Confused about Flight plans...

[Ingo Harders]

I have been away for quite a while due to real life but now have returned and re-learning slowly. the aircraft is new (TBM), the sim is new and not everything is working yet as it should. So here is my problem. I have flown the route KLAX-KLAS several times now on the OSHNN1.Misen, HEC.CRESO4 route and all was well. Tonight when trying again I was first asked if I had a different arrival . Looked it up and realized the controller ran into the same problem I always face.. "turbojets only" we got that sorted and he asked me if I had a different departure on board. 

Thats when I gave up. Reprogramming the G3000 would have have taken at least another 20 min. and that is not the time I had tonight.

So my question is this... should I just 

a) randomly pick a SID and STAR and then wait for the controller to tell me which route I should fly? )before starting to program the G3000)

b) just ask tell the controller I'd like to goto KLAs how would he like me to fly?

When I questioned the controller whether there was anything wrong with flightplan I was told they have to use standard routing. Is there a place where I can look those up? Otherwise me spending time to plan my routes seems to be an exercise in futility.

Anybody that can help me with this?

thanks in advance.

 

[Robert Shearman Jr]

Ingo -- this video details my process for finding or assembling routes within the US.  You do have to be careful to ensure you're choosing SIDs and STARs that are pertinent to your aircraft type; and in many cases there might NOT be a departure or arrival for non-jets and you just end up getting radar-vectored to/from a location near the edge of the terminal airspace instead.  Hope it helps.

 

[Torben Andersen]

Regarding standard routes, you can look at NFDC Preferred Routes Database. Alternatively NBAA's Routes/Reroutes/Severe Weather Avoidance Plan.

Often I simply use Flightaware's IFR Route Analyzer

Happy flying

[Ingo Harders]

Robert, Torben,

Thank you so much. I will have to look into the provided links a bit closer.  I am currently using FltPlan.com to find my SIDs and STARs. Basically doing what was outlined in your video. 

In my KLAX-KLAS example my first step is to to look for eastbound departures. Then eliminate all the "turbojet only" ones. ( That usually narrows the choice down considerably). Then I look for an arrival from the west. Often on the the short ( 1- 2 hour ) flights that I do there is no need for victor airways as the SID and STAR often overlap. Then I start the aircraft and program the waypoints in thus finding out if there is a more or less straight line in the route and eliminate transition points that deviate too much. ( I will be using your method from now on, thank you Robert). Then when everything looks fine I save the flightplan for later use. 

I am however still puzzled why I can be cleared for a certain departure one day and refused the next day, given the same runways are in use.   It was my understanding (until now at least) when you have a STAR that is published, current and valid for your aircraft (meaning you can maintain listed speeds and altitudes) it is the pilots choice which one to choose, if there are multiple options. Otherwise, why publish several arrivals? 

Same happened to me in Oakland (KSBA-KSFO : GAUCH2.MQD, MOD.MOD9) one day that route is cleared, the next I get vectored thru 3 different VORs on arrival, dismissing the STAR completely.

I guess it would help if the controller could give a short explanation why the routing change. in private msg if need be. Until then its a crapshoot going to Vegas (see what I did there?) 

Thanks again you Two for your help 🙂

 

[Tobias Dammers]

1 hour ago, Ingo Harders said:

I am however still puzzled why I can be cleared for a certain departure one day and refused the next day, given the same runways are in use.   It was my understanding (until now at least) when you have a STAR that is published, current and valid for your aircraft (meaning you can maintain listed speeds and altitudes) it is the pilots choice which one to choose, if there are multiple options. Otherwise, why publish several arrivals?

There may be additional constraints on those procedures, like operations at other airports in the area, weather, noise abatement rules, traffic, etc. In principle, the idea in the US is that if you file something sensible, and it is operationally OK, then you will be cleared as filed - but it is well within ATC's authority to amend your flightplan and assign a different procedure, or even just vectors for the departure. Depending on the situation, they may opt for one or the other - e.g., if the airspace is crammed, vectoring you out will give them more flexibility; but if things are calm, sending you on a SID means less work for them and you.

[Robert Shearman Jr]

You might get rerouted due to traffic or other considerations, but it also might be a variance in the experience level of the controller.  Delivery and Ground are the first things you learn on the network and routing, in particular, is a complex topic (as I'm sure you've found).  Some controllers are more apt to want to force you onto the "standard" routing for a given citypair (because that's what they're told to do, for optimal traffic flow) and some might be more apt to let a non-standard but still perfectly reasonable routing fly when it's not super-crowded because there's no real operational need to force you onto something else.  Obtaining a clearance is much more of a negotation than a dictated process, so if the controller wants to reroute you while you prefer to stay on the route as filed, feel free to ask them, "we'd prefer to stay on our filed routing if available," and see what they say.  If they need to delay you while they coordinate it up the chain, you can decide whether the delay or the reroute is the lesser of two evils.  It's okay to make it a back-and-forth process -- just be sensitive to their workload.

[Brad Littlejohn]

To give a little bit of history on the KLAX-KLAS route.

