Zone Infringements
Guest
Posts: n/a
DFC, in my last post on this thread I suggested tht you look out the ICAO reference for ATS message addressing. In response you mentioned the Random FPL address book - which IIRC gives collective addresses for non-standard airways routes - and the AIP.
As you clearly can't be bothered to refer to the definitive document, I'll do it for you.
It seems to me that the flights that you are talking about fall into category e).
I don't imagine that you will change your opinion simply because I have pointed out the definitive rules for FPL message addressing. Nonetheless, the theoretical answer has now been provided and you have a multitiude of people who know how the system works in practice telling you that you are wrong. The simple fact is that, in normal operations, the only unit that is obliged to take overdue action if you don't turn up at the appointed time is the destination aerodrome.
I suggest you learn to live with reality and try to understand why you re wrong (and to help you along, try to understand the difference between a filed FPL and the basic information needed by an ATS unit to process your transit through their area of responsibility). And before you get on your high horse again, yes, once you have established communications with a unit, you will get flight informtion and alerting services - but if it's not your destination aerodrome, you get the services because you're talking to them, not because you may just happen to have addressed a flight plan to them.
As you clearly can't be bothered to refer to the definitive document, I'll do it for you.
ICAO Doc 4444 PANS-ATM
11.4.2.2.2.2 A filed flight plan message shall be originated and addressed as follows by the air traffic services unit serving the departure aerodrome or, when applicable, by the air traffic services unit receiving a flight plan from an aircraft in flight:
a) an FPL message shall be sent to the ACC or flight information centre serving the control area or FIR within which the departure aerodrome is situated;
b) unless basic flight plan data are already available as a result of arrangements made for repetitive flight plans, an FPL message shall be sent to all centres in charge of each FIR or upper FIR along the route which are unable to process current data. In addition, an FPL message shall be sent to the aerodrome control tower at the destination aerodrome. If so required, an FPL message shall also be sent to flow management centres responsible for ATS units along the route;
c) when a potential reclearance in flight (RIF) request is indicated in the flight plan, the FPL message shall be sent to the additional centres concerned and to the aerodrome control tower of the revised destination aerodrome;
d) where it has been agreed to use CPL messages but where information is required for early planning of traffic flow, an FPL message shall be transmitted to the ACCs concerned;
e) for a flight along routes where flight information service and alerting service only are provided, an FPL message shall be addressed to the centre in charge of each FIR or upper FIR along the route and to the aerodrome control tower at the destination aerodrome.
11.4.2.2.2.2 A filed flight plan message shall be originated and addressed as follows by the air traffic services unit serving the departure aerodrome or, when applicable, by the air traffic services unit receiving a flight plan from an aircraft in flight:
a) an FPL message shall be sent to the ACC or flight information centre serving the control area or FIR within which the departure aerodrome is situated;
b) unless basic flight plan data are already available as a result of arrangements made for repetitive flight plans, an FPL message shall be sent to all centres in charge of each FIR or upper FIR along the route which are unable to process current data. In addition, an FPL message shall be sent to the aerodrome control tower at the destination aerodrome. If so required, an FPL message shall also be sent to flow management centres responsible for ATS units along the route;
c) when a potential reclearance in flight (RIF) request is indicated in the flight plan, the FPL message shall be sent to the additional centres concerned and to the aerodrome control tower of the revised destination aerodrome;
d) where it has been agreed to use CPL messages but where information is required for early planning of traffic flow, an FPL message shall be transmitted to the ACCs concerned;
e) for a flight along routes where flight information service and alerting service only are provided, an FPL message shall be addressed to the centre in charge of each FIR or upper FIR along the route and to the aerodrome control tower at the destination aerodrome.
I don't imagine that you will change your opinion simply because I have pointed out the definitive rules for FPL message addressing. Nonetheless, the theoretical answer has now been provided and you have a multitiude of people who know how the system works in practice telling you that you are wrong. The simple fact is that, in normal operations, the only unit that is obliged to take overdue action if you don't turn up at the appointed time is the destination aerodrome.
