You have been able to file US flight plans as ICAO format for several years. Been an option on fltplan.com for ages.
JasonC wrote:
You have been able to file US flight plans as ICAO format for several years
Yes. It’s an option not a requirement. I never use the ICAO format.
It’s an option not a requirement
Did you actually read the article I linked?
I suspect that the ZZZZ change is a front end change only. ForeFlight currently handles this for the pilot.
The main reasons for the flightplan form change is PBN and ADS-B. Today, to be assigned an RNAV SID or STAR, the aircraft must file an ICAO flightplan form and specify PBN/D2. Also RVSM flight now requires the ICAO form and at some point ADS-B will require it as well. At ForeFlight, ICAO flightplan support has been available for a few years. It is mostly transparent except for the one time equipment configuration, which takes less than a minute to setup.
No, This is a coordinated effort with Leidos, DUATS, FAA FSS Alaska, and NavCanada. Everything is in place, but NavCanada needs more time to work out issues communicating with the US. NavCanada currently does not have any acknowledgement of receipt of AFTN messages, it is a black hole, you send your flightplan to their system and have no way of knowing if it got there or if there was an issue. NavCanada also uses the ETD for SAR purposes (presumed departure) and initiates a SAR based on the ETD and not based on a pilot Activating their flightplan. In the US, one must activate their VFR flightplan within 2 hours of ETD, or it is deleted from the system. No activation, no SAR in the US. Canada, merely filing a flightplan will result in a SAR if you decide not to go and forget to cancel. Because there are no means of assuring if a flightplan actually was processed by NavCanada, issues arise, particularly for cross border operations. Part of the change is to have NavCanada add a LAM (Logical Acceptance Message) protocol. There are other idiosyncrasies between the systems for example, they will automatically exchange an FPL and SPL pair with the flightplan.
The US is drifting towards the use of the ICAO flightplan form without a mandate. Approximately 35 to 40 percent of US domestic flightplans now use the ICAO format. Once an aircraft equipment codes are setup and a pilot transitions to the ICAO flightplan form, there is not any advantage of reverting to the FAA/Domestic form use. With high use of RNAV SID/STAR/ODP coming into vogue in the US, they can’t be filed or used without the ICAO PBN specification for RNAV 1, so particularly aircraft that visit the teens or flight levels have a strong incentive to migrate.
Why is it such a big deal? Just announce that 12 months from now, the ICAO form is the only accepted form and be done. The US are a founding member of ICAO.
