Isn’t it the case that, in CAS, any “DCT” or “own nav” is offered only to traffic above the MRVA, anyway? Also only if it looks assured that the traffic will remain in CAS.
So the obstacle clearance obligation (if one exists) on ATC is implicitly discharged.
The explicit obligation for obstacle clearance on ATC is when being vectored, but that is also above the MRVA 
airways wrote:
I take this as vectoring an aircraft to shorten the route. Sometimes a fix is not available for the shortcut you can give, but a vector does the trick perfectly.
A “direct routing” is not the same thing as a vector.
Peter wrote:
Isn’t it the case that, in CAS, any “DCT” or “own nav” is offered only to traffic above the MRVA, anyway?
Yes, but the reason it is offered only to traffic above the MVA is the part of PANS-ATM I quoted.
A “direct routing” is not the same thing as a vector.
They are not synonyms, but a vector may well be used to provide a direct routing in which case they stand for the same cause.
I can also confirm that one does get shortcuts in Spain, but it seems one has to ask for them; they are not offered by ATC. Two flights in the past few days:
There were all refused initially “due to military activity” but when I said I am on a long flight and would appreciate any shortcut, they later said they coordinated it and I can have it.
I also got the impression that ATC ELP has generally improved, a bit.
Airborne_Again wrote:
That’s what I thought, too. But the responsibility of the controller does extend to direct routings.PANS-ATM:
8.6.5.2 When vectoring an IFR flight and when giving an IFR flight a direct routing which takes the aircraft off an ATS route, the controller shall issue clearances such that the prescribed obstacle clearance will exist at all times until the aircraft reaches the point where the pilot will resume own navigation.
In the upcoming EASA Part-ATS, it has been made a bit more explicit, and the same wording will be added as SERA.8015(b)(6).
“(5) When vectoring or assigning a direct routing not included in the flight plan, which takes an IFR flight off published ATS route or instrument procedure, an air traffic controller providing ATS surveillance service shall issue clearances such that the prescribed obstacle clearance will exist at all times until the aircraft reaches the point where the pilot will re-join the flight plan route, or join a published ATS route or instrument procedure.”
The “not included in the flight plan” bit is very good!
My experience is similar to Peter’s yet I was offered few shortcuts. Regarding ELP, I haven’t ever had any problems understanding or being understood in Spain, unlike Peter (maybe because of his British accent they don’t catch him easily).