I suggest you learn to live with reality and try to understand why you re wrong (and to help you along, try to understand the difference between a filed FPL and the basic information needed by an ATS unit to process your transit through their area of responsibility). And before you get on your high horse again, yes, once you have established communications with a unit, you will get flight informtion and alerting services - but if it's not your destination aerodrome, you get the services because you're talking to them, not because you may just happen to have addressed a flight plan to them.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The general sentiment quoted by Chilli etc;
No sh1t sherlock! We're not in Alaska, we're in the UK. The procedures work in the UK
Anyone who thinks that parts of Wales, large parts of Scotland and the Lake District are more surviveable than Alaska when one is forced to spend hours trapped in a downed aircraft during the winter months needs to have a rethink.
A number of aircraft have disappeared in the Highlands.....some have been found.............in the following spring thaw............................would it not be a shame if a flight from Inverness to say Blackpool via GOW did not receive an alerting service from Glasgow when they failed to turn up at the zone boundary as expected?
Spitoon,
e) does not really apply because the flight will be subject to an ATC clearance for that part of the flight within controlled airspace......hence ATC service.
------
Shame people resort to childish rants when they have not got the ability to debate an issue........roll on mode S and mandatory flight plans.......then perhaps those that shout loudest can be quiet while they learn how to file a flight plan!
The CAA have no data on which to require an AIP change.....yet!
Regards,
DFC
No sh1t sherlock! We're not in Alaska, we're in the UK. The procedures work in the UK
Anyone who thinks that parts of Wales, large parts of Scotland and the Lake District are more surviveable than Alaska when one is forced to spend hours trapped in a downed aircraft during the winter months needs to have a rethink.
A number of aircraft have disappeared in the Highlands.....some have been found.............in the following spring thaw............................would it not be a shame if a flight from Inverness to say Blackpool via GOW did not receive an alerting service from Glasgow when they failed to turn up at the zone boundary as expected?
Spitoon,
e) does not really apply because the flight will be subject to an ATC clearance for that part of the flight within controlled airspace......hence ATC service.
------
Shame people resort to childish rants when they have not got the ability to debate an issue........roll on mode S and mandatory flight plans.......then perhaps those that shout loudest can be quiet while they learn how to file a flight plan!
The CAA have no data on which to require an AIP change.....yet!
Regards,
DFC
Guest
Posts: n/a
DFC, I was going to retire gracefully from this debate but ...
If e) doesn't apply to the flights you are talking about, which paragraph does?
As I mentioned before, you have to understand the distinction between a filed FPL and the limited info needed by an ATC unit to give clearance (or not) through a particular piece of airspace that is along your route. It is sometimes difficult to map ICAO regs to a national system but I'm afraid that on this occasion it doesn't fit what you think should happen.
The present ICAO rules do not specify that a FPL should be sent to aerodromes along the the route FOR ANY FLIGHT. You may not like the rules, they may be outdated, they may not fit many of the types of operation that take place today, but that's what they are and the UK doesn't differ to my knowledge. So accept it.
By all means try and change the rules through the appropriate channels but don't try and tell the rest of the world - and some of the people who have taken the trouble to answer you are very experienced in the way that ATC works - that they are wrong simply because you think the rules are wrong.
Now I'm bored with this and I will retire gracefully.
If e) doesn't apply to the flights you are talking about, which paragraph does?
As I mentioned before, you have to understand the distinction between a filed FPL and the limited info needed by an ATC unit to give clearance (or not) through a particular piece of airspace that is along your route. It is sometimes difficult to map ICAO regs to a national system but I'm afraid that on this occasion it doesn't fit what you think should happen.
The present ICAO rules do not specify that a FPL should be sent to aerodromes along the the route FOR ANY FLIGHT. You may not like the rules, they may be outdated, they may not fit many of the types of operation that take place today, but that's what they are and the UK doesn't differ to my knowledge. So accept it.
By all means try and change the rules through the appropriate channels but don't try and tell the rest of the world - and some of the people who have taken the trouble to answer you are very experienced in the way that ATC works - that they are wrong simply because you think the rules are wrong.
Now I'm bored with this and I will retire gracefully.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,634
Received 513 Likes
on
273 Posts
Me too, before I wake up to find I'm losing the will to live.....
