Hi all
So I’m fairly new to a IFR FP’s and use Rocket Route and also Autorouter.
When creating a FP Bembridge EGHJ To San Sebastián LESO and using the autoroute function in Autorouter all the suggested routes go via KOTEM and then various airways points ( but mostly not on an airway) . This validates and has a low overhead. I know however from experience that London Control are expecting IFR traffic to route south via Q41 to ORTAC and I would then plan to pick up A25 and then R10 . This has a higher overhead but I would expect to get some shortcuts en route. So, I end up manually creating routes more often than not and not using the autoroute function.
I had a similar situation using Rocket Route last year , I had a validated suggested IFR route to the Isle of Man but London wouldn’t open it , it was a series of airways points in a direct line to IOM but largely didnt follow an airway. I ended up flying VFR with an IFR approach.
So just wondered how others approach this and how they use the various tools available to make sure they have a FP that will be accepted in the air as well as on the ground !
Have you checked the “use UK preferred routes” option?
Generally, the UK system is unique and poses a bit of a challemge to flightplanning providers / softwares.
Anyway, their (ATC’s). If the route validates, then it’s the controller’s job to find a solution. As a pilot, just be prepared for some discussion and a somewhat longer routing than in the flightplan, so just take along some extra fuel and all is fine. But do one thing: file a route / altitude that clearly put’s you into CAS/ on airways. If not, London Control will indeed drop it. It’s the disjointed UK ATC system.
To answer the question in the title: yes of course it is valuable! It’s nowadays impossible to create European IFR routes without the use of IT.
Frankly, this is more of an art than a science. Outside of the UK, autorouter and RocketRoute seem to do an excellent job. Inside the UK, the system is just a mess. London can (and will) arbitrarily drop flight plans which they consider to “not their problem”. Luckily the UK doesn’t care if you fly IFR outside controlled airspace. There’s no need to call it “VFR” – just fly IFR and make sure you avoid controlled airspace unless you have an explicit clearance.
Autorouter has a couple of features that make it easier in the UK: you should always tick the “Prefer Standard Routes” box, and you should set a minimum level of at least FL90. The standard routes are a list published by NATS which they more or less expect people to fly. If you file a standard route (or something made up by joining multiple standard routes together), you should be fine inside controlled airspace. I have no idea if RocketRoute supports this.
The rule in France seems to be that if you can get it to validate then you can fly it and ATC will be happy with it. If its a weekend and you don’t mind staying outside controlled airspace to the FIR boundary (its only 41 miles to KOTEM and once you’re a few miles south of Bembridge controlled airspace starts at FL125), then this looks like a perfectly workable route. During the week, you would have to call Plymouth Military (ideally on the phone before you take off) to arrange a crossing of the Portsmouth danger areas. I’m sure Plymouth Military can activate your flight plan for you as well.
Even if London Control don’t want to know about your IFR plan – don’t worry – Brest will have it direct from eurocontrol and will be expecting you.
boscomantico wrote:
As a pilot, just be prepared for some discussion and a somewhat longercrouting than in the flightplan, so just take along some extra fuel and all is fine.
Oh how I wished it worked like this in the UK…
BTW, @MarkH using the “fly-by” feature to force autorouter to go via ORTAC (add ortac with a radius of 0), the best route I get has a distance of 472NM. If Plymouth Mil happen to have an exercise going on when you want to fly, that’s not too much of a detour.
Some background on the UK situation and how it relates to autorouter can be found here.
There is a simple rule of thumb: if your UK route does not follow airways and that portion is not shown in magenta-blue dashes, then you should take a closer look at the map and be prepared to fly without ATC. The magenta-blue dashes tell you that the segment is mention in the UK standard route document (SRD) and that there is a certain level of ATC service, even when it is in uncontrolled airspace.
The autoroute function is invaluable because it deals with all route restrictions that you can encounter between origin and destination, including DCT length restrictions. It saves you a significant amount of time and frustration involved in getting a route accepted by the IFPS. That said, it does not always give you the best route in terms of planned route, which means that you may be required to take on more fuel than necessary, which may be a problem if you are constrained by weight.
In order to plan better routes you need to have a minimum of understanding of how the tool chooses the proposed routes and know how to potentially find a better one.
One of the “shortcomings” of the autorouter is that if an origin has SIDs then it will use a SID for all proposed routes even if there are other departures points available. Same thing for STARs. That can result in unnecessarily long routes.
For example if I plan a flight from LFPN Toussus to LFOP Rouen, both have SIDs and STARs. From LFPN it will offer me a SID to EVX which is fine as I will be very close to Rouen. Next however, it will take me to ABB to fly the STAR. According to the RAD ARR/DEP document ELBOX is an arrival point which is allowed from some LFP* airports and that saves a lot of time. So instead of accepting the autorouter’s suggestion, I find a route from EVX to ELBOX and use ELBOX as last enroute point, no STAR.
I also use the “Generally discourage DCT” setting to avoid an exaggerated use of DCTs.
If you know of better routes than those that the router validates, you probably will find something in the RAD document that makes the IFPS accept your route but something in the autorouter’s algorithm prefers doing something different.
In your case the route via KOTEM is 458 NM. Via ORTAC it is 472 NM. The router’s goal is to deliver the shortest route that validates, and that’s what it does when proposing the route via KOTEM. If you add “Generally discourage DCT” as a restriction, it will propose a route which is 501 NM via Deauville and Poitiers.
If you know that ATC will want you to fly to ORTAC (and you don’t mind DCTs) you can force the autorouter to propose a route via ORTAC by adding a fly-by waypoint in advanced settings.
Aviathor wrote:
One of the “shortcomings” of the autorouter is that if an origin has SIDs then it will use a SID for all proposed routes even if there are other departures points available. Same thing for STARs. That can result in unnecessarily long routes.
It will produce other solutions as well that do not include SID/STAR and show their length. You can examine the alternative solutions and choose your preferred one. The autorouter prefers routes that have a SID start and STAR end because this is what the majority of users expect. In other cases, there might be a lack of clarity as to how to get from/to the airport.
If you want to go via a specific departure/arrival point, you can select it by clicking on “SID” and “STAR” next to the aerodrome respectively.
Everything comes down to the question “what makes route A better than route B” which is a very complex question on which opinion can differ and which often cannot be represented by mathematical rules.
achimha wrote:
If you want to go via a specific departure/arrival point, you can select it by clicking on “SID” and “STAR” next to the aerodrome respectively.
Thanks Achim. I did not know about that function. I just noticed the SID and STAR links/buttons for the first time.
AFAIU you still to know that ELBOX is a “legal” arrival waypoint, however.
achimha wrote:
Everything comes down to the question “what makes route A better than route B” which is a very complex question on which opinion can differ and which often cannot be represented by mathematical rules.
Exactly. The tools make your life a lot easier but you need to understand how they work, why they do not give you what you expected and how to make it work the way you want.
Thanks all some very useful information there and some functions I did not know about.
An art form as was said , certainly though things do seem to get easier once in French airspace with all their low level airways and controllers with the time to deal with GA traffic.
@MarkH have a look at this for some solutions.
London can (and will) arbitrarily drop flight plans which they consider to “not their problem”.
Eurocontrol distributes (to each airspace owner involved) all “I” flights plans that validate. However London Control drops flight plans which are filed at too low a level – you have to file to be in CAS and to be in CAS for more than a few minutes… So e.g. EGKA SFD LYD LFAT (the usual route) you have to file FL070+. If you file FL060 or 6000ft etc they will drop it. And if say going EGKA-EIWT via BCN then you have to file for FL150+ to be in CAS. See my trip reports here to Weston, Ireland, for example.
The full rules they use for dropping flight plans are confidential, bizzarely! I have tried to find out many times. UK ATCOs seemingly never post on this (or any other) topic due to secrecy constraints.
Luckily the UK doesn’t care if you fly IFR outside controlled airspace.
Yes it’s a good tool for hacking around the UK (especially in a de-iced plane 
) but you won’t get a proper enroute IFR service, with an implied whole-route clearance etc. You are exactly the same as a VFR flight, and getting a popup clearance into enroute CAS (usually Class A in the UK) is almost impossible. Scotland is better in that they will give you a service even if you temporarily leave CAS.
I use the autoroute function too (BTW there is a free tool for route generation only which is a good backup for the autorouter) and do hacks especially at the UK end. And as you say London Control give you a different route anyway… they won’t have traffic climbing into CAS to the east or west of Heathrow or Gatwick, obviously, although there are some transit routes at FL090/100 IIRC. I don’t know about why one gets the ORTAC route but it is close to France so probably some inter-ATC agreement.
