No flight plan found

V

vanman

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jun 9, 2017
Messages
18
Display Name
Display name:
vanman
I got my IR in April, but have been flying ifr with instructors for 4 years (too lazy to take the tests and my wife did like me fly through the clouds by myself since some people she knew were killed when he took off into imc and crashed shortly afterwards killing him, his wife and a kid or two. Anyways, I filed on fltplan.com the day before to depart Tulsa KRVS to El Dorado AR KELD on Wed the 28th at 4AM and to pickup my clearance airborne at PEJAY. I've attached the navlog from fltplan.com. I takeoff at 0410 (towers closed) and call up Tulsa departure to pick up my clearance. After a minute or so they tell me, no flight plan found do I want flight following? I was somewhat baffled at that moment but went ahead with flight following since it was just vmc at that point. It would have been a little different if there were low clouds.

Anybody venture what's going on? I have an answer from fltplan.com.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0491.PNG
    IMG_0491.PNG
    584.9 KB · Views: 86
Did you check the little box that says "file flight plan?" Once you enter in the flight plan, you still have to check that box for fltplan.com to file it
 
vanman said:
I was somewhat baffled at that moment but went ahead with flight following since it was just vmc at that point. It would have been a little different if there were low clouds.
Click to expand...

Lesson there is NEVER depart unless you have received the clearance on ground over cell phone or can confidently remain VFR on departure. There is zero guarantee that ATC will issue or you will be able to pick up your IFR immediately in the air even if they do have it on file.

I know on Foreflight I receive a confirmation that ATC has received my filing. I would hope any E-file has some form of verification.
 
vanman said:
I got my IR in April, but have been flying ifr with instructors for 4 years (too lazy to take the tests and my wife did like me fly through the clouds by myself since some people she knew were killed when he took off into imc and crashed shortly afterwards killing him, his wife and a kid or two. Anyways, I filed on fltplan.com the day before to depart Tulsa KRVS to El Dorado AR KELD on Wed the 28th at 4AM and to pickup my clearance airborne at PEJAY. I've attached the navlog from fltplan.com. I takeoff at 0410 (towers closed) and call up Tulsa departure to pick up my clearance. After a minute or so they tell me, no flight plan found do I want flight following? I was somewhat baffled at that moment but went ahead with flight following since it was just vmc at that point. It would have been a little different if there were low clouds.

Anybody venture what's going on? I have an answer from fltplan.com.
Click to expand...
Tulsa Approach is in Kansas City Center's sky. PEJAY is in Fort Worth Center's sky. Did you file PEJAY as the "departure" point on the flight plan? If it was RVS with PEJAY as the "first fix" there shouldn't have been a problem. But if PEJAY was the point from which the flight plan started, then what happened makes sense.
 
jordane93 said:
Did you check the little box that says "file flight plan?" Once you enter in the flight plan, you still have to check that box for fltplan.com to file it
Click to expand...
Yes, and fltplan.com also confirmed that it was filed and accepted by ATC.
 
I looked at your flight plan. PEJAY was the departure. Your NAVLOG starts with KRVS, but the filed flight plan begins at PEJAY which is in Fort Worth Center's airspace. Tulsa is in Kansas City Center's airspace. Tulsa Approach would not have the proposed flight plan.
 
I've run into that before using Garmin Pilot. I had a confirmation email stating it had been accepted through Leidos, but clearance delivery couldn't find it. I refiled right from the plane, waited for the confirmation email again, but CD still had nothing. They were nice enough to give me a pop-up clearance and enter the information in manually, especially since the field was solid IMC.
 
So what luvflyin is the reply I got from fltplan.com. I find it strange that the computers of each airspace don't talk to each other. So if I file to pick up my clearance in one airspace but don't try to pick it up until well past it and into another airspace (like I stayed vfr until closer to the destination and then turned into imc), ATC will not find it? Would I have to refile?

Shawn, yes, if it were imc on the ground I would have gotten the clearance on the ground, but since it was vmc, I thought airborne pick would be easier. It fact, I've never encounter anything like this before.

Thanks for the info. Still learning.

Van
 
Yeah, even many in the FAA don't understand flight plan routing. I remember ages ago when the DC (then) ADIZ was established. Two guys from the FAA tried to make a video on the procedure and they showed up at EMI and tried to pick up their clearance from BWI approach. The results were somewhat laughable (why they decided to show this at a pilot meeting just indicated how screwed up the security theatre was). Some of us knew why the clearance wasn't there. EMI is in New York Center's airspace not one of the BaltoWash TRACONS. It as a result of this all the SFRA gates were created so that the flight plans would go to the controller that the pilot was talking to.