DFC, Have you been introduced to Walter Kennedy, on the Chinook thread? I have a feeling you and he might get on like a house on fire.....
DFC, Have you been introduced to Walter Kennedy, on the Chinook thread? I have a feeling you and he might get on like a house on fire.....
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone who thinks that parts of Wales, large parts of Scotland and the Lake District are more surviveable than Alaska when one is forced to spend hours trapped in a downed aircraft during the winter months needs to have a rethink. A number of aircraft have disappeared in the Highlands.....some have been found.............in the following spring thaw............................would it not be a shame if a flight from Inverness to say Blackpool via GOW did not receive an alerting service from Glasgow when they failed to turn up at the zone boundary as expected?
The case I am thinking of was the one that brought about the establishment of the 'responsible person' as I recall, after the aircraft crashed on Jura and lay there for a few days before it was noticed it had not returned home.
Every reference in the AIP to the responsibility for taking overdue action refers to it being the responsibility of either the destination airfield, or the parent ATSU if there is no ATC unit available there (having been notified by a responsible person of course). Absolutely no inference that it applies to en route ATC agencies in reference to solely the flight plan.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spitoon,
As I mentioned before, you have to understand the distinction between a filed FPL and the limited info needed by an ATC unit to give clearance (or not) through a particular piece of airspace that is along your route
I am well aware of the difference.
Let me say again. It is not mandatory to file a flight plan prior to departure on a national VFR flight in class G which will transit a zone. One can choose to make a radio enroute call and file an abreviated plan. Sometimes that is actually better than pre-filing - flexibility of route.
The whole point I have been making is that a pilot requesting a clearance to cross a zone must pass flight plan details to the appropriate ATS unit.
Using the FPL message addressed to that unit is internationally and within the UK AIP accepted as having communicated the required details to that unit.
An alternative is to pass the details by telephone in advance.
How can anyone deny knowledge of a flight after receiving a flight safety message?
--------
PPRuNe Radar,
You confuse me;
The case I am thinking of was the one that brought about the establishment of the 'responsible person' as I recall, after the aircraft crashed on Jura and lay there for a few days before it was noticed it had not returned home
The responsible person was brought in to remove the requirement to close a flight plan with ATS on or just before arrival at an airfield with no ATS.
If there was no flight plan then there would be no requirement for a responsible person even today.
If there was a flight plan and this was prior to the "responsible person" then ATS were seriously at fault for missing the fact that a flight had not arrived.
The consensus seems to be that many UK ATC units simply can't be bothered with flight safety mesages and UK pilots have no problem with that.
How many countries have ATC who are proud to announce that they ignore Flight Safety Messages?
Regards,
DFC
As I mentioned before, you have to understand the distinction between a filed FPL and the limited info needed by an ATC unit to give clearance (or not) through a particular piece of airspace that is along your route
I am well aware of the difference.
Let me say again. It is not mandatory to file a flight plan prior to departure on a national VFR flight in class G which will transit a zone. One can choose to make a radio enroute call and file an abreviated plan. Sometimes that is actually better than pre-filing - flexibility of route.
The whole point I have been making is that a pilot requesting a clearance to cross a zone must pass flight plan details to the appropriate ATS unit.
Using the FPL message addressed to that unit is internationally and within the UK AIP accepted as having communicated the required details to that unit.
An alternative is to pass the details by telephone in advance.
How can anyone deny knowledge of a flight after receiving a flight safety message?
--------
PPRuNe Radar,
You confuse me;
The case I am thinking of was the one that brought about the establishment of the 'responsible person' as I recall, after the aircraft crashed on Jura and lay there for a few days before it was noticed it had not returned home
The responsible person was brought in to remove the requirement to close a flight plan with ATS on or just before arrival at an airfield with no ATS.
If there was no flight plan then there would be no requirement for a responsible person even today.
If there was a flight plan and this was prior to the "responsible person" then ATS were seriously at fault for missing the fact that a flight had not arrived.
The consensus seems to be that many UK ATC units simply can't be bothered with flight safety mesages and UK pilots have no problem with that.
How many countries have ATC who are proud to announce that they ignore Flight Safety Messages?
