Real names. C210_Flyer and Flyer59? Your parents must have not loved you.
Flyer59 wrote:
They usually charge it from every pilot whose IFR flightplan they have received, not matter if/where the pilot cancels IFR, because they had many pilots file IFR who would always cancel IFR if the weather was VMC justto save the € 4.20
From my understanding that is normal procedure to cancel IFR if VMC outside the IAF. This is what many European pilots have told me to do. This is what is universally accepted. Or are you telling me this is not so?
Of course if you want to log some approaches at the end of an IFR flight but now in VMC but then that begs the question can you even log an approach in VMC even while under an IFR flight plan without foggles and a safety pilot? I can maybe understand a grey area where you are still on an IFR flight plan and doing a visual approach. I have done that and paid the approach fee with no squawks.
Of course they accept that you cancel. But they say they do not want to provide an IFR approach all year, pay for the infrastructure and the software and then have everybody cancel their IFR approach.
And, as i said, they said if you refuse to pay the the € 4.20, they will delete your entry in the program – but you will have to fly the official VFR approach.
(I am not telling you anything, i just repeat what they said)
Jason,
click on the name and read my full name in my profile. I know you can do that :-)
Flyer59 wrote:
And, as i said, they said if you refuse to pay the the € 4.20, they will delete your entry in the program – but you will have to fly the official VFR approach.
I don’t have to refuse or argue or anything, I just say “VFR arrival” and they don’t charge me and never have. Maybe because I look like a very poor pilot that cannot afford the fee? So far they have always asked whether I was IFR before printing the invoice, never added anything automatically to the invoice.
Flyer59 wrote:
- You could ask them to delete your entry from the system, and not pay, and they would do that if you insist – but then they want you to fly the offical VFR procedure, including the traffic pattern, just like every other VFR pilot – and not a straight in IFR style approach(All this is only what they said. I have no personal interest in the topic)
Ok that is fair but I did ask them if I could do a straight in and they did say yes.
One of the reasons for a straight in is that it is being a good neighbor. Considering how sensitive the countryside is around an airport you would think a straight in done correctly without high RPM and dragging it in is preferable to doing a pattern. Doing it right even with my 210 you would barely hear it. The cows would not stop milking and the chickens will still lay their eggs. 
For me the fuel cost of doing a VFR circuit would far exceed the 4.20. I’ll stick to IFR straight in.
Cancelling IFR is not necessary, just ask for a visual. But presumably then you will still pay the IFR fee.
In Germany can you not do a straight in VFR arrival?
JasonC wrote:
Real names. C210_Flyer and Flyer59? Your parents must have not loved you.
Hey proper etiquette on this site is to use a smiley when you are trying to be either funny or sarcastic. This way we know for sure, I think. 
They did say yes, because they did not think the € 4.20 for the cancelled approach would be a problem. But they said today if that is a problem and you don’t want to pay you fly the VFR approach, including the pattern.
No, the straight in approach goes directly over the town of Straubing, while the traffic pattern avoids all villages. Also Straubing is famous for potatoes, no cows there.
@ Achim: I think they introduced that with the new SW recently, that’s what they told.
They will now change their table of fees and make it clear: You send them an IFR FPL, you pay.
A visual approach under IFR is an IFR approach, so you pay.
Normally you should stick with the VFR traffic pattern – which you enter at the downwind or base leg. When there’s a lot of traffic straight in approaches always creat problems. I just did one two hours ago – and had to do a three sixty because there was a Mooney on the base leg .