This was after sitting through the first FRZ meeting and listening to Marty (FAA ATC guy who had been in management for too long) talk about how difficult it was going to be to get the VFR flight plans from the Leesburg AFSS to the DCA approach. "Why don't you just put them in as IFR?" says I. He runs over to the FSS guys, and they say "Of course, we're going to put them in as IFR, how else would it work?".
 
Well... when I was in the corporate world a few years back similar situations happened with me (on the ground, not airborne).
Overwhelmingly it was I filled local vs Zulu or the other way around.
 
Yep, back in the day time zone errors were pretty common. It's not so bad now when I just use the LOCAL TIME or "minutes form now" in most of the sites.
 
Hmm, I've had that happen a couple times to me as well, wonder if it's a fltplan bug or a ATC bug?
 
vanman said:
So what luvflyin is the reply I got from fltplan.com. I find it strange that the computers of each airspace don't talk to each other. So if I file to pick up my clearance in one airspace but don't try to pick it up until well past it and into another airspace (like I stayed vfr until closer to the destination and then turned into imc), ATC will not find it? Would I have to refile?

Shawn, yes, if it were imc on the ground I would have gotten the clearance on the ground, but since it was vmc, I thought airborne pick would be easier. It fact, I've never encounter anything like this before.

Thanks for the info. Still learning.

Van
Click to expand...
It can be weird. I think some of it has to do with the way facilities (TRACON in particular) divide up airspace between them.

At my home base, KTTA, if you look at the charts, the appropriate TRACON frequency is Raleigh. But, it's kind of on the edge between Raleigh and Fayetteville. For example, if you are flying an IAP to runway 21, you are likely to be handled by Raleigh; if an IAP to runway 3, Fayetteville, although the frequency on the charts in both cases is Raleigh.

Similarly, if your filed IFR flight plan is heading south, you are likely to be instructed to contact Fayetteville rather than Raleigh and, if you call Raleigh in the air to open the plan, are likely to be asked to remain VFR and contact Fayetteville. Of course, if, anticipating that, you call Fayetteville to begin with, that will be the day they want you to call Raleigh! BTDT :D
 
In my opinion, beginning a flight at a fix or VOR is not a smart idea and is always subject to miss-routed, lost, or ATC rejected flightplans. Airports have designated tie in centers. See FAA order JO 7350.9G. This is the FAA reference to flightplan providers that is used to determine the routing of flightplans. It does not include points other than airports. So how does the flightplan provider route the flightplan when the departure point is not an airport? The geographical center boundaries of the low airspace is used, but this is not always right, particularly near center boundary areas where there are agreements between centers and this information is not published. So there is no way for the flightplan provider to know which center to route the flightplan to. If the flightplan is routed to the wrong center, the ATC computer will simply reject the flightplan. If it is routed to the correct center, but one different than the departure control/center, departure control will have no way of accessing the flightplan.

Not all filing systems will report a flightplan that is rejected by ATC to the pilot, so the risk of the flightplan not being on file anywhere is high.

If you want to get your flightplan enroute, file from the departure airport or from an airport on your route. Depart VFR, then contact the departure control for the airport that belongs to the filed airport and tell ATC that you departed VFR and would like to pickup your clearance. So I file from Rock Hill, SC and if I depart VFR I will wait until I clear the local area and will contact Charlotte Departure. Charlotte, N12345 departed Rock Hill, 3000 VFR, would like to pickup my IFR to ...
 
Obviously not your problem here, but I love the "are you sure you want to file this plan departing in x hours x minutes" on fore flight. I tried to pick up a clearance in the air from a small uncontrolled airport and they could not find my plan. Turns out I filed it for the following day, now I pay attention to the time till flight given by fore flight.

For a variety of reasons, when I plan a mid point stop, I generally try to stop at a towered airport. One reason is if there is a problem with a flight plan it is easier to figure out on the ground. I realize that you can get a clearance over the phone on the ground, but in the practical world of flying on an instrument plan in good visibility/ceilings, that is not how I do it or anyone I know who flies for a living does it.

Jim
 
I always knew there had to be a good reason for this advice, but no one ever explained it to me (and possibly they didn't know the reason either). Thanks for a clear and easy-to-understand explanation.
 
Our tax dollars at work.
Now how will this change once the ATC privatization bill is signed? Will they finally fix all these design flaws?
 
Just curious.... when you contacted Tulsa Approach, did you tell them your filed departure point was PEJAY?
 
As far as I know any plans through 3rd party, Foreflight, Garmin, Fliightplan are known to have problems. I usually file 1800wxbrief.com. I have not had any problems going through that website.
 