Regards,
DFC
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there was a flight plan and this was prior to the "responsible person" then ATS were seriously at fault for missing the fact that a flight had not arrived.
The consensus seems to be that many UK ATC units simply can't be bothered with flight safety mesages and UK pilots have no problem with that.
How many countries have ATC who are proud to announce that they ignore Flight Safety Messages?
How many countries have ATC who are proud to announce that they ignore Flight Safety Messages?
Paragraphs 3,4,5 & 7 are the relevant ones (it even mentions mountainous terrain flights .. where once again, surprise, surprise, the Alerting action is placed on your arrival airfield or a parent ATSU (having been told about your non arrival by a responsible person).
The CAA also put their contact details on this leaflet. So if you can't accept the way they think it works (which has been iterated here by many other people), then get in touch and put them right as well
In the meantime ... units in the UK will deal with 'transit' Flight Plans as they always have.
CAA GA Safety Sense Leaflet 20A VFR Flight PLans
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: CYQT
Age: 54
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeeeesus is this thread still going ?? 
DFC if you want to complain about (perceived) vagueries of the UK AIP start your own thread or write to the CAA.
The original query by the threadstarter was answered long ago (by around page 2).
Stop hijacking threads to continue your usual sniping at the UK ATC system.
Here's something to think about:
DFC if you want to complain about (perceived) vagueries of the UK AIP start your own thread or write to the CAA.
The original query by the threadstarter was answered long ago (by around page 2).
Stop hijacking threads to continue your usual sniping at the UK ATC system.
Here's something to think about:
Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men
Douglas Bader
Douglas Bader
aceatco, retired
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: one airshow or another
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Stop hijacking threads to continue your usual sniping at the UK ATC system.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DFC, I note from your profile that your position is P1 but maybe you can enlighten us a bit further on your experience and what you do.
The impression that your postings evoke is that you are very good at quoting chapter and verse but have no experience in operating in the UK.
Why are you so convinced that everything and everyone is wrong with the current UK system.
Or is it just a case of sour grapes as alluded to?
The impression that your postings evoke is that you are very good at quoting chapter and verse but have no experience in operating in the UK.
Why are you so convinced that everything and everyone is wrong with the current UK system.
Or is it just a case of sour grapes as alluded to?
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPRuNe Radar,
Bit of history,
Prior to the "responsible person" situation, if a flight was flying to an aerodrome with no ATS then that pilot had to "close their flight plan". They did that by making an R/T call to the FIS/adjacent ATSU prior to landing or by telephone after landing. If they did not "close the plan", alerting action was initiated..........basically the current system in the rest of Europe.
Is it not true to say that provided pilots do what it says in the AIP then they can not be at fault?
If as one is lead to believe, so few pilots file full flight plans in the UK and how few of those address them to extra enroute ATC units.........then ATC can not claim that they are overloaded with paper flight plans for transit flights.
Anyway, we have discussed this at the company almost as long as here. We are obvously worried about being overdue but ATC not taking alerting action due to ignoring a flight plan. The suggested solution is;
Flight from Welshpool to Exeter via BRI - File Welshpool to Bristol (Alternate Exeter) on contacting Bristol ATC announce diversion to Exeter. In that case should we fail to turn up at the Bristol zone Bristol will start alerting action and later if we fail to turn up at Exeter, Exeter will start alerting action.........thus we have the required alerting action normally expected.
It's no problem for us......would it make any more work for ATC than simply not ignoring transit flight plans?
---
Squibbler,
I was sure that this was about zone transits.......and one needs a flight plan for zone transits...still talking about zone transits.
Thankyou for the quotation, I will considder myself a wise man.
-----
Vintage ATCO,
That old chestnut gets trotted out by UK ATCOs everytime someone fails to say how wonderfull UK ATC is.
I can count on one hand the number of ATCOs I know (I am not one) and only 2 are from the UK........all except 1 are retired........so I doubt if I know you but please email me if you do!
Judging from the various forums we must have a lot of disgruntled Pilots, ATCOs, Engineers, Spotters and Pimply bums with noting to add to the debate! ..................
