The stock clearance into HPN from the POU area is IGN V157 HAARP. It's
been that for as long as I've been flying around here. Recently, they've
started issuing IGN V157 VALRE V157 HAARP, which boils down to exactly the
same thing (VALRE is just a bend in V157).

Today, I asked the controller about it. His response is that he just reads
what gets printed on the strip, and they've been wondering the same thing
in the Tracon :-).

Does anybody have any idea why the ATC computer would be generating
clearances with the same airway mentioned twice?

Hi Roy haven't talked to you directly in years.

Put VALRE into Google this is what came back. My gut feeling is that since
it is designed to handle high performance aircraft in reality all traffic
follows this flow with VALRE being condiered by the computer as a
feeder?/transistion fix.
http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0507/00651VALRE.PDF

It appears the date on the chart was effective 7/05/2005. Probably required
some ARTCC computer programming
Al

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
> The stock clearance into HPN from the POU area is IGN V157 HAARP. It's
> been that for as long as I've been flying around here. Recently, they've
> started issuing IGN V157 VALRE V157 HAARP, which boils down to exactly the
> same thing (VALRE is just a bend in V157).
>
> Today, I asked the controller about it. His response is that he just
> reads
> what gets printed on the strip, and they've been wondering the same thing
> in the Tracon :-).
>
> Does anybody have any idea why the ATC computer would be generating
> clearances with the same airway mentioned twice?

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message =
...
> The stock clearance into HPN from the POU area is IGN V157 HAARP. =
It's=20
> been that for as long as I've been flying around here. Recently, =
they've=20
> started issuing IGN V157 VALRE V157 HAARP, which boils down to exactly =
the=20
> same thing (VALRE is just a bend in V157).
>=20
> Today, I asked the controller about it. His response is that he just =
reads=20
> what gets printed on the strip, and they've been wondering the same =
thing=20
> in the Tracon :-).
>=20
> Does anybody have any