Important: These forums are for discussions between SkyDemon users. They are not routinely monitored by SkyDemon staff so any urgent issues should be sent directly to our Customer Support.

WP names in ICAO flight plans


Author
Message
ckurz7000
ckurz7000
Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 538, Visits: 2.2K
I am running SD 2.4 on an iPad.

When I plan a route using reporting points on the map I don't see their name in the flight plan but only their coordinates. So, e.g., the waypoint "RADLY" shows only up with coordinates. This is unusual and not very friendly for the folk at ATC. Also, it makes it difficult for me to read the flight plan.

My suggestion: use the waypoint name in the flightplan in place of the coordinates.

Thanks, -- Chris.
Replies
ckurz7000
ckurz7000
Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 538, Visits: 2.2K
Tim Dawson (20/08/2012)
What you see is correct. The correct way of reporting an EET at an FIR boundary is the EET/LFRR0123 format. To use the name of an airways reporting point there, or a lat/lon, would be an error.

I do not know what MN1 and MN2 are, but they have no place in a flightplan. The only things that should make up a flightplan route are airways reporting points, radio navaids or lat/lons.


Hi Tim, you may be right in that the generated flightplan is syntactically correct. However, I can only confirm the experience of my fellow fliers that a flightplan like the one generated by SD would raise eyebrows with ATC and make them come back and ask me questions. Those border crossing points such as, e.g., GOLVA are specifically for reporting a border crossing and use in flight plans.

MN1 and MN2 are waypoints associated with the airport LJMB and expected to be used when landing at LJMB. They are part of my route and hence also part of the Route description in the flight plan. They do bear some significance because the approach controller at LJMB immediately knows that I will follow a sensible route. If I don't put these in the flight plan I will get them as part of the entry clearance in his airspace.

Either way is OK, but there is a reason that I file them as part of my routing. And if I use them as part of my SD route they show up in the fllightplan anyway. So if they already show up it is very confusing not to have them show up with their names.

Somthing to consider...

Thanks very much for a great product and cheers, -- Chris.
i-vela
i-vela
Too Much Forum (440 reputation)Too Much Forum (440 reputation)Too Much Forum (440 reputation)Too Much Forum (440 reputation)Too Much Forum (440 reputation)Too Much Forum (440 reputation)Too Much Forum (440 reputation)Too Much Forum (440 reputation)Too Much Forum (440 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3, Visits: 35
Yep,
having VFR reporting points in plain text in the self-generated flightplan would be great, as even ATCs in Italy request them to be given with the full name.

Regards
Asix
Asix
Too Much Forum (542 reputation)Too Much Forum (542 reputation)Too Much Forum (542 reputation)Too Much Forum (542 reputation)Too Much Forum (542 reputation)Too Much Forum (542 reputation)Too Much Forum (542 reputation)Too Much Forum (542 reputation)Too Much Forum (542 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3, Visits: 25
Hi,

I don't see the problem here. On the Ipad you can just erase the coordinates and type the name of the reporting point in the Flight Plan.

Regards, Asix
ckurz7000
ckurz7000
Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 538, Visits: 2.2K
Asix (27/08/2012)
Hi,

I don't see the problem here. On the Ipad you can just erase the coordinates and type the name of the reporting point in the Flight Plan.

Regards, Asix


Well, of course you can. But must of SD's functionality is geared toward making the life of the pilot easier. So why not here?

-- Chris.
Beni
Beni
Too Much Forum (3.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.3K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.3K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 18, Visits: 232

Well, of course you can. But must of SD's functionality is geared toward making the life of the pilot easier. So why not here?


Same opinion here, it would make things easier, the syntax "[waypont name] ([coordinates])" would be awesome.

However, I filed a couple of int flight plans using coordinates, nobody ever complained (didn't try it in Italy though).
milansmid
milansmid
Too Much Forum (7.6K reputation)Too Much Forum (7.6K reputation)Too Much Forum (7.6K reputation)Too Much Forum (7.6K reputation)Too Much Forum (7.6K reputation)Too Much Forum (7.6K reputation)Too Much Forum (7.6K reputation)Too Much Forum (7.6K reputation)Too Much Forum (7.6K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 68, Visits: 565
Hello,

I just want to express my full agreement with the opinion that the auto-generated flight plan should specify also the airports (used as waypoints) and VFR reporting points associated with the airports with their ICAO codes and full names instead of coordinates.

I am re-writing the coordinates in the flight plan to their ICAO equivalents and full names everytime I file a flight plan with SkyDemon and it was always accepted by the controlers with no questions (Luxembourg / Belgium, France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, and Czech Republic).

Thanks for considering this, Tim.

Milan
GO

Merge Selected

Merge into selected topic...



Merge into merge target...



Merge into a specific topic ID...




Threaded View
Threaded View
ckurz7000 - 7/23/2012 11:41:58 AM
Tim Dawson - 7/26/2012 12:42:02 PM
ckurz7000 - 7/30/2012 8:50:13 AM
ckurz7000 - 8/19/2012 9:16:33 PM
Tim Dawson - 8/20/2012 2:54:07 PM
Kerosene - 8/20/2012 3:18:54 PM
CMC - 8/20/2012 5:29:16 PM
ckurz7000 - 8/21/2012 6:43:13 AM
i-vela - 8/26/2012 6:28:52 PM
Asix - 8/27/2012 10:54:20 AM
                         [quote][b]Asix (27/08/2012)[/b][hr]Hi, I don't see the problem here....
ckurz7000 - 8/28/2012 7:08:38 AM
                             [quote] Well, of course you can. But must of SD's functionality is...
Beni - 8/28/2012 8:29:25 AM
                                 Hello, I just want to express my full agreement with the opinion...
milansmid - 8/28/2012 11:07:16 AM
Kerosene - 8/20/2012 6:33:46 PM
Tim Dawson - 8/29/2012 12:32:14 PM
ckurz7000 - 8/29/2012 3:22:54 PM
milansmid - 8/29/2012 10:09:00 PM
0fficer - 8/31/2012 4:45:51 PM
                     That my very well be the case but on vfr flights crossing FIR...
ckurz7000 - 8/31/2012 7:42:06 PM
                         That is probably the previous ATC unit giving your details to the...
0fficer - 8/31/2012 10:53:23 PM
stevelup - 9/3/2012 8:30:29 AM
                         Just a bump up post, really. It would be great to get a yes or no from...
ckurz7000 - 9/5/2012 1:52:04 PM
Tim Dawson - 9/5/2012 4:33:07 PM
ckurz7000 - 9/6/2012 7:33:40 AM
milansmid - 9/7/2012 1:48:52 PM

Reading This Topic

Login

Explore
Messages
Mentions
Search