Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

The complete charade of Eurocontrol IFR routings

Back to the original post, I also flew airways to La Rochelle (from Gloucester) recently. Only my second airways flight, so still learning. After some discussion with others and playing around with various “router” programs, I filed EGBJ DCT WOTAN DCT ORTAC DCT MINQI R14 DIN DCT AKETI A25 LUSON DCT LFBH at FL100 which validated and was accepted. However, on first contact with Bristol they pointed out there are no airways from WOTAN to ORTAC and directed me via L9 to CPT. I wasn’t sure how to respond so accepted that diversion. As mentioned above, this is the kind of stuff that isn’t covered in the IR syllabus. I was then handed over between about 5 or 6 controllers, at times it seemed every 5 minutes, until Jersey.

Once under French ATC it got much easier, I spoke only to 2 controllers, (one made me call back on another frequency) and was given two directs before a radar vectored ILS into La Rochelle. It would be fair to say that French airspace seemed a lot quieter than around London.

View of planned and actual route flown below.

Peter – is it worth a separate thread/topic to discuss views on what’s missing from a relevant PPL/IR syllabus? This isn’t expressing negativity about what flight training schools provide – they have to work towards the syllabus and contain costs – more of a reflection on the current system. I’d include:
- Flying approaches with the autopilot (perhaps in preference to NDB manually, but would still include precision approach flown manually)
- Airways route finding (rather than using the outdated and irrelevant Jepp manual)
- “Informal” transition between VFR and IFR, especially for different European countries. I did some of this (being based at a smaller airport) and have done so with my IR(R) but would not be clear on how (easily) this is done in other countries. This would include non-airways IFR, rather than filing a flight plan when in flight.

FlyerDavidUK, PPL & IR Instructor
EGBJ, United Kingdom

is it worth a separate thread/topic to discuss views on what’s missing from a relevant PPL/IR syllabus?

Sure – go for it!

After some discussion with others and playing around with various “router” programs, I filed EGBJ DCT WOTAN DCT ORTAC DCT MINQI R14 DIN DCT AKETI A25 LUSON DCT LFBH at FL100 which validated and was accepted. However, on first contact with Bristol they pointed out there are no airways from WOTAN to ORTAC and directed me via L9 to CPT. I wasn’t sure how to respond so accepted that diversion. As mentioned above, this is the kind of stuff that isn’t covered in the IR syllabus. I was then handed over between about 5 or 6 controllers, at times it seemed every 5 minutes, until Jersey.

You will never get a climb straight into the stream of LHR/LGW inbound/outbound traffic, which south of EGBJ is probably (the ADS-B box equipped spotters can confirm this, perhaps) around FL100. I think you have just 2 options: a low level run below CAS i.e. about 5000ft, or an F15

Same at Shoreham. One can never go straight north from it – Eurocontrol validation notwithstanding. One can go east or west and climb say FL100 and then they can mix you in after CPT or so.

Last Edited by Peter at 17 Jul 07:42
Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

This then resulted in private IFR being pretty hard to get – not because it is hard to do but because it gives you automatic access to all airspace so is a political hot potato.

Norway and Sweden is G and C/D only (Sweden only G and C, while Norway has A at one particular space at international waters from FL 195 and up for some odd reason). We used to have A and E, but not anymore. This means IFR and VFR can be flown everywhere, but also that VFR from G and up will be controlled flight and radio and transponder is required (not entirely sure about transponder, if it is a requirement, but I always fly with one). There is no problem flying in G all over the place if weather permits, but it will be low at many places, particularly along the coast. For VFR between 10-20k this will be the same as flying IFR at this altitude since it is a controlled flight (I would think, I don’t fly IFR though). The only problem with this is air sport activities going up into C/D airspace. This is solved with “boxes” that are opened and closed, and seems to work OK. Besides, flying in rugged and mountainous terrain with a single engine aircraft is more practical and safe VFR than IFR in most situations, at least if you at some point are going to land somewhere, willingly or unwillingly.

The traffic situation on the continent is much more saturated, but I don’t understand why making the air space more complicated will make the situation simpler. There basically are only two forms of flying; controlled and uncontrolled. If you fly VFR or IFR is just a technical “choice”.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

Update:

The router now produces this route which is perfectly fine

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

I have another example, from a flight yesterday, Poitiers-Shoreham

To file this without the big dogleg, I had to use 9nm-spaced waypoints using the VORrrrddd notation

LFBI N0150F080 GINON4N GINON J55 LGL DCT LISEU DCT DVL DCT DVL346009 DCT DVL346018 DCT DVL346027 DCT DVL346036 DCT DVL346045 DCT SITET DCT DRAKE EGKA

On the actual flight, I got a DCT SITET with almost 180nm to run (actual flight is black):

Can anybody guess why the stupid restrictions were sent by the French to Eurocontrol (especially the MAX DCT = 10)? On this and many previous flights, it’s obvious that ATC don’t give a damn about any of this. The airway A34 DVL-SITET (MEA FL070) clearly does exist

The above routes are from the autorouter. FlightPlanPro produces the other common solution:

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

It is not only Eurocontrol routes which are a sharade but the whole concept of aviation in Europe.