Flyin'Dutch,
Hier is het bericht in onze taal. U hebt geen bijdrage tot het debat geleverd. U weet wat niet wij spreken over zodat maakt u eenvoudig kinderachtige persoonlijke aanvallen.
There is a lot right with the UK system. This is probably one of the few places where the AIP says one thing but it seems practice is something different.
You still can't help having a look tho!
Regards,
DFC
Bit of history,
Prior to the "responsible person" situation, if a flight was flying to an aerodrome with no ATS then that pilot had to "close their flight plan". They did that by making an R/T call to the FIS/adjacent ATSU prior to landing or by telephone after landing. If they did not "close the plan", alerting action was initiated..........basically the current system in the rest of Europe.
Is it not true to say that provided pilots do what it says in the AIP then they can not be at fault?
If as one is lead to believe, so few pilots file full flight plans in the UK and how few of those address them to extra enroute ATC units.........then ATC can not claim that they are overloaded with paper flight plans for transit flights.
Anyway, we have discussed this at the company almost as long as here. We are obvously worried about being overdue but ATC not taking alerting action due to ignoring a flight plan. The suggested solution is;
Flight from Welshpool to Exeter via BRI - File Welshpool to Bristol (Alternate Exeter) on contacting Bristol ATC announce diversion to Exeter. In that case should we fail to turn up at the Bristol zone Bristol will start alerting action and later if we fail to turn up at Exeter, Exeter will start alerting action.........thus we have the required alerting action normally expected.
It's no problem for us......would it make any more work for ATC than simply not ignoring transit flight plans?
---
Squibbler,
I was sure that this was about zone transits.......and one needs a flight plan for zone transits...still talking about zone transits.
Thankyou for the quotation, I will considder myself a wise man.
-----
Vintage ATCO,
That old chestnut gets trotted out by UK ATCOs everytime someone fails to say how wonderfull UK ATC is.
I can count on one hand the number of ATCOs I know (I am not one) and only 2 are from the UK........all except 1 are retired........so I doubt if I know you but please email me if you do!
Judging from the various forums we must have a lot of disgruntled Pilots, ATCOs, Engineers, Spotters and Pimply bums with noting to add to the debate!
..................Flyin'Dutch,
Hier is het bericht in onze taal. U hebt geen bijdrage tot het debat geleverd. U weet wat niet wij spreken over zodat maakt u eenvoudig kinderachtige persoonlijke aanvallen.
There is a lot right with the UK system. This is probably one of the few places where the AIP says one thing but it seems practice is something different.
You still can't help having a look tho!
Regards,
DFC
Last edited by DFC; 11th Mar 2005 at 21:58.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: CYQT
Age: 54
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Squibbler,
I was sure that this was about zone transits.......and one needs a flight plan for zone transits...still talking about zone transits.
I was sure that this was about zone transits.......and one needs a flight plan for zone transits...still talking about zone transits.
Like I said, you've hijacked the thread.
You're incorrigible.............
Wise man my
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flyin'Dutch,
Hier is het bericht in onze taal. U hebt geen bijdrage tot het debat geleverd. U weet wat niet wij spreken over zodat maakt u eenvoudig kinderachtige persoonlijke aanvallen.
Hier is het bericht in onze taal. U hebt geen bijdrage tot het debat geleverd. U weet wat niet wij spreken over zodat maakt u eenvoudig kinderachtige persoonlijke aanvallen.
Your attempt at being derisory is noted, but you still fail to make it clear where you fit into the bigger picture.
So come on and lift a tip of the veil which one fits you:
Pilots, ATCOs, Engineers, Spotters and Pimply bums
Anyway, we have discussed this at the company almost as long as here
Flight from Welshpool to Exeter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: South East
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DFC has gone VERY quiet since he/she was asked what he/she does regarding aviation. Makes me think it's just a sad person with to much time, the internet and a pile of books, maybe even someone who couldn't hack it in the aviation industry.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...It would be shortsighted to disallow others to hold views different from our own, and to suggest that they are therefore too far up their own [asses] is both rude and not helpful in having a discussion as is the notion that a different view needs to lead to an argument.