It happens. I filled with flight service the other day and approach still couldn't find it.
 
BigBadLou said:
Our tax dollars at work.
Now how will this change once the ATC privatization bill is signed? Will they finally fix all these design flaws?
Click to expand...
Oops - forgot your sarcasm emoji (I hope)
 
It takes about 30 minutes for the flight plan to populate. And that's assuming they entered the flight plan the minute you gave it to them. If they get busy it may take longer. I always tell them when I will be ready to depart regardless of your filed departure time..."I will be ready for clearance in 15 minutes, if you can get it in ASAP, Thank you." If you get in that situation, just ask for a pop up clearance and they WILL give you one. Then screw the original clearance.

tex
 
TommyG said:
As far as I know any plans through 3rd party, Foreflight, Garmin, Fliightplan are known to have problems. I usually file 1800wxbrief.com. I have not had any problems going through that website.
Click to expand...

Isn't 1800wxbrief also 3rd party...(Lockheed Martin)
 
flyingron said:
Yeah, even many in the FAA don't understand flight plan routing. I remember ages ago when the DC (then) ADIZ was established. Two guys from the FAA tried to make a video on the procedure and they showed up at EMI and tried to pick up their clearance from BWI approach. The results were somewhat laughable (why they decided to show this at a pilot meeting just indicated how screwed up the security theatre was). Some of us knew why the clearance wasn't there. EMI is in New York Center's airspace not one of the BaltoWash TRACONS. It as a result of this all the SFRA gates were created so that the flight plans would go to the controller that the pilot was talking to.

This was after sitting through the first FRZ meeting and listening to Marty (FAA ATC guy who had been in management for too long) talk about how difficult it was going to be to get the VFR flight plans from the Leesburg AFSS to the DCA approach. "Why don't you just put them in as IFR?" says I. He runs over to the FSS guys, and they say "Of course, we're going to put them in as IFR, how else would it work?".
Click to expand...

I ran into this problem with EMI(as a beginning of the IFR plan) actually. Filed with Foreflight and got rejected(don't remember the wording, but had the Lockheed number). So I called them and they explained that EMI is in NY Center space, so Patomac rejected the routing. They fixed it for me by using an airport as departure.
 
TommyG said:
Yes, but they are also the FAA knighted FSS.
Click to expand...
So? GTE's DUATS is similarly FAA knighted as the other online source of briefings and flight plan service.
 
IMG_0108.PNG
flyingron said:
So? GTE's DUATS is similarly FAA knighted as the other online source of briefings and flight plan service.
Click to expand...

From the FAA website itself. You can clearly read.
 
TommyG said:
View attachment 54673

From the FAA website itself. You can clearly read.
Click to expand...
I don't know what your point is, but the page is also out of date The government pulled the plug on DTC in a rather horrendously run competition two years ago.

Anyhow you denigrated Foreflight in the process as well. Foreflight doesn't file flight plans itself, it forwards them to DUATS or (with the later releases) LM at the user's choice.
 
flyingron said:
I don't know what your point is, but the page is also out of date The government pulled the plug on DTC in a rather horrendously run competition two years ago.

Anyhow you denigrated Foreflight in the process as well. Foreflight doesn't file flight plans itself, it forwards them to DUATS or (with the later releases) LM at the user's choice.
Click to expand...

Really!! I denigrated Foreflight!! Did that upset you that much???
 
TommyG said:
Really!! I denigrated Foreflight!! Did that upset you that much???
Click to expand...
I'm not upset at all. I'm just trying to figure out what on earth you're talking about. You stated you never file through foreflight because your flight plan isn't going to the "official" site. With foreflight it either sends it to LM or DUATS at the user choice DIRECTLY, from the APP. Both the official online contractors. I just didn't understand what point you were trying to make (nor what you were trying to tell me with the goofy screen shot you provided which appears to contradict what you were saying and reinforce what I said).
 
TommyG said:
As far as I know any plans through 3rd party, Foreflight, Garmin, Fliightplan are known to have problems. I usually file 1800wxbrief.com. I have not had any problems going through that website.
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no difference. ForeFlight sends its flightplans to Leidos which is the company that operates 1800wxbrief and it is Leidos that does the routing to ATC. So even if you call on the phone, this will happen to you.
 
genna said:
I ran into this problem with EMI(as a beginning of the IFR plan) actually. Filed with Foreflight and got rejected(don't remember the wording, but had the Lockheed number). So I called them and they explained that EMI is in NY Center space, so Patomac rejected the routing. They fixed it for me by using an airport as departure.
Click to expand...

You are supposed to use the gate fix to enter the SFRA. EMI is in NY center and the purpose of the SFRA flightplan is to get it routed to Potomac approach. The rejection is from New York Center.
 
John Collins said:
You are supposed to use the gate fix to enter the SFRA. EMI is in NY center and the purpose of the SFRA flightplan is to get it routed to Potomac approach. The rejection is from New York Center.
Click to expand...

Yep, in fact, this was a mistake the FAA themselves made back in the original "ADIZ" days. They held a meeting up at Leesburg to show a video on "how to do it" and this was before the gates. They made the mistake of using EMI as a pick up point and of course, the plan went to ZNY. Why they made a video showing how NOT to do it, but it just went to show how far up their posteriors the FAA had their heads at the time as they couldn't even get their own plan to work. The gates were added specifically to solve the flight plan routing issue.

It was also laughable having FAA management go over and over about how hard it would be to route FRZ flight plans to DCA and I grab Marty who was giving the lecture and asked why they just didn't put them in as IFR. He pops over to the Leesburg AFSS guys and asked them the question and they say "of course we're going to put them in as IFR, how else would it work?" Again, more policy set up by people so high up in the FAA that they lacked the slightest semblance of a clue about how things actually worked in practice.
 
John Collins said:
You are supposed to use the gate fix to enter the SFRA. EMI is in NY center and the purpose of the SFRA flightplan is to get it routed to Potomac approach. The rejection is from New York Center.
Click to expand...

Yes. Rejection was from NY Center. But SFRA gates have nothing to do with it. This was not SFRA plan. IFR is IFR
 
genna said:
Yes. Rejection was from NY Center. But SFRA gates have nothing to do with it. This was not SFRA plan. IFR is IFR
Click to expand...

Thanks, I now understand you were IFR and my comment doesn't apply. However, I do see many cases of rejections on the VFR DC SFRA using EMI instead of using a Gate fix and these flightplans are also coded as IFR under the covers, so sometimes VFR is IFR. IFR with a VOR, waypoint, or latitude-longitude point of departure, particularly near center boundaries are problematic. If ATC rejects a flightplan, ForeFlight sends an email to the pilot. Sometimes a Leidos specialist will be able to fix it and then it is transparent to the user. Before ForeFlight sent emails on ATC rejections, the rejection was simply not known to the pilot, and they would get to the airport and clearance delivery would not have a record of the flight. Pilot would complain, what happened to the flightplan, it was successfully filed. I don't know if other flightplan handling systems generate an indication to the pilot of a rejection by ATC, but rejections come from the ATC computer and can occur regardless of who does the filing and well after when the filing occurred.
 
So, I filed again yesterday with the same flight plan on fltplan.com. Depart Tulsa krvs for el dorado, ar keld via pejay. My navlog states that my departure is pejay, and it is my clearance pickup fix. I get airborne and call up Tulsa departure. They look through their system and the find nothing. I tell them the pickup fix is at pejay. They say they should have it but they don't so I tell them I'll call up ft worth center. I call up center and tell them that I have an clearance pickup fix at pejay. They give me a squawk code and start to look for for the clearance. They don't find it and he ask why I filed with pejay as the departure. I told him because the system allowed me to do that (in fact, just got an generic email from fltplan.com that touted this vey feature). He was nice about it and finally he was able to give me my clearance, cleared to keld as filed. I asked him what the problem was. He said he had to manually put the clearance in. I didn't ask him any further about it but it sounds like the plan was accepted by atc but not entered. I asked him in the future would it just be easier if I just used the departure airport and he said yes.

So I don't see any advantage to filing an airborne fix and I will be using the depature airport in the future. The reason I did this "experiment" is because I had an instructor fly to an untowered airport and the airport had unforcasted ifr at his arrival. Center would not give him a clearance to get below the clouds and told him to call up flight services. He instead filed on fore flight on his iPad at a nearby fix, circled over the town to get a cell signal to get it sent. He got a confirmation and got his clearance.

Anyways, glad I filed yesterday. It was vfr all the way except the last 5 miles which was ovc 002. My first approach to minimums by myself (actually had a passenger). It was unforcasted and even the asos was saying broken 003.
 
I don't tend to use random fixes. I don't even tend to use VORs. The nice thing about using an airport is that if they have an approach, you can look up who handles ATC (Center or TRACON) for that field. I reguarly file from the next airport over because I can't raise ATC on the ground and getting void time clearances is a PITA at my home field (uncooperative TRACON). As soon as I break ground, I call ZTL and ask for my clearance from the airport just north that's in their space. I mourn the fact that we got swallowed up by the CLT airspace. Back when we were in ZTL's space, I could get the clearance on 125.15 on the GROUND here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top