IFR flight plan with multiple stops
gregscheetah
flight plan - say from DSM to Jeffco. Even tho there is a fuel stop in
KLBF, about midway. This is what it wants to file with DUATS.
My question is: I have always thought it was necessary to file two
flight plans - one DSM to KLBF and another KLBF to Jeffco. Is this
necessary? Or can I file a single flight plan? Is the Voyager
software making a mistake?
Thanks,
Dave Butler
It probably can be filed that way. You can let it go ahead and file it to see
whether DUAT accepts it. You don't have to fly it just because it's filed.
Whether ATC will let you fly it is another question. In my part of the country,
probably not. I'm guessing after your fuel stop you'd find your flight plan
doesn't exist any more.
Regardless of what DUAT or ATC wants, I'd want two flight plans.
DB
Mark Hansen
I remember someone on one of these aviation groups showed how to file
a flight plan that included delays for various things, like refueling
or approach practice. They even included the syntax for filing such a
plan in DUATS.
I've since looked for this and can't find it. Does anyone here remember
that? Where can the syntax be found?
--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA
Andrew Sarangan
If you are on IFR flight plan and you stop to get fuel, the whole
airport will be shutdown for IFR operations until you get back in the
air. I've heard this being done by freight carriers who stop for a
couple of minutes to drop off a package and be on their way. There was
an article about this on IFR magazine some time ago. You file a flight
plan with a 'through stop' (I am not sure of the exact term). The same
article also mentioned that ATC will not normally approve these stops
except at remote airports where other IFR traffic is less likely.
Tim Auckland
dlevy on 12/6/2004.
Messages from Roy Smith and Stan Provost have the actual syntax.
Here's an exceprt from Roy's:
In theory, you should be able to file a single IFR flight plan that
covers your entire flight, with delays at each intermediate point. I
just filed the following with DUATS:
1 Type of flight plan: IFR
2 Aircraft tail number: N25629
3 Acft type/special equip: P28A/U
4 True airspeed: 130
5 Departure point: HPN
6 Departure time: (UTC) Mon Dec 6 20:00
7 Altitude: 30
8 Route of flight: CMK V3 HFD IJD/D0+05 HFD V3 CMK
4104/07342
9 Destination: HPN
10 Estimated time enroute: 0400
11 Remarks:
12 Fuel on board: 0500
13 Alternate destination(s):
14 Pilot's name: ROY H SMITH
Address: XXX
Phone no.: 999-555-5555
Aircraft home base: HPN
15 Number aboard: 1
16 Color of aircraft: WHITE/BLUE
17 Dest contact name:
Phone no.:
and the computer accepted it. The "IJD/D0+05" means "delay for 5
minutes at IJD". I suppose for a touch-and-go, I could have made it
"IJD/D0+01".
The google groups url is:
Tim.
Mark Hansen
> The delay syntax came up in a thread "X-count flight plan" started by
> dlevy on 12/6/2004.
>
> Messages from Roy Smith and Stan Provost have the actual syntax.
Wow, Thanks Tim. I'm going to save this off this time!
>
> Here's an exceprt from Roy's:
>
[ snip ]
Tim Auckland
Tim.
Roy Smith
Mark Hansen <m...@NOSPAMwinfirst.com> wrote:
>On 08/11/06 08:52, Tim Auckland wrote:
>> The delay syntax came up in a thread "X-count flight plan" started by
>> dlevy on 12/6/2004.
>>
>> Messages from Roy Smith and Stan Provost have the actual syntax.
>
>Wow, Thanks Tim. I'm going to save this off this time!
Just keep in mind that having the DUATS computer accept it, and having
ATC issue you the clearance you seek are two different things.
Robert M. Gary
> airport will be shutdown for IFR operations until you get back in the
> air.
Assuming no tower.
Tim Auckland
"Thoughts on this approach?" 7/18/2005 Yossarian
Reply from Steven P. McNicoll 7/26/2005 7:34 am
....
The route should be filed with a delay in hours and
minutes at the point the approaches are to be made. If you intend to
fly
approaches for one hour it would be DXR..ABC/D1+00..DXR, half an hour
would
be DXR..ABC/D0+30..DXR.
....
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 07:39:31 -0700, Mark Hansen
<m...@NOSPAMwinfirst.com> wrote:
A Lieberma
> plan with a 'through stop' (I am not sure of the exact term). The same
> article also mentioned that ATC will not normally approve these stops
> except at remote airports where other IFR traffic is less likely.
