A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Alternate same as departure?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #18  
Old December 7th 04, 02:41 PM
Roy Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Brien K. Meehan" wrote:
Actually, I've filed similar plans with Lansing, and they wouldn't let
me. They insisted that I file at least 2 plans, one departing Midland
and the other departing Lansing.


Technically, they should let you do that, but I'm sure there's some
operational reason why it's easier on ATC to have two distinct flight
plans, so I'm willing to go with the flow on this. The pilot and ATC
need to act as a team for things to work efficiently. If one team
member says, "please just do it my way" and it's no big deal to comply,
there's no reason to get bent out of shape over it.

I've also tried to file flight plans with the alternate the same as the
departure, and they wouldn't take it. I didn't argue, and just gave
another nearby alternate (e.g. DET instead of PTK).


This one I just don't understand. What alternate you file has
absolutely no impact for ATC. It's a regulatory obligation that the
pilot has to comply with to be legal. There's no reason at all that FSS
or ATC should give a rats ass what your alternate is, and for an FSS guy
to refuse to accept your stated alternate is absurd. I'd have told the
guy to just enter the flight plan the way I read it to him.

That's just one more reason I prefer DUAT to FSS. The DUAT software may
not be the most user friendly in the world, but at least each time I log
in, it doesn't invent some new stupid rule that doesn't really exist.
As long as the flight plan I give it is syntactically and semantically
correct, it accepts whatever bizarre route I felt like inventing without
giving me any 'tude.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Notes on NACO Obstacle Departure Procedures John Clonts Instrument Flight Rules 1 July 15th 04 10:20 PM
Interesting Departure Procedu MRB Trixy Two Richard Kaplan Instrument Flight Rules 26 February 18th 04 11:42 PM
Alternate Intersection Name in Brackets? Marco Leon Instrument Flight Rules 7 January 22nd 04 04:55 AM
Requirement to fly departure procedures [email protected] Instrument Flight Rules 77 October 15th 03 06:39 PM
Alternate requirements Anthony Chambers Instrument Flight Rules 8 September 17th 03 09:45 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.