I think the Autorouter view is not real-time, and the transition from “arriving” to “closed” is significantly delayed in autorouter compared to the actual Eurocontrol/ATC system. They say as much on https://www.autorouter.aero/wiki/flight-tracking/#Arrival_considerations
That has to do with tracking, which is an informal “nice too” feature, as opposed to the core function of Autorouter, which is routing and FPLs.
I would expect Autorouter to reflect the real world status of active flightplans. Any comment from @achimha?
boscomantico wrote:
But even then, since it is an active ATSU, what will then happen is that upon ETD+30, the first thing the AIS will do is call (and reach) that ATSU and enquire whether the aircraft has actually landed or not. The ATSU will then confirm this, and the pilot will never hear anything about that little overdue action in the background.
AFAIU it is the ATSU of the destination airport that is responsible for the follow-up of a flight – not AIS.
If there is no open ATSU at the destination then procedures vary. In Sweden the ATCC is responsible.
Capitaine wrote:
I used to use 0800 IFR VFR (0800 437 837) in France, but don’t know if it’s still valid
It isn’t. The new number is +33 1 56 30 13 01.
Timothy wrote:
I have had the opposite experience of filing two FPLs, out and back, landing at an ATC airfield (I think the most recent experience was Deauville) then, when ready for departure, many hours later, putting GRAMET 1 into Autorouter Telegram only to find that the outbound is still alive and active in the system.
I think the Autorouter view is not real-time, and the transition from “arriving” to “closed” is significantly delayed in autorouter compared to the actual Eurocontrol/ATC system. They say as much on https://www.autorouter.aero/wiki/flight-tracking/#Arrival_considerations
Eurocontrol distributes IFR and ZY flight plans and for the VFR portion in the AeriPlus Flightplan case our own addressing engine tells Eurocontrol where to send it. The whole flight plan is under Eurocontrol “management” and a ARR message will be handled by Eurocontrol which will also send a response.
For VFR flight plans, which are not distributed by Eurocontrol and addressed and distributed by either the ARO office or our addressing engine or the pilot (e.g. when originating in the UK), you can send an Arrival message via AFTN but that is no guarantee that it will be noticed.
If you fly to an airfield e.g. France , say at night and land with pilot controlled lights and nobody is there and it is a VFR flightplan I would also call to Le Bourget. It is a long story and I am typing this on my iPhone. In short: the arrival message is not always enough and seen with VFR flight plans. Best to then also call. Of course, you can close with ATC or an approach frequency just before or after landing or at a controlled tower airfield with ATC when they are there. But that is common and known.
If I depart from Lelystad VFR, the flight plan has to be delivered to ARO Schiphol. They then distribute the flightplan to all stations, which they address manually. If I file a Z/Y or IFR flight plan from Lelystad, it is Eurocontrol that deals with the distribution.
This may be more complex.
AIUI, and with Achim of the Autorouter having done his 6th disappearing act and not yet returned 
so we have no detailed info:
and the above is true for DEP and the other messages.
It is not always enough on VFR flight plans to just send an arrival message. For IFR or Z/Y flight plans handled by Eurocontrol you even get the arrival message confirmed. That is, when landing at an airport where the tower is closed for example.
No idea, but I would expect some ATC software to get confused if they see a DEP followed by a CNL. It might also trigger S&R action because you departed but never landed.
Maybe some people in ATC might know?
Peter wrote:
ARR rather than CNL
The practical difference, after you have landed, being?
ARR rather than CNL, I would say.
So, is it enough after landing to cancel via AutoRouter Telegram the FPL you have just flown?
