFR flying alt and with the usual low powered GA radio. This is a bit funny, because at first contact with Sweden control going to Norway, they say report [to us] when crossing the border
Peter_G wrote:
If filing VFR via SkyDemon, the FIR Boundary information is calculated and inserted automatically.
Yes, this is a very nice feature. SD does this well. I usually put a reporting point just on either side of the border to make things clearer for ATC.
Peter wrote:
Firstly, I have never, not in 22 years, entered the border crossing time on any flight plan.
For IFR you don’t have to as Eurocontrol provides the estimates.
Peter wrote:
Firstly, I have never, not in 22 years, entered the border crossing time on any flight plan.
The rules governing information to be put in Section 18 of an ICAO flight plan states:
“EET/ – Estimated Enroute Time(s) in “HHMM” format to Significant Fixes or FIR Boundaries e,g, EET/CAP0745 EHAA0830”
If filing VFR via SkyDemon, the FIR Boundary information is calculated and inserted automatically.
tmo wrote:
FWIW, if I don’t file an EET/point0123 for a border crossing point in field 18, the Polish ARO will call me and ask for a time. I usually put something “about right” in there and it was never questioned.
Indeed. I normally just give the estimated time for the border crossing. (E.g. EET/EPWW0100.) But on a recent flight from the Czech republic to Germany, passing Polish territory, the Czech ARO rejected the flight plan saying that Poland also demanded a specific border crossing point.
