Peter wrote:
Can you paste in an IFR route into a text box, and have the route plotted on the screen? That was my last suggestion to the guy. For example
Almost. You can paste the route part of the flight plan into the SD route box as long as you remove the initial speed and level. SD will correctly insert all waypoints along ATS routes as well as level changes. (I tried with your example.) Departure and destination airports have to be entered in separate boxes (they are also separate fields in the flight plan). You also have to enter the initial level in a separate box. Speeds, of course, are calculated using the aircraft model.
What about any subsequent speed/level specs?
Some other planning tools, e.g. the old Jepp Flitestar/Flitedeck/Flitemap/Jeppview cannot accept these specs at all; the whole route is rejected. Crucially they do accept airway names.
Can you force the EET to some value slightly off the “aircraft model” one?
Looks like he implemented that suggestion, after about 10 years 
What does the resulting “IFR map” look like? Does it show intersections etc which lie off-route?
This is all standard stuff for IFR “in the system”. I think Foreflight does all that. For IFR “outside the system” (basically Class G) this is largely irrelevant but still having intersections displayed is nice for VFR flights. Often they form good waypoints. I do all VFR flights on IFR waypoints.
Peter wrote:
What about any subsequent speed/level specs?
As I wrote, all level changes will be included. Speed changes are ignored as SD computes the speeds from the aircraft model.
Some other planning tools, e.g. the old Jepp Flitestar/Flitedeck/Flitemap/Jeppview cannot accept these specs at all; the whole route is rejected. Crucially they do accept airway names.
SD does accept ATS route names.
Can you force the EET to some value slightly off the “aircraft model” one?
You can change every value determined by SD — except the flight rules field. That will always be “V”.
Looks like he implemented that suggestion, after about 10 years What does the resulting “IFR map” look like? Does it show intersections etc which lie off-route?
Yes. SD has shown all ATS routes and intersections as long as I have used it (6 years) — that is even before the implementation of “IFR features” began.
Peter wrote:
It is 100% legal for VFR traffic to ask for an instrument approach and fly it.If you are not instrument rated (IR or IMCR as applicable) then the conditions need to be VMC.
Interesting… Back in the US it would be illegal because a pilot without and IR cannot accept an IFR clearance (which is what an approach clearance is). I’m not sure what SERA (if that’s what would cover it) says. Not to say a non-IR pilot can’t fly IFR approaches for practice, but that needs to be explicit when requesting it, e.g. “Approach(or tower), N12345 request practice ILS 34” and the pilot must remain VFR.
In the UK, when I used to say “want to practice ILS” comming out of the blue it gets interpreted by ATC as training flight with an FI and student onboard, some airfields may have restrictions on that and ask you to pre-book a “training slot”…
Yes; this is because – historically – an IAP without a landing has been free, which led to a load of IR schools flying to that airport and doing the IAP without a landing, taking up the capacity of the airspace and ATC. That is why “training approaches” (generally but not always ones without a landing) are nowadays usually chaged for.
Actually, even farm strips get this: nearby PPL schools doing landing approaches there. They really hate it. I was warned about this during my PPL training. And same in Arizona when doing the IR; airparks seemed to be really militant about people using their GPS approaches.
The exception is “dead” airports which like to get more activity on their IAP, but there are few if any of those in the UK. N France has some, especially after the police there went “24hrs PNR” which – as everybody knew in advance – pretty well kills their business.
Just to close this, the airfield ATC manager has now responded to me (having been on holiday) identifying what I could have done to avoid the problem (what we identified early in this thread) and also where the unit could have done better, which is not something that I will be sharing.
Seems like you got a good response.
which is not something that I will be sharing
Would you mind asking the ATC manager if he is fine with you posting it? It is always interesting to learn about those at the other end of the communication line.
Sorry, I don’t feel comfortable asking her to do that. She has gone to the trouble to listen to the tapes, look at the documents, etc. and I would feel it wrong to ask to share the results. Exactly the same with the Newcastle chap (see my other thread). I am happy to share my short-comings (which might help other pilots) but not to ask ATC to share theirs (which won’t help pilots only other ATCOs). Sorry, it’s me.
