Arne wrote:
Over here it is encouraged to use IFR points for VFR planning because they are immediately visible on the radar screen
Who encourage that? I have to try to fly high some of the next flights, high enough to get up in C airspace (which is increasingly easier year by year the way AVINOR keep shrinking G airspace). Then the flight must be controlled, and I must file a FP and use those IFR points instead. Just to see what happens.
LeSving wrote:
Then the flight must be controlled, and I must file a FP and use those IFR points instead.
Really? A flight plan for class C? That’s not required elsewhere. Just a clearance before entering.
Really? A flight plan for class C?
Yes, sir, I’m afraid so, sir. A flight plan is mandatory for every flight through controlled airspace, or so I was taught.
Even if it may take the form of the “abbreviated” flight plan which essentially comes down to requesting transit from TWR or whoever is in charge.
What that does to the use of waypoints is obscure, though, to me. I do remember LFAC Calais tower requesting my position and obviously expecting a waypoint – when I named the nearest village for my position, they seemed beyond hope.
Jan_Olieslagers wrote:
A flight plan is mandatory for every flight through controlled airspace, or so I was taught.
No. I live in the middle of controlled airspace, so to say, as my homebase has a control zone (class D). No flight plan is necessary in order to fly there. And asking for entry or transit does not automatically include filing a flight plan.
Rwy20 wrote:
I think this refers to the use of the three letters “DCT”. This is not permitted in VFR flight plans anywhere, I think. You are supposed to just put in the points, and it is assumed that you will meander your way VFR from one to the other, more or less direct. Thus, the term “DCT” really doesn’t have any meaning, as opposed to their use in IFR flight plans.
DCTs are certainly permitted! In fact just putting in points in sequence is not permitted (unless the points are lat-long). In fact, under international standards there is no difference between IFR and VFR in what is legal in the route section of a flight plan.
That said, quite a few countries apply their own rules for VFR flight plans, e.g. by permitting geographical names. Banning the term DCT is a strange one, but what do you know…
I think this refers to the use of the three letters “DCT”. This is not permitted in VFR flight plans anywhere, I think. You are supposed to just put in the points, and it is assumed that you will meander your way VFR from one to the other, more or less direct. Thus, the term “DCT” really doesn’t have any meaning, as opposed to their use in IFR flight plans.
This is very wrong.
ICAO Doc 444, in its section on flightplans, says (irrespective of VFR or IFR):
In fact, France for example has exactly this in its AIP (ENR 1.10) as well.
It doesn’t really matter though, because even if you don’t insert the “DCT” between waypoints, then this is still implicit, because what else could someone reading the flightplan expect between two points? If you wanted fly non-direct between them, then would have to indicate more points, since any turning point must be indicated.
Oh, and by the way this
In Spain you’re expected to leave the route field blank in your VFR FPL.
also has no foundation in the Spanish AIP. It’s standard Doc444 in this regard.
what_next wrote:
Really? A flight plan for class C? That’s not required elsewhere. Just a clearance before entering
A flight plan is always required for a controlled flight, VFR or IFR (SERA.4001 b 1 and the international Rules of the Air).
But the flight plan does not have to be filed. You can give the necessary flight plan details over radio at the same time that you request the clearance (SERA.4001 a). In effect, the clearance request is the flight plan. This is sometimes called an “abbreviated flight plan”, although that is not an official term in the EASA regs.
That is exactly what I meant, @AA, only I didn’t know the “abbreviated” is not official terminology.
Abbreviated flightplan is official terminology as per SERA.
Rwy20 wrote:
I think this refers to the use of the three letters “DCT”. This is not permitted in VFR flight plans anywhere, I think.Well in Sweden’s system for flightplans you have to use DCT between your points, whether they are IFR points or coordinates or VOR/radial/dist, to get the FPL approved. In VFR. So they are not only permitted but needed.
Who encourage that?ATCOs I’ve met. The lady from the CAA doing the training for the FPL system.
A flight plan is mandatory for every flight through controlled airspace, or so I was taught.Declaring your intentions to the tower before take-off becomes an abbreviated FPL and is sufficient unless you fly into a busy airport with slots. Of course the ATCC prefers a proper FPL, but an abreviated should be enough.
when I named the nearest village for my position, they seemed beyond hopeA radar screen is an IFR chart showing waypoints and airways (and small triangles moving around). They don’t have a VFR map to underlay.