In short, it is nothing but a reborn socialist plan economy theory applied to airspace and airports.

You get airports which press themselves into slot corsetts, which kills all flexibility and creates lots of situations where no slot is available but you stand before empty runways and long times of inactivity but can’t take off anyway because the slot contingent is over.

You get the quagmire of having to synchronize airport and airway slots, something which is often impossible especcially if there are two slot airports are concerned.

You get Eurocontrol which uses highly technological “deus ex machina” computermodels to create a system which nobody can understand anymore and which can only be tackled by flightplanning computers trying to evaluate how to get through the maze.

I work with models every day and I know what happens if you transfer control to those models rather than use them as a helpful tool. In the hands of people with the mindset of European Aviation powers that are, they become tools which at the least will massively reduce capacity but at worst cripple the whole system. So far, we see some sort of impasse, where the systems Eurocontrol use, work after a fashion, yet the result is exactly like what is described in this thread. You have to use gee-wizz systems to make a flight plan, yet once airborne human intelligence in the form of ATCO’s intervene and will turn the rubbish into something useable.

Now imagine if the robot-geeks get their wish and eliminate the ATCO’s and let the models and computers steer you via ADSB-IN without any human interaction. Not only will flying become much more boring, it will become much more inflexible and, as I am not a beliver in such science, dangerous.

I do applaud efforts like the Router in Euroga, like others who have done similar things to make IFR in Europe workable again for GA, yet the fact alone that they are necessary shows how sick the system really is.

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

Just had to do another crazy hack:

EGKA N0149F070 DRAKE DCT SITET DCT DPE280040 DCT DPE275035 DCT DPE270030 DCT VEULE VEULE4A LFOP

to avoid this crazy routing

France has a MAXDCT=10 to block this sort of thing, hence I had to insert three of these VOR-relativ waypoints.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Returning home to LSZK (Y FPL) from the SOP seminar in EDTY Schwabisch Hall, autorouter gave me the following and that is the clearance I received from AFIS just before departure, with instructions to contact Langen Radar when passing 1500’. RWY 10 was active.
EDTY N0111F080 TAGIK1Y TAGIK DCT GAGSI N850 TRA Z601 ZUE/N0109F050 DCT VIBAX VFR LSZK

When I contacted Langen, they came back with climb 5000’ then turn HDG 200. I was on a 200° HDG about 5 minutes when I was cleared DCT VIBAX. So much for the tour of the Black Forest!

Last Edited by chflyer at 19 Apr 21:54
LSZK, Switzerland

Nota good example for how terrible the system is, however. An IT based routing system such as the IFPS will always be based on rules and restrictions that can‘t match the operational reality of moment. Hence, you get big detours on the flight plan routing and them in practice, usually get good shortcuts on that from ATC.

Every pilot who has done it a dozen times knows how it works and and workflow is mostly good.

It is after all better than the terrible US system, where, most of the times, you file something, and then, when picking up the clearance, ATC will read out a (human created!) looong routing that you then have to digest (and which is then changed AGAIN multiple times in flight….)

I understand the US are finally working on a similar IT based flightplan processing system.

Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

The problem is that sometimes ATC make you fly the filed route, so you need to plan for it.

And the ability to get a shortcut depends hugely on the competence and workload of each unit along the route. Once you file a route, they usually assume you want to fl it, and once you get a SID assigned you are well on the way of flying it, especially if ATC is really busy.

Also, ATC units with poor ELP are reluctant to engage in a conversation regarding shortcuts (historically a huge problem in Spain although it seems much better today than years ago).

Knowing many US pilots, the majority of light GA routings there seem to be one long DCT.

The Eurocontrol system works well in terms of IT reliability. It was created by and is operated by a bunch of quite competent anoraks, with a vast budget (visit the place, in case of doubt). The problem with it is the crappy restrictions database which different countries have fed into it. Within each country, every vested interest throws in every restriction they can, regardless of whether they need it or not. And there is a huge amount of “if we don’t restrict this airspace, we will lose it” going on, by the military.

The hacks I have posted in this thread work because I know there is nothing going on along the route (one checks notams, experience, etc). A novice, or a foreign visitor, won’t know about this, which is what is so very wrong with the system. It works for the locals… which is a rather very European way of doing business

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top