The CRESO4 arrival into KLAS is restricted to those that are slow'n'go (read: props), because of the conflict that has always existed from when the 4 Corners Post plan was implemented back in 2001. The Four Corners plan (which is the predecessor to the current Las Vegas Metroplex Plan) are based around the plan that there should be a set of SIDs and STARs into and out of the area that passes through a "gate": a set of fixes that come in and out of the area. In this instance, we'll focus on the southwest gates, as for the arrivals from the southwest, we have the RNDRZ gate, while for the departures, we have the RAYDR gate.

Now comes the problem. The CRESO4 arrival actually not only comes in over the RAYDR departure gate, but will conflict with a segment on the RAYDR SID from KLAS. The CRESO4 arrival would actually be descending through the segment of the RAYDR that the departure will be climbing through. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't want your aircraft to have a MAC with a departure, so you'd get the reroute. 

As to why to publish different arrivals, KLAS has RNAV arrivals for the airport and specific runways at that airport, but also has non-RNAV equivalents in case the aircraft isn't RNAV capable. For example, the LARKK1 arrival is the non-RNAV equivalent to the RNDRZ1 arrival. Then also take into account aircraft performance, noise abatement, etc. That way, every type of aircraft with every type of equipment would have a way into and out of the Las Vegas area.

BL.

 

[Ingo Harders]

Hi Brad,

Thats why I chose the the CRESO4 because I am flying a turboprop. It severely limits the choices when you are not "turbojet"/ Then again, I probably should stick with smaller fields like SBA and PSP.

[Brad Littlejohn]

2 hours ago, Ingo Harders said:

Hi Brad,

Thats why I chose the the CRESO4 because I am flying a turboprop. It severely limits the choices when you are not "turbojet"/ Then again, I probably should stick with smaller fields like SBA and PSP.

Ahh. Then that was a good choice to make with CRESO4. I don't know if the controller that rerouted you realized what aircraft type you were when rerouting you. That may be a training issue there. That can be checked.

As for limiting choices, I wouldn't say that those plans limit your options, except for when that SID or STAR explicitly states that it is for turbojets only. You'll still have options. For example, take the return trip from that route above: KLAS-KLAX. You obviously wouldn't file the preferred route of RAYDR2.BLAQQ.SHTNR.ANJLL4 because you're in a prop. So you'd fly the non-RNAV equivalent SID, which would be MCCRN6.HEC.

https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/2108/00662MCCARRAN.PDF

https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/2108/00662MCCARRAN_C.PDF

Those can get you on a SID and vectored out of the way of the jets on the RNAV SIDs so you'll be good to go. Now with that, with the ANJLL4 also being turbojet and RNAV, that rules that one out. With that, we also have a non-turbojet STAR into KLAX, which is the KIMMO3:

https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/2108/00237KIMMO.PDF

https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/2108/00237KIMMO_C.PDF

Again, this one will keep you out of the RNAV streams that everyone would be coming down, so you'd have a clear shot into the airport, and using a SID and STAR. If anything, they (the FAA) should keep those around because being able to allow any aircraft to get into the airport of choice (SOPs notwithstanding) without being forced to have certain equipment onboard.

BL.

 

[Dustin Rider]

There's a lot of good learning going on in this thread. I always enjoy hearing about how other virtual facilities run their routes and hear their explanations for why they do certain things. For the OP, to answer your first question, yes, I typically wait to program my avionics until I get my clearance, both on VATSIM and in real life. Most of the time, I tend to get my filed route, but occasionally, for various reasons, most of which are in this thread, I'll wind up getting a reroute.

To my knowledge, there is no reason you can't get your IFR clearance well ahead of your taxi clearance (or release time if you're at a non-towered airport). I also find it useful to get it out of the way early not only because I now know what to program into my avionics, but when my passengers arrive, I've already reduced the amount of work that needs to be done with them on board and my engines running in my non-APU bird.

[Ingo Harders]

Thank you All so much. Very helpful and I am sure to follow some of the suggestions. 

Still it would be nice to hear from the controller (afterwards when he has time) why a specific route was rejected. That way I can avoid similar mistakes in the future.

Happy flying/controlling All 

[Brad Littlejohn]

On 9/4/2021 at 6:24 AM, Ingo Harders said:

Thank you All so much. Very helpful and I am sure to follow some of the suggestions. 

Still it would be nice to hear from the controller (afterwards when he has time) why a specific route was rejected. That way I can avoid similar mistakes in the future.

Happy flying/controlling All 

 

For that, I'd either leave feedback at the facility's site, or better yet, it wouldn't hurt to ask y you got the reroute on frequency. It wouldn't get the controller into any trouble, because what you're asking is informational that other pilots could also use. It would also be interesting to know if the reroute happened en route, or at the clearance delivery level.

BL.

[Ingo Harders]

Brad,

this happened prior to takeoff in the example outlined above. But I have also had that happen enroute that the Star was dismissed. ( this was not in socal). I realize as a turboprop I am slower than the rest and mess up the nice arrival flow. In that regard I like Seattle. turboprops on the star are heading inbound 2000' below turbojets, then I get routed to one runway while the turbojets land on the parallel runway. Makes it easy.

Anyhow I think we've exhausted this one. Thanks again for your input :)