Here’s the closed (theoretical) FP route, how we expected it to happen.
Take a look at where Gatwick Airport is, and ask yourself at what level you could possibly fly that route.
Next step will be to contact the agency which delivered that routing and ask them 
The basic answer of course is: why does IFPS validate that route? It is because the UK has not supplied it with the right data, and most countries in Europe do the same; they have various reasons for wanting to keep their own tactical traffic control in place.
Obviously you can fly that route below CAS. Also should be possible higher; if you look on FR24 you will find most EGKK traffic is FL150+ over Dover. But not all.
Lots of examples around Europe of “valid” routes which cannot be flown.
Ibra wrote:
To remove doubts (as this may not be obvious in places where OCAS IFR is not possible or less understood), these initial phone clearances are “pure IFR departures on I-FPL”, I am bloody sure they are not “remain VFR” or some Z-FPL departure junk, they are “remain VMC” and “remain OCAS” while flying under IFR: in Paris, I launch into low Class A TMA straight after takeoff while staying outside clouds (not possible to get into Alpha TMA under VFR)
In class A all traffic is separated. So what’s the point of clearing you into class A “remaining VMC”? Is it so that you can descend out again in case of comfailure?
Peter wrote:
I agree, but [the CAA man who threatened legal action if his name is mentioned] will still bust you, MOR or no MOR Having 5 digits to spend on a lawyer won’t help because the CAA man will suspend your license immediately, and you won’t be flying until after the court case comes up, 6-12 months later (the CAA will make sure it doesn’t happen too quickly). I do the FCS1521 on each such occassion; I doubt anybody reads them.
I ‘get’ what you are implying, but that wonderful CAA man holds very little power over anyone not flying on a UK license. No need to spend any money on any expensive lawyer. On an IFR plan, cleared to destination, when ATC decides to take you out of CAS and then tries to dump you, the response should be unambiguous. UNABLE
ATC are a SERVICE they are there to help YOU to get to YOUR destination the quickest and SAFEST way possible. YOU are not there to facilitate their job, they get paid to do that job. I do this systematically, because I stick to the rules, nicely filing my FP on time, nicely complying with GAR’s, EOBT, slots etc. What I will not comply with is somebody dicking me around and endangering my life while he/she is sat comfortably on a chair and the worst thing that can happen is a slap on the wrist. It is our life out there, we deal with the weather, we deal with terrain, we deal with the potential icing etc.
A plane should be like a car, it should allow you to travel from A-B to C in the safest way possible. Your CAA man knows this, they are just trying to be obnoxious, jets leave all the time VFR to IFR. I don’t see why we should expect a less safe way to fly in machines that are under powered, often have no radar, don’t deal well with ice at all and don’t have the climb or descent performance of the jets. The system works, if the system is implemented, I know there is a lot of EASA bashing going on, but at least it works. None of this BS with well its not really IFR is it…
In class A all traffic is separated. So what’s the point of clearing you into class A “remaining VMC”? Is it so that you can descend out again in case of comfailure?
I have no idea how separation is established for OCAS IFR climb into 1500ft class A? to get radar separation you will need to have com & txp working first? as far as I know they give 3kft as initial level with 10min margin on departure slot, so maybe you get procedural separation initially? if you fail to depart before CBOT+10min, you have to call on phone again to delay and get new initial clearance
On freestyle IFR departure OCAS, if you depart after your slot or mode C fails you will be asked to leave airspace (this happened already to some), so I think TMA ATC have good reasons to insist on “remain VMC” while things are getting setup, if you lose comms on departure before getting airborne clearance you are on similar logic, no?
If departing IFR OCAS on SID clearance, you are supposed to fly it until 40dme at 3kft-4kft from Orly before flying your filed level & filed route
Ibra wrote:
I have no idea how separation is established for OCAS IFR climb into 1500ft class A? to get radar separation you will need to have com & txp working first?
I would expect procedural separation to be used. A climb to the MSA of a single aircraft shouldn’t pose much of a problem. If there is a COM and/or transponder failure, the comfailure procedures will give ATC time to clear the way.
They give initial clearance up 3kft which about MSA/MVA, yes they should cope with lost comms at those levels as long as you are not going in published routes of other traffic, sometimes they may clear to higher filed level on ground but they may restrict to lower one once airborne contact is made
The other thing I am not sure about if FPL is ack & open with an initial departure clearance, if no radio & radar contact is made (not departing, land back, failed comms…) does that automatically trigger SAR?
Ibra wrote:
The other thing I am not sure about if FPL is ack & open with an initial departure clearance, if no radio & radar contact is made (not departing, land back, failed comms…) does that automatically trigger SAR?
Yes. (Except in the UK…)
Peter wrote:
If you do live in the UK, they can bust you no matter what license you fly on – this post (a clear warning aimed at me) is from a former guy involved in infringements.
I think the whole chosing to fly on N-REG in Europe debate is an entirely different one from complying with ICAO and EASA rules of the air. When flying on and EASA license one is expected to follow SERA, you can’t be ’’busted’’ for following the regulation, though I suspect you could be busted for not following the rules which is exactly what UK ATC are doing… (edited for spelling mistake)
