Jump to content

You're browsing the 2004-2023 VATSIM Forums archive. All content is preserved in a read-only fashion.
For the latest forum posts, please visit https://forum.vatsim.net.

Need to find something? Use the Google search below.

Unable to file a flight plan...


James Nixon 1347161
 Share

Recommended Posts

James Nixon 1347161
Posted
Posted

Basically, I tried filing a flight plan via vPilot but it just wouldn't work I kept trying but it didn't file (no error message). So I tried the vatsim manual one and I get the error 'An unrecognized response was received from the server. It said:'. Just that, nothing which helps in anyway. I really hope you can help me out, thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bradley Grafelman
Posted
Posted

Can you show a screenshot of the vPilot flight plan window and/or the pre-file page with all of the data filled in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James Nixon 1347161
Posted
Posted
Can you show a screenshot of the vPilot flight plan window and/or the pre-file page with all of the data filled in?

 

http://prntscr.com/atorsg

As you can see everything is filled in.

 

EDIT:

This is the error with the normal VATSIM flight planner, which makes me [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume this is not an issue with vpilot but an issue with my account.

 

http://prnt.sc/atp0tb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Norman Blackburn
Posted
Posted

I'm going with your fplan is simply too long.

Norman

sig_FSLBetaTester.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James Nixon 1347161
Posted
Posted
I'm going with your fplan is simply too long.

 

That did it, thanks.

I wish VATSIM would incorporate a validation check to make sure people understand if it's too long. Instead of wasting several hours finding out the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joshua Black
Posted
Posted

Looking at what you have in your route, there's a lot of unnecessary information. Any "DCT" in a route is redundant. Unless you have an airway to connect two points, how else would one get there besides going direct? Also, all of those stepclimbs throughout your flightplan are also pretty useless on the network. But honestly, I use them too. However, when your flightplan is already that long, you can get rid of most/all of those level changes. You have the FL310 stepclimb in your flightplan 3 times. And then later on, are you seriously going to go from FL350 to FL360 to FL350 back to FL360? Also, considering the last three lines of your flightplan all occur on one airway, you can free up tons of space by making it simply "ABERI B934 UNDAT" instead of having all that junk in there. It makes it easier for controllers to read as well instead of having to filter through what they care about and what they don't.

Joshua Black

22

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David Zhong
Posted
Posted

Whether or not you think it's redundant, "DCT" is required under the rules for formatting the route field. Sure it makes no difference, but then neither does using spot on phraseology.

 

The changes between FL350 and FL360 are most likely due to direction of flight. Again, it's something you're suppose to do. And since VATUSA are controllers are taught to enforce the table of cruising levels, were the route segment in the US, I wouldn't be surprised if that was actually flown

David Zhong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joshua Black
Posted
Posted

But when you have the issue that he did with it being too long, there are plenty of options to make it shorter. I don't think there's ever been a controller online that adds "DCT" to flightplans. If anything, controllers remove them. Something like AAA DCT DJF DCT TTOOD DCT GHF DCT DRT simply looks amateurish but that's my opinion.

Joshua Black

22

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
Jonathan Fong
Posted
Posted

Sometimes many DCTs are necessary. Don't [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume every route is just a straight line - there may be reasons for strange-looking or large amounts of DCTs. Here's a personal example from a route I fly often - BIKF to EGLL in Concorde.

 

You may look at this:

58N015W DCT SOVED DCT DOLIP DCT UNLID DCT LULOX

and think it to be a bit excessive.

 

However, this is a graphical representation of the above segment:

 

8xoBuqb.png

 

As you can see, the above routing maintains separation from land during supersonic cruise. Remove any of the points (except for SOVED, but that's required due to it being the border of Shannon Control) and you stray too close to land and lay a 110dB sonic boom on Ireland's coast. Also note that there are no high-altitude airways in Irish airspace (as with several other European countries), therefore DCTs are necessary in any case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ross Carlson
Posted
Posted
Remove any of the points (except for SOVED, but that's required due to it being the border of Shannon Control) and you stray too close to land and lay a 110dB sonic boom on Ireland's coast.

 

The point being made in this thread is that if you need to reduce the length of your route in order to stay within the maximum length, removing DCT is fine because it is not strictly necessary. You can remove all the DCTs from your example plan and not change the route of flight one bit. DCT is implied when no airway is given to connect two waypoints.

Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jonathan Fong
Posted
Posted

The point being made in this thread is that if you need to reduce the length of your route in order to stay within the maximum length, removing DCT is fine because it is not strictly necessary. You can remove all the DCTs from your example plan and not change the route of flight one bit. DCT is implied when no airway is given to connect two waypoints.

 

I know that. I was responding to the comment made that many DCTs

simply looks amateurish.

 

Also, if you read my post, you'd know that the example route I gave was meant for SUPERSONIC flight and therefore all of the points were necessary. Yes, if you removed the points, the route would still lead to EGLL from BIKF; however, the route would then stray over land during the cruise phase. As you know, supersonic flight over land is frowned upon on VATSIM and strictly prohibited in real life; therefore, every DCT shown in the example plan is required to be there to ensure that the aircraft does not 'boom' Ireland (once again, with the exception of point SOVED, but that point is required due to it being on the border of Shannon Control and Shanwick Radio, as stated in the Irish AIP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ross Carlson
Posted
Posted
Yes, if you removed the points, the route would still lead to EGLL from BIKF; however, the route would then stray over land during the cruise phase. As you know, supersonic flight over land is frowned upon on VATSIM and strictly prohibited in real life; therefore, every DCT shown in the example plan is required to be there to ensure that the aircraft does not 'boom' Ireland

 

You're conflating two different things. Removing "DCT" is not the same as removing the actual waypoints. You can remove every "DCT" and the route is exactly the same:

 

58N015W DCT SOVED DCT DOLIP DCT UNLID DCT LULOX

 

will result in the same flight track as:

 

58N015W SOVED DOLIP UNLID LULOX

Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jonathan Fong
Posted
Posted

Ah, I misunderstood you then. However, from what I know, the DCTs are part of ICAO flight plan policy and shouldn't be removed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ernesto Alvarez 818262
Posted
Posted

your arent filing an ICAO flightplan on VATSIM. its a VATSIM flightplan (cant even be considered FAA anymore these days)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ross Carlson
Posted
Posted
Ah, I misunderstood you then. However, from what I know, the DCTs are part of ICAO flight plan policy and shouldn't be removed.

 

Right, but if you need to shorten your route in order to meet the VATSIM length maximum, removing the DCTs is low-hanging fruit since it doesn't affect anything operationally at all.

Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thimo Koolen
Posted
Posted

Why is there even a maximum flight plan length on Vatsim?

spacer.png

ACCNL4 (Training Director) - Dutch VACC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ross Carlson
Posted
Posted
Why is there even a maximum flight plan length on Vatsim?

 

That's just the nature of software. There is a limit to the size of any piece of data. There's a limit to the size of a flight plan in the real world too ... it's probably much longer than VATSIM's limit, though.

Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
Richard Gerrish
Posted
Posted

Sorry for the Nerco post...

 

I just ran into a similar issue with another pilot and it turned out deleting the remarks allowed him to file his plan as well.

Richard Gerrish

Developer, STM Applications Group

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Norman Blackburn
Posted
Posted

I just ran into a similar issue with another pilot and it turned out deleting the remarks allowed him to file his plan as well.

That will mosy likely be down to his remarks taking the total over the limit allowed.

Norman

sig_FSLBetaTester.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share