If the view of only some people is allowed to be 'the right one' it may well feel cosy for a bit but ultimately will get a bit nepotistic and lonely.
Although this is ultimately not our trainset, I think that since it is a public forum others should be allowed dignity when airing their views.
If the view of only some people is allowed to be 'the right one' it may well feel cosy for a bit but ultimately will get a bit nepotistic and lonely.
Although this is ultimately not our trainset, I think that since it is a public forum others should be allowed dignity when airing their views.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DFC was quiet because like most other people, one has to work from time to time. However, there has been no postings relevant to the debate so why should there be a response.
With an aircraft down off the West of Scotland, perhaps alerting action will be reviewed as part of the investigation although it appears from news reports that in this case the flight was departing the zone.
I must however point out an error regarding the point previously where I said;
Flight from Welshpool to Exeter via BRI - File Welshpool to Bristol (Alternate Exeter) on contacting Bristol ATC announce diversion to Exeter. In that case should we fail to turn up at the Bristol zone Bristol will start alerting action and later if we fail to turn up at Exeter, Exeter will start alerting action.........thus we have the required alerting action normally expected
It has been pointed out to us that there is no requirement to go to such drastic measures and that such measures are not appropriate if one knows in advance that a diversion "may be a posibility for operational reasons" i.e. not weather etc.
The way to correctly do the above is to file a flight plan with a RIF in item 18.
This I am told will acheive the exact same result i.e. Bristol will be required to keep and act on the flight plan until such time as they are told that the destination is changed to Exeter and then Exeter will have and act on the revised flight plan. The diference being that Exeter will not be required to inform the arrival of a diversion as per the diversion procedures.
Seems that there may be times in the UK when we have a flight plan with several RIFs when hoping from zone to zone looking for transits!
-------
squibbler,
A zone infringement is a zone transit without the required ATC clearance is it not?
To avoid infringements, always get an ATC clearance before entering and to get an ATC cleaarance, file a flight plan or abreviated plan as per the AIP!
Regards,
DFC
Flyin\'Dutch,
Being P1 of a Maule or a B757 makes little difference to the argument that international alerting standards need to be followed for the safety of us all.
Same as a surgeon and a GP debating the requirements to wash one\'s hands to avoid passing on MRSA.............would you like the Surgeon discounting your argument simply cause you are a mere GP?
No. So I won\'t either if you ever put one forward.
Regards,
DFC
With an aircraft down off the West of Scotland, perhaps alerting action will be reviewed as part of the investigation although it appears from news reports that in this case the flight was departing the zone.
I must however point out an error regarding the point previously where I said;
Flight from Welshpool to Exeter via BRI - File Welshpool to Bristol (Alternate Exeter) on contacting Bristol ATC announce diversion to Exeter. In that case should we fail to turn up at the Bristol zone Bristol will start alerting action and later if we fail to turn up at Exeter, Exeter will start alerting action.........thus we have the required alerting action normally expected
It has been pointed out to us that there is no requirement to go to such drastic measures and that such measures are not appropriate if one knows in advance that a diversion "may be a posibility for operational reasons" i.e. not weather etc.
The way to correctly do the above is to file a flight plan with a RIF in item 18.
This I am told will acheive the exact same result i.e. Bristol will be required to keep and act on the flight plan until such time as they are told that the destination is changed to Exeter and then Exeter will have and act on the revised flight plan. The diference being that Exeter will not be required to inform the arrival of a diversion as per the diversion procedures.
Seems that there may be times in the UK when we have a flight plan with several RIFs when hoping from zone to zone looking for transits!
-------
squibbler,
A zone infringement is a zone transit without the required ATC clearance is it not?
To avoid infringements, always get an ATC clearance before entering and to get an ATC cleaarance, file a flight plan or abreviated plan as per the AIP!
Regards,
DFC
Flyin\'Dutch,
Being P1 of a Maule or a B757 makes little difference to the argument that international alerting standards need to be followed for the safety of us all.
Same as a surgeon and a GP debating the requirements to wash one\'s hands to avoid passing on MRSA.............would you like the Surgeon discounting your argument simply cause you are a mere GP?
No. So I won\'t either if you ever put one forward.
Regards,
DFC