It's called a "pass through" clearance. I did this once and it worked
great, but I landed in podunct MS for fuel and the frequency traffic was
quiet.
I had filed to seperate plans for each leg. As I got closer to my
intermediary stop, I asked center if they had my next flight plan in the
system.
After confirming they did, I asked if they could give me a pass through
clearance for fuel stop.
My request was approved with a void time, clearance void if not off in....
I kept my squawk, got my fuel and launched back up in the blue wild yonder
and recontacted center.
Worked great for me the one time I used it. I have requested it on other
occaisions and I got "unable" so it's clearly a workload consideration and
controller choice.
Allen
Steven P. McNicoll
"A Lieberma" <lieb...@myself.com> wrote in message
news:Xns981CAC76C5F3l...@216.77.188.18...
>
> It's called a "pass through" clearance.
>
It's just called a "through clearance".
Greg Esres
There is something called a "through clearance" that would allow you
to make a stop on a single IFR plan, but you can't file for such a
clearance. You have to ask your controller for it and make darned
sure he understands what you're asking for. I learned this the hard
way. ;-)
All IFR flights are suspended while you're on the ground, so he would
be unlikely to give you such a clearance if there's much IFR traffic
in the area.
Greg Esres
Does it sound like that he actually got a "through clearance"? The
phraseology doesn't match what's in the .65. Sounds to me he just
picked up a new IFR clearance in the air.
Steven P. McNicoll
"gregscheetah" <gjoh...@cccglobal.com> wrote in message
news:1155305537.3...@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
A "through clearance" is a possibility. It's useful for brief stops at
locations without direct pilot/controller communications. But stops for
fuel tend to be longer than what most would consider to be brief, and there
is direct pilot/controller communications on the surface at LBF so a through
clearance offers no advantage. Just file two flight plans.
Steven P. McNicoll
"Robert M. Gary" <N70...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155319403.3...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
There's no point in issuing a through clearance at a controlled airport.
Steven P. McNicoll
"Greg Esres" <NoS...@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:tisqd25p3du97kkh9...@4ax.com...
>
> Does it sound like that he actually got a "through clearance"? The
> phraseology doesn't match what's in the .65. Sounds to me he just
> picked up a new IFR clearance in the air.
>
No. It sounds like he just picked up his departure clearance on the way
in.
Stan Gosnell
news:1155305537.3...@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com:
A stopover plan is legal, but probably not a good idea. If there is much
delay at the fuel stop, lots of confusion can result, and may even if there
is no delay. I file separate plans.
--
Regards,
Stan
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin
Stan Gosnell
news:CVnDg.7169$xp2....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:
> A "through clearance" is a possibility. It's useful for brief stops
> at locations without direct pilot/controller communications. But
> stops for fuel tend to be longer than what most would consider to be
> brief, and there is direct pilot/controller communications on the
> surface at LBF so a through clearance offers no advantage. Just file
> two flight plans.
We sometimes get a through clearance on offshore flights. We file 2
plans, but due to the lack of ATC radar and communications coverage, we
can almost never talk to anyone to get our inbound clearance, other than
through company communications specialists, who have to call FSS, who
calls center, and get everything relayed a few times. If we're just
stopping to drop off & pick up passengers, we often ask for our inbound
clearance with a void time before we descend out of radio coverage. If
there is no other IFR traffice, center may give us a through clearance,
combining our cruise clearance to the rig with our inbound clearance.
When the system is barely viable in the first place, some flexibility is
necessary.
gregscheetah
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
> >
> > Assuming no tower.
> >
>
> There's no point in issuing a through clearance at a controlled airport.
I agree with everyone that suggests just filing two flight plans. BUT
the voyager flight planning software doesn't do that. It files one -
even after it clearly understands that the aircraft is landing at a
midpoint airport for fuel.
I like the Voyager flight software because I originally thought that it
does allow one to plan the entire flight and then insert fuel stops as
needed. Previous software (AOPA) required me to plan the whole flight,
determine fuel stops required, and then plan two or more additional
flight plans for each fuel leg.
Allan9
The computers tracking your flight automatically cancel your IFR when you
land even at an intermediate airport.
GIGO
Al
"Dave Butler" <x@x.x> wrote in message
news:11553065...@sj-nntpcache-1.cisco.com...
Steven P. McNicoll
"Allan9" <ex...@neo1.rr.com> wrote in message
news:jK8Gg.67030$u11....@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
> The computers tracking your flight automatically cancel your IFR when you
> land even at an intermediate airport.
>
No they don't.