Hiyo.

This is a curiosity question directed to the folks doing a fine job in the towers at the larger airport like YVR, YYC, YYZ and YUL.

The other day at our local airport I heard a commercial carrier have to get a full route IFR clearance, for whatever reason, and with the new(ish) RNAV routes that have been put in place, having ATC say waypoint names and then having to spell them all out made the clearance seem quite lengthy. I started thinking that if this was right before the morning rush at some of the busier places, this would be chaotic on the frequency. Understanding that a lot of carriers now use PDCs, is this the case?

A lot of carriers do use PDC but when a flight plan is not filed with the pref route or the route is changed due to weather or flow, then the PDC is no longer valid and clearance has to read up to the end of the changes and finishes with the first common fix then "flight planned route".

When a plan is filed in Canada or the US, the crew has no idea whether it has been accepted and their copy may be completely or only partially different to what we have. In Europe the flight plan system (IFPS I think its called, long time ago now) receives a plan and checks whether its on a valid route. If not, it is rejected and the sender is sent a corrected version immediately. There are very few times when a full route is required to be read to the pilot over the radio.

Having to read a full, and sometimes lengthy route in its entirety can be a real pain even when you do warn the pilot that you require the whole thing read back and will take it slow and add the phonetics.

Some of the 5 letter fixes are a little weird and aren't easy for some to comprehend BMPAH, or are similar to VORs: e.g. HANKK and HNK.

I spell out the waypoints because it's easier and faster to go slowly the first time and get a correct read back than to pull teeth to get everything correct a second or third time. That being said, I pick my battles. I don't spell out fixes to guys that I know, but an American with a full route to KTEB is going to get the clearance nice and slow.

we run a half decent amount of IFR traffic (not like our neighbour YYZ, but a steady amount), and we don't have a clearance delivery guy. So ground is issuing clearances, plus dealing with taxiing aircraft and moving ground vehicles, and answering the phone lines. In the end it is faster to take time and get the clearance correct in one shot.

Driving Comet wrote:I spell out the waypoints because it's easier and faster to go slowly the first time and get a correct read back than to pull teeth to get everything correct a second or third time. That being said, I pick my battles. I don't spell out fixes to guys that I know, but an American with a full route to KTEB is going to get the clearance nice and slow.

we run a half decent amount of IFR traffic (not like our neighbour YYZ, but a steady amount), and we don't have a clearance delivery guy. So ground is issuing clearances, plus dealing with taxiing aircraft and moving ground vehicles, and answering the phone lines. In the end it is faster to take time and get the clearance correct in one shot.

Got one of those full route clearances with unknown Rnavs in it the other day from SSM - YYZ area, rejected it as I'm a SE piston, and got the usual routing.....(I did already have a no overwater note in the file)

Anyway did 2 recent IFR trips through YXU -- same one guy is doing ground, tower and clearances....seems they were kind of busy for only one person to handle....lotta work...wonder what's with that....not exactly a total backwater. No problem but no break for him either....

Rookie50 wrote: Got one of those full route clearances with unknown Rnavs in it the other day from SSM - YYZ area, rejected it as I'm a SE piston

I'm failing to make the connection between you not knowing where the waypoints are, having a piston engine, and rejecting the routing. As far as I recall you are allowed to accept a route that you can't follow from memory, that's why they have charts and GPS nav units.

photofly wrote:

Rookie50 wrote: Got one of those full route clearances with unknown Rnavs in it the other day from SSM - YYZ area, rejected it as I'm a SE piston

I'm failing to make the connection between you not knowing where the waypoints are, having a piston engine, and rejecting the routing. As far as I recall you are allowed to accept a route that you can't follow from memory, that's why they have charts and GPS nav units.

Yeah, lol, I've flown to NYC and done the arrival there too. I get it one has to look up waypoints.

This routing was apparently straight down Lake Huron, because apparently the system that approves and generates the routes didn't catch my "no overwater" route in the file. I'll rephrase -- I immediately questioned the routing as likely being a direct one over water, as its happened before, as the system attempts to generate more direct routings.

They called up center and got me the correct routing, no problem, which if you'ed like to look at a map before commenting, there is exactly one route from SSM to the Toronto area appropriate for a piston single, unless they want to send me all the way around through the US, which I've done before for weather, at my (repeated) request.

Happy now? I don't choose my routings to please AvCan. People pleasing is a good way to get hurt, or unnecessarily stressed, in aviation.

I think you should start a new thread where you post all of your routings and clearances. And the lessons new pilots can learn from them. It would be really interesting.

photofly wrote:I think you should start a new thread where you post all of your routings and clearances. And the lessons new pilots can learn from them. It would be really interesting.

I had no idea you were an ATC controller, PF

photofly wrote:I think you should start a new thread where you post all of your routings and clearances. And the lessons new pilots can learn from them. It would be really interesting.

You've been on quite the Avcanada rampage lately...ha. Time to take the plane up to ND4 for a weekend.

..

Rookie50 wrote:

Driving Comet wrote:

photofly wrote:I think you should start a new thread where you post all of your routings and clearances. And the lessons new pilots can learn from them. It would be really interesting.

You've been on quite the Avcanada rampage lately...ha. Time to take the plane up to ND4 for a weekend.

Next He will be telling us he's "Mr Aviation". When is the next video, PF?

Seriously, where do you get off telling others how to fly?

That's stunning, coming from "Mr Advice".

I tried looking for a post of yours - in any thread - on any topic - in which you don't tell everyone that you own a 182RG and that you love to fly IFR all over the north east, and that you're a big deal in investments; and guess what? I couldn't find one. Not a single one. You're like an amnesiac at a party, unable to retain a memory of who you've already been introduced to, and unable to realize that the conversation is not about you: it's "Hi I'm Bob!" every nine seconds. Give it a rest, already.

..

and once again...

photofly wrote:and once again...

..

Could be a variety of reasons why YXU was all combined up. Don't work there, so I can't comment. Things that affect when a position is opened would be staffing, anticipated workload, training, etc.

Edit: I feel as though I'll be talking to myself with this thread, ha.

Driving Comet wrote:Could be a variety of reasons why YXU was all combined up. Don't work there, so I can't comment. Things that affect when a position is opened would be staffing, anticipated workload, training, etc.

Wasn't a problem. I kinda felt bad for the guy, that's all, he was on the ball and friendly, to boot.

But both trips in, one person, and the pattern and ramps were jammed. Never seen YXU so busy, and for a change far more than the usual training flights. Must have been 6, 8 jets on the ramp, medivac heli. Maybe just an unusual day.

cossack wrote:When a plan is filed in Canada or the US, the crew has no idea whether it has been accepted and their copy may be completely or only partially different to what we have.

In the private world (not a professional pilot) I always file IFR with FltPlan.com. You get an email that the plan has been filed and usually a few minutes later another with the assigned or expected route. Helps with being prepared (GPS & clearance) and its not a surprise. Occasionally you'll get a route that is not acceptable (whatever reason) and at that point I will usually call and negotiate. Always been able to work it out.

Question for the YYZ guys. When heading north east I know the preferred route is SN over the lake and then .... I always put No Over Water in the remarks but usually that gets overlooked. Is there something else, or another way to ask for this? Like I said above, I have always been able to work it out but thinking of a more efficient way.

Thanks

PAJ wrote:

cossack wrote:When a plan is filed in Canada or the US, the crew has no idea whether it has been accepted and their copy may be completely or only partially different to what we have.

In the private world (not a professional pilot) I always file IFR with FltPlan.com. You get an email that the plan has been filed and usually a few minutes later another with the assigned or expected route. Helps with being prepared (GPS & clearance) and its not a surprise. Occasionally you'll get a route that is not acceptable (whatever reason) and at that point I will usually call and negotiate. Always been able to work it out.

Question for the YYZ guys. When heading north east I know the preferred route is SN over the lake and then .... I always put No Over Water in the remarks but usually that gets overlooked. Is there something else, or another way to ask for this? Like I said above, I have always been able to work it out but thinking of a more efficient way.

Thanks

South east? If so, what's the departure airport? Lots of options depending on where you're departing and where you're going.

Sorry - meant east. Departure from CYFD heading to Montreal or occasionally CYPQ. I prefer the north route NUBER T614 ILUSI and whatever is required down the line but often get SN and across the lake assigned. Would't mind the lake so much if I could do it at 9,000 but that's not going to happen and I understand why. Single engine down low I don't like.

PAJ wrote:Sorry - meant east. Departure from CYFD heading to Montreal or occasionally CYPQ. I prefer the north route NUBER T614 ILUSI and whatever is required down the line but often get SN and across the lake assigned. Would't mind the lake so much if I could do it at 9,000 but that's not going to happen and I understand why. Single engine down low I don't like.

I see. I was picturing more of a YKZ/YTZ->BUF routing from your initial post. Not sure I can really help with that routing, you're either well south or well north of my little chunk of airspace. Maybe someone from airports could chime in.

I think all aviation products should have (in brackets), next to rnav waypoints, the pronunciation that the person creating them thought at the time was right.

Would't mind the lake so much if I could do it at 9,000 but that's not going to happen

7000 is an OK altitude for us there depending on departure volume off YYZ. If you were able to accept 7000 there is a good chance of more expeditious routings than SN.

Married a Canadian wrote:

Would't mind the lake so much if I could do it at 9,000 but that's not going to happen

7000 is an OK altitude for us there depending on departure volume off YYZ. If you were able to accept 7000 there is a good chance of more expeditious routings than SN.

Thanks - good to know.