Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Autorouter issues and questions (merged)

Eurocontrol perform the SID/STAR insertion for all flight plans where a procedure is contained in the database. You won’t see anything of that, it’s done to calculate the 4D profile. They would like to force all plans to explicitly state the SID/STAR (unless a DCT connection is used which many airports allow) but could not get the stakeholders to live with this requirement so now they kindly ask everybody to do it and for the rest, they just insert one to their liking. The goal is that the filer has the same 4D profile as Eurocontrol.

Last Edited by achimha at 02 Sep 13:38

ok, now I understand ,thanks for explanation

LKKU, LKTB

Thanks for the replies.

Interesting info Achimha!

Just feels wrong to file a route that is weather dependent :) But now i know :)

Jonas

ESOW Västerås, Sweden

For clarification: you don’t need to put the exact SID name into the flightplan. The termination point of the SID is sufficient.

The only case I know which asks (in their AIP) to file a specific SID procedure in the flightplan is Germany. But even there, you don’t really have to do it (i.e. it doesn’t bring up an error message if you don’t), since you only interact with a computer, and the Brussels computer doesn’t generally care about specific SID procedures when it comes to validating or rejecting a flightplan.

Last Edited by boscomantico at 02 Sep 14:13
Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

Ok thanks boscomantico, i tried this manual route in autorouter with only connecting points for SID and STAR and it works:

ESMS N0131F160 SALLO M44 KOGIM M725 HDO M748 KOMUR Z164 VOZ M725 STO Z21 SASAL DCT VEBAL L196 KOMAR L187 EVTON Y128 TIKSA L607 NERRA LDDU

Would have asked the autorouter team for a function to omit SID and STAR when autorouting if not already explained why by Achim…

Jonas

Last Edited by Jonas at 02 Sep 14:30
ESOW Västerås, Sweden

@achimha wrote:

You can’t really know which one you’ll get and autorouter just picks the most optimal one (considering the optimization target). In the future, Eurocontrol plan to forecast the SID/STAR. Right now an easterly SID/STAR is as likely as a westerly even though the main wind direction in Central Europe is westerly.

It may also be reasonable pick the more likely one in cases when it can be determined from indirect information. One source of such information is the preferential runway system, if declared. Another one is a comparison of available approach procedures: if an ILS is only available in one direction, it usually matches the local wind rose and other relevant considerations for choosing the runway.

LKBU (near Prague), Czech Republic

boscomantico wrote:

The only case I know which asks (in their AIP) to file a specific SID procedure in the flightplan is Germany. But even there, you don’t really have to do it (i.e. it doesn’t bring up an error message if you don’t), since you only interact with a computer, and the Brussels computer doesn’t generally care about specific SID procedures when it comes to validating or rejecting a flightplan.

The IFPS User Manual reads in chapter 81 (SID/STAR) on page 227:

Within the IFPZ, the IFPS is required to provide a route that starts and finishes with points that allow the relevant ATS units to insert the appropriate terminal procedure with no other modification to that route.
Message originators shall file terminal procedures in the filed route of a flight plan or associated message submitted to the IFPS for processing according to the published requirement of those aerodromes. Where no SIDs or STARs are published for an aerodrome within the IFPZ, it shall remain the responsibility of the message originator to confirm whether that aerodrome requires only VFR arrivals or departures.
Certain aerodromes within the IFPZ have no terminal procedures, but do not require solely VFR arrivals or departures. When planning to depart from or arrive at these aerodromes, the message originator should, where possible, connect the aerodrome to the nearest airway within the DCT limit of that aerodrome.

Last Edited by TobiBS at 02 Sep 16:50
P19 EDFE EDVE EDDS

Doesn’t say they want you to specify exactly which “variant” of a SID you would like to fly. It also wouldn’t male sense, since the departure runway is normally not known during planning. The German AIP however, IIRC, does say they want you to file the exact variant of the SID.

Also, as I said, one thing is what they would like you to do and the other is what gets you a valid FPL into the system, which is more relevant.

Last Edited by boscomantico at 02 Sep 17:14
Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

boscomantico wrote:

The only case I know which asks (in their AIP) to file a specific SID procedure in the flightplan is Germany.

AIP-Sweden is even explicit that you should not insert SIDs and STARs for Swedish airports. However, Swedish ATC has to accept it nowadays as IFPS does the verification of the flight plan and it will accept SIDs and STARs. Pre-IFPS flight plans with Swedish SIDs and STARs were rejected.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

boscomantico wrote:

Doesn’t say they want you to specify exactly which “variant” of a SID you would like to fly. It also wouldn’t male sense, since the departure runway is normally not known during planning.

Sorry if it looked like, but I didn’t want to object you, I just wanted to proof, that besides all national AIPs, Eurocontrol is publishing a manual for the IFPS, that gives exactly the guidance Achim was talking about. Therefore no comment more than the cite was given in my post.

boscomantico wrote:

The German AIP however, IIRC, does say they want you to file the exact variant of the SID.

What I found in ENR 1.10-7 is:

7.3 Route
The description of the requested route shall be inserted in Item 15 (Route) of the flight plan.
7.3.1 For IFR arrivals and departures, the published coded designators of the relevant standard instrument departure and arrival routes shall be inserted. For flights on ATS routes, the appropriate coded designators shall be inserted.
7.3.2 If no standard instrument departure or arrival route has been established for an aerodrome, “DCT” shall be inserted as the first or last route segment, as appropriate.

Airborne_Again wrote:

AIP-Sweden is even explicit that you should not insert SIDs and STARs for Swedish airports. However, Swedish ATC has to accept it nowadays as IFPS does the verification of the flight plan and it will accept SIDs and STARs. Pre-IFPS flight plans with Swedish SIDs and STARs were rejected.

Well for them IFPS handles it nicely, because the IFPS manual states on page 109:

Although it may not be required by a National Authority through AIP publication, the message originator may indicate the full SID and STAR designators in the flight plan route submitted to IFPS.
Whenever present, such designators shall be used by the IFPS for the profile calculation. The IFPS will ensure that in messages distributed to ATC, the SID and STAR designators will not be present when they are not required.

P19 EDFE EDVE EDDS
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top