I have never had this before, so I wonder if it’s “normal” …
Flew IFR from EDML (near Munich) up to EDDG, the Muenster-Osnabrueck Airport on Friday and back today. For both flights I had a autorouter routing which was validated without errors.
On Friday after take off the complete routing was cancelled and I got a waypoint 100 miles north, but one pretty far away from the original routing and to the IAF from the there. It didn’t bother me becasue there was no cloud for the whole flight.
Now today I flew back (with complete family on board) and the weather forecast was pretty lousy for the second half of the flight. I entered all waypoints not only into the Garmins but also into the ADL120 app to have the precise route on the radar image.
At the runup area off EDDG I was told that I would get a completely new clearence, so i had to copy 15 waypoints via radio. While enterring them (not one of them was in the old route) i checked the tracks on the MFD and there were two places in the new routing that made no sense (from a track of 170 to 022 for example). I complained that this routing made little sense and the ground controller called AIS and came back with YET another routingm but at least one that made sense …
Now, this is no fun, especially when it’s clear that you will fly a good part in IMC – and with two pretty live kids in the back seats.
30 minutes after a take-off I got a “direct to destination”, way over 100 NM … The direct led me directly into a area with heavy rain, so I had to use the “ten degree to the right”-method at least five times to avoid the stuff that looked the worst on the ADL/radar image. Nevertheless I flew for +1:20 in solid IMC and for about 45 minutes in pretty heavy rain. The freezing level was in FL80 and i had 2 degrees in FL70, but 60 was a solid and fat layer too … and in 5000 i flew in IMC too.
When it was clear that I would not get down to VMC overhead my field i requested the “25 ILS of EDMA for cloudbreaking”. That worked perfectly, and i flew home VFR in 2000 feet around some showers. There was still an overcast over the whole area, but thirty minutes after landing 8sure) it cleared up, blues skies over the whole region!
I must say that the re-routing in the run-up area really stressed me. Half of the waypoints i didn’t understand and ground had to repeat them, and i wonder why all this necessary when they can give you a 100 NM direct a short time later …
Why do they do that? And is that really necessary?
You shouldn’t let yourself get stressed out by these things. It’s no good for your safety (and enjoyment).
These things are a nuisance, but no more. Personally, I wouldn’t have minded at all if there had been some kinks in the new routing, since experience tells that – as you could see – these are in the end never flown as initially cleared.
As to why exactly it happens, I don’t know. But is my impression wrong that this happens rather often with autorouter routings and way less often with, for example, RR routings? (We all love the autorouter and its features, no doubt). It seems that autorouter tends to create routings that passes IFPS, but is not liked by ATC, so the Flugdatenbearbeiter reworks it, sometimes completely.
I know I “shouldn’t” … but with two kids on the back seat (“are we almost there”, “can we watch the Star Wars movie tonight”, “I am hungry” ….) that’s easier said than done :-)
What I really did not understand is why they gave me a re-routing with turns from 160 to 022 degrees … and that you have to discuss that stuff at the holding position until you get a proper routing …
I have also had bizzare routings in Germany. I get the feeling they are trying to sabotage these “fancy software tools” – in the same way Eurocontrol tried to sabotage the very first router – Autoplan – by messing around with the validation site, first making it HTTPS and then making it in Flash. They were doing this because they were getting pressure from commercial route development outfits. This one is probably a job creation scheme within German ATC. They should direct their efforts into supplying Eurocontrol with the correct airspace data instead…
I believe some German ATCO has been loudly posting on that unmoderated German forum that he thinks the autorouter is bad or whatever…
The direct led me directly into a area with heavy rain, so I had to use the “ten degree to the right”-method at least five times to avoid the stuff that looked the worst on the ADL/radar image. Nevertheless I flew for +1:20 in solid IMC and for about 45 minutes in pretty heavy rain. The freezing level was in FL80 and i had 2 degrees in FL70, but 60 was a solid and fat layer too … and in 5000 i flew in IMC too.
You must not let ATC send you into hazardous weather. Just say “unable to, due weather” or “request 20 left to avoid” etc. If they don’t like it (which sometimes happens “due to military activity” or – in France once, FL190 – “the military commander is getting very angry”) just stay cool and repeat the phrase. The ATCO will go home at the end of his shift but you might end up dead.
No, they let me avoid ANYTHING for the whole flight, that’s never a problem in Germany, They even led me through heavy Frankfurt traffic in IMC, absolutely no problem …
But if they try to “sabotage autorouter”? I cannot imagine, because Germany is really not like that in my experience. ATC is very helpful most of the time and I have never had them create problems. But the rerouting at the holding position .. I found that pretty stupid.
Is there a process for querying that after the flight? The UK has a system called MOR – mandatory occurrence report. You can MOR something (e.g. a refusal to get a CAS clearance when there is obviously no traffic around) and it gets investigated. I would definitely MOR this, because the FP did validate, and provided all of it was in CAS (something for you to check – DCTs can sometimes take the flight OCAS), then they have no right to do this unless there is some new and not yet notamed (and not yet notified to Eurocontrol) military etc activity.
Anybody who knows anything about GA will know that chucking a new route at the pilot when he is just about to go is a huge bump in his workload. It could also throw his fuel planning. Also even a complete muppet will know that an airway route cannot be loaded into most GPSs in common use. Did you get any airway names in the new route?
Achim explained it several times IIRC, and it has nothing to do with conspiracies. DFS doesn’t bother to report all restrictions in lower airspace to Eurocontrol properly. They rather say that with the very small number of IFR low level GA flightplans a day, they can just as well have the Flugdatenbearbeiter adjust them as required.
The fact that this creates a nuisance to the pilot is apparently overlooked by them.
Alexis: did your original routes contain any directs?
I don’t think it was that big a deal. You got a clearance. It was inconvenient but that is all. Happens all the time in the US. The advantage of the US tools is that they let you know your expected new route in advance.
Peter wrote:
because the FP did validate, and provided all of it was in CAS (something for you to check – DCTs can sometimes take the flight OCAS), then they have no right to do this unless there is some new and not yet notamed (and not yet notified to Eurocontrol) military etc activity.
Peter, why do you say they have no right to do so? Is there a clear rule to this effect? I get re-clearances all the time.
OK, no right to do it without a valid operational reason.
I would try to determine what that was.
You fly at FL300-400 I believe so it’s a different environment, which is 99.9% multi pilot aircraft. ATC will know it doesn’t cause a problem there.
Here in the UK we have a system whereby denials of CAS transits (VFR traffic mainly) need to be justified, and this seems to have drastically improved the system, over some years.
