A barking dog is not always mean. It does not sound like you did anything fundamentally wrong, but somebody had a short fuse.
lmsl1967 wrote:
took them 15 minutes to finally find the VFR manual, which states the VFR routes but again, doesn’t mentioned that a route depicted on the map is not valid.
So maybe it is valid afterall.
lmsl1967 wrote:
- VFR manual (!), is there an IFR manual? Who is going to read 200 pages everytime he needs to fly in a country?
I think it is a good idea to familiarise yourself with the relevant sections of the AIP of each country you plan flying into. They often are copy/paste of ICAO Doc 4444 or the like, The AIP AD section also often contains textual descriptions of procedures at airports that are not on the IFR plates. For example that you should automatically contact APP/DEP when climbing through some altitude on departure.
lmsl1967 wrote:
I was also questioned why not to hire a local pilot to get familiar with the airspace.
If you are planning on flying there on a regular basis it might be a good idea. At least I think you should discuss your experience with someone throroughly familiar with the airport in order to understand what their grievances were.
I think it is a good idea to familiarise yourself with the relevant sections of the AIP of each country you plan flying into
One should study the VFR approach chart (VAC) which you can get in the AIP (except for Germany which charges for it) or from the various Jeppesen products. That should show the preferred VFR routes in/out of CAS.
I don’t think many pilots read the AIP generally. There are way too many pages, and for many countries the information is way off reality.
However I don’t think that’s the issue here. It is being “ordered” to return to the departure airport.
It’s worth noting that some countries (e.g. France) have visual approach charts, showing all the points. They are often georeferenced (in SD and GP, haven’t tried others), making finding the points fairly easy, even if they are not in the GPS.
It’s not necessarily obvious to everyone, as in the UK for instance the NATS website with airport info doesn’t have such charts / points.
Peter wrote:
Maybe “scared” was putting it too strongly, but I am sure everyone knows exactly what I meant. Private pilots are taught to take ATC very seriously. This theme is repeated everywhere, including many posts here by others. The whole issue of keeping decisionmaking in the cockpit (or not) is wrapped up with many fatalities, too.Private pilots are taught to take controlled airspace very seriously. I believe the the problem is not so much exaggerated respect for ATC as it is about uncertainty with proper R/T procedures. If you don’t feel confident communicating with ATC, you are much less likely to question them, request alternatives or even ask for clarifications.
Hopefully, this ends up being no more than an unpleasant conversation. However, I see similarities to experiences I had learning to fly in Vancouver (which has quite crowded airspace).
You can brief yourself on the procedures of a new airfield to the best of your abilities (and of course to meet any requirements); however, you are unlikely to have the same experience as a local. What this means is that these things come up – a different routing using a ‘local’ landmark or route, a VFR reporting point that you are not immediately aware of the location, or any other variation.
Because as pilots we believe we are supposed to have briefed and ‘know’ everything relevant to the flight, I find I often have a moment of consideration, i.e. let me look at the map so that I can find the point/route and turn to it. In general, I don’t want to appear ill prepared, so I think this is a natural response.
This might work fine in less busy airspace, because there aren’t many other airplanes and/or the controllers are relaxed. In busy airspace, the controllers are expecting you to respond quickly after having accepted the instruction and if you don’t they might have to send instructions to another aircraft. In these scenarios, instead of accepting the instruction (and taking time to figure it out) it is correct to let the controller know you are unfamiliar with the VRP and ask for a heading. You might get a minor complaint from the controller, but at least you will know where to go and they will be pleased that you are going the right direction. It probably won’t escalate to ‘return to he airport’ request.
It is the uncertainty that bothers the controller. They are fine telling you to go to a VRP or to turn to a heading, but are rightfully irritated if you accept an instruction but take a long time figuring it out. Better to swallow your ego and get them to point you in the right direction sooner.
As for the information requests in the, e.g. the ETA to some far off point, you can always tell the controller you will report back to them when you have the information available.
Peter wrote:
I don’t think many pilots read the AIP generally.
I do 
I don’t fly VFR much last few years and especially I don’t fly VFR much outside zone I’m familiar with (Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia) but I sometimes do VFR departure if it offers better routing or speeds up departure. And I find ATC always cooperative in directing you out of CAS regardless if you’re familiar with VRPs or not.
However, for any useful discussion I believe at least country if not airport should be revealed.
Peter wrote:
One should study the VFR approach chart (VAC) which you can get in the AIP (except for Germany which charges for it) or from the various Jeppesen products. That should show the preferred VFR routes in/out of CAS.
I have all available AIP charts, which in that case, there are no approach charts or even a chart with the VRP. You can only access to that in the so called VFR manual. Fortunately I have all the VRP and the VRP routes into the Skydemon. Coincidently, the Skydemon plotted VRP and routes are equal to the charts on the tower, and there is nothing that tells you that specific VFR route is forbidden; its there!Peter wrote:
I don’t think many pilots read the AIP generally. There are way too many pages, and for many countries the information is way off reality.
I do read the AIP when I can find it, not only Germany is for sale, there are places where to find the AIP is more painful exercise than find Wally.
Aviathor wrote:
If you are planning on flying there on a regular basis it might be a good idea. At least I think you should discuss your experience with someone throroughly familiar with the airport in order to understand what their grievances were.
I don’t agree with you, if a procedure is complicated it shouldn’t be there at the first place. If you need 200 pages VFR manual something is completely wrong. Someone said it right, most of these people flying range is around the VRPs they design, so if I am used to that and I called ‘Aguiar-da-Beira’ one must be really a dumb ass not to understand it. If someone tells me to follow a standard VFR route to the training area and I have a VFR route which ’drive’s me’ directly there, common sense wouldn’t even lead me to imagine that the same person that spent his life flying around those VFR would ever draw such route going backward then northwest, southeast and finally on the direction you want to go, when you have a direct one plotted (and from which I filled into the FP that was approved and later transmitted differently to ATC without my knowledge) which seem to be forbidden.
Finally which is also my point, ATC as someone were said, is there to guide you and support you, when they start to overload you with requirements, information, etc. on critical moments of the flight, it’s really a recipe for disaster.
lmsl1967 wrote:
there are places where to find the AIP is more painful exercise than find Wally.
AIP can be accessed for free at Eurocontrol site.
lmsl1967 wrote:
I do read the AIP when I can find it, not only Germany is for sale, there are places where to find the AIP is more painful exercise than find Wally.
The easiest access to AIP is using the Autorouter.aero.
I don’t agree with you, if a procedure is complicated it shouldn’t be there at the first place. If you need 200 pages VFR manual something is completely wrong.
It is your right not to agree. You do however exagerate the number of pages it is necessary to read. Most of the important stuff is concentrated in a few sections of AIP ENR and AIP GEN. It is for example interesting to know that
lmsl1967 wrote:
my FP was approved and without my knowledge corrected and sent to the ATC
I find this amazing – when my VFR-FP is amended or adjusted I can see that.
Actually the confirmation message always reminds me to check for changes.
(recently had a VRP for Portoroz added in which I always use but casually left out when filing the FP)
Didn’t you get a confirm in any way ?
