Air Traffic Controller Discussion With a Global Perspective
By Greg Barber 903254
#508094
This does not mean that whatever the pilot has filed (including spending all of the time it took to program their FMC) will be accepted by the controller and issued as their clearance.


"agreement between"

Likewise it does not mean that because the controller has a particular routing or clearance they want to use, that the pilot will be prepared to use it. The pilot may have spent significant time preparing a legal and perfectly valid route, prepared all the documents, checked all the airspace and have a clear picture of what they are about to fly. To have that changed into something completely different is not likely to be something that are going to "agree to".

Pilot and controller need to be mindful of each others objectives and capabilities when coming to an agreement of what the clearance should be (if indeed it is not simply what the pilot filed). If the controller amends the clearance to something that the pilot is unable to fly, the pilot should simply say so and work with the controller to come up with another solution to the problem. Likewise, if the pilot has filed something that the controller is unable to grant, the pilot should work with the controller to solve the problem.

Getting back to the original question...

When I programme the FMC in my aircraft with star approach and runway details ,what more will ATC require, Thanks, Art


ATC expects that once the pilot has programmed and checked the FMC data, the aircraft will fly according to that procedure.

Art, a good technique is to find the chart for your planned or assigned procedure and double check what has come up in your FMC. Check tracks, distances, speeds and altitudes for each waypoint in the procedure. This helps to ensure that the aircraft (on autopilot or not) is flying the procedure that ATC expects it to.

Also have a Plan B in mind. If you expect based on communications you can hear from aircraft ahead of you that you may be vectored off the procedure, have a plan for where you expect you'll be rejoining. Also consider how high you should be and how fast you should be to make a stable approach.

At the end of the day, if you don't understand something or find it confusing, ask (much as you have done here).
By Johan Grauers 1113891
#508187
Arthur Melton 1092578 wrote:Having read all this would it be better to fly non FMC aircraft?


Not nessecarily, but the FMC is a tool like everything else and if you can't use it efficently then yes it might be better to learn to do without it.

I don't fly much these days but when I did I would try and fly procedures on raw data now and again just to remind me. When I started on vatsim though I spent years with very basic aircraft and tended to fly everything on raw data, because of that I've now got a pretty good idea of what I need to do even without my FMC (hwo well I execute is a different story :mrgreen: ).

But in my opinion, reprograming a new terminal procedure isn't that difficult. What takes time is the briefing and understanding of it, however it shouldn't take more than five minutes or so unless the procedure is really complex. As a pilot I have no real issue with changes to the plan, as long as I'm given a bit of time to prepare when requested I will figure it out with or without my FMC.
By Robert Shearman Jr 1155655
#508200
Arthur Melton 1092578 wrote:Having read all this would it be better to fly non FMC aircraft?

It depends what you mean by "better." In the real world, ATC may need to amend your filed route (sometimes in-flight), and in many places the arrival procedure isn't assigned until reaching the terminal control area. If you can't accept those changes the controllers will need to provide vectors or some other means of working you into their traffic flow.

So flying something which can accommodate in-flight route changes is most realistic, and offers you the ability to cooperate most easily with ATC. But you have to know how to operate it & fly the procedure properly. If the controller assigns a route but then must constantly correct you when you deviate from it, then you haven't saved them any work. So more primitive and less realistic is "better" if it means you can more accurately follow the instructions you're given by ATC.
By Don Desfosse 1035677
#508243 It's a bit clunky, especially until you've done it a few times, but you can change routes, add/change arrivals, etc. with the updated default GPS and vRoute. To do so:

1. Download your new route/arrival from vRoute
2. Take your autopilot off of GPS navigation
3. Load the new flight plan into your simulator
4. Select the navigation leg you want to use
5. Enable GPS navigation on your autopilot again (or if the course line from your PPos differs too much from the DTK line for the leg selected in your GPS, either use HDG mode or manual control to get to your next waypoint/fix and then re-enable GPS navigation).
By Robert Shearman Jr 1155655
#508290
Arthur Melton 1092578 wrote:So maybe I shall stay primitive and so be realistic depending on the age I am flying in ,Warbirds and suchlike.

I very frequently fly VFR and IFR using only VOR/DME and NDB navigation (/A). It's how I originally learned in the 1990s and I still find it very rewarding. But I also enjoy medium-haul tubeliner flights as well. It's quite a different kind of aviation.