Filing FPL

The very good service still being provided by the very few nationalised offices conceals a huge cost to the general taxpayer. The UK had some dozens of people processing about 3000 flight plans per month, mostly GA, mostly faxed and a few telephoned, and many of them just for training i.e. no international flights. That is a cost of quite a few € million, and you can expect somebody to be “looking at it closely” as we speak.

I am obviously not in favour of having our facilities made harder but this is such an obvious cost saving opportunity that it cannot last. Probably the only thing which keeps it going, given the various electronic facilities, and given that most commercial operators have been filing electronically for years, is the unions.

I recall one old ATCO explaining that they had a “VFR addressing manual” which was about 5cm think, and for every flight plan that actually went somewhere they would look up the various addresses it should go to. I guess the Germans and the few others are still doing that – or maybe they have a database.

Many of the flight plans contained garbage – names of obscure villages which nobody knew, names of airports (not allowed for ICAO flight plans), illegible stuff which could only be guessed at, and lots of time wasting stuff due to the need to phone up the source (e.g. a flying school).

Olivia has been reported over the years as being a bit “random” when it comes to flight plans which go outside France. It could be that they make the same mistakes for wholly French flight plans too but those won’t be noticed because France has a joined-up system where a flight plan filed to any French airfield is visible to any ATCO in France – or so it appears clearly when one flies there VFR. That absolutely doesn’t happen in the UK, for example.

I am obviously not in favour of having our facilities made harder but this is such an obvious cost saving opportunity that it cannot last. Probably the only thing which keeps it going, given the various electronic facilities, and given that most commercial operators have been filing electronically for years, is the unions.

My understanding is that the german DFS weighed up against each other: on the one side the cost… and one the other side the huge amount of junk that would end up in the AFTN and in the ATC terminals if they had no “controlling entity” such as the AIS office, and then found the current situation to be overall “better”.

I recall one old ATCO explaining that they had a “VFR addressing manual” which was about 5cm think, and for every flight plan that actually went somewhere they would look up the various addresses it should go to. I guess the Germans and the few others are still doing that – or maybe they have a database.

They do have a database, obviously.

I had a look at the UK system and EuroFPL, but I wonder why there is no such thing as the UK direct filing system available in each country or europeanwise, as it would make it safer and more reliable than it is now.

As I said, technically you can do that with tools like Skydemon and Rocketroute. But “by regulation” it is not the right way to do it in most countries.

Regarding the French VFR IFR number, it is usefull to close the flight plan, but they don’t really like to file the plan for you, Olivia is there for you.

Since you are French, that could well be true. When a foreigner calls up and tells them that they can’t figure out how to make the bloody girl named Olivia obey as they wish, they do accept FPLs by phone. My experience at least.

But after all, that’s part of the excitement of going abroad, and I like it !

That is true! Mastering the system is a big part of the fun.

They do have a database, obviously.

Presumably that database is confidential, otherwise

and one the other side the huge amount of junk that would end up in the AFTN and in the ATC terminals if they had no “controlling entity” such as the AIS office

would not be an issue

So, keeping it confidential protects the jobs!

I recall one old ATCO explaining that they had a “VFR addressing manual” which was about 5cm think, and for every flight plan that actually went somewhere they would look up the various addresses it should go to. I guess the Germans and the few others are still doing that – or maybe they have a database.

No, it’s all in the AIP ENR 1.11

Mastering the system is a big part of the fun.

Mastering the “bloody girl” perhaps even better?

Sorry, off-topic and off-manners, couldn’t resist such a bait.

I agree – like many pilots I already waste much of my day fixing IT issues in the daily job, and the last thing I am interested in is worrying if XYZ got my flight plan.

@FredPilote, if you use Olivia for international flights, you may want to follow up with a phone call to the BRIA at Le Bourget which I believe handle all international (cross-borser) flights to or from France. Those guys are really helpful and eager to justify maintaining their jobs. When ever I have a (IFR) flight planning problem I cannot figure out any other way, I file it with Olivia. They have sometimes called me to discuss the flight plan! And they always find a solution.

I must admit I seldom fly to Belgium, but on those occasions I have never had a problem with ATC finding my flight plan. I previously used Olivia for VFR flight plans, but I now only use EuroFPL and usually file IFR or do not file at all.

Your problem may be a one-off. Flight plans do sometimes get “lost” or misaddressed. When departing Carpentras on my way back from Calvi, Orange Approach had a hard time finding my IFR flight plan. They eventually did.

Wait until we offer VFR flight plan filing on autorouter.eu / router.euroga.org Then you can see exactly where a flight plan is sent to and the database containing those rules is in the open and can be amended by the users.

There really is no point in every flight plan filing service (that is every country’s AIS + a few commercial companies) maintaining their own list of VFR flight plan addressing rules each with their own bugs, omissions and outdated information. The only sensible approach is to maintain a common database# and we’ve laid the groundwork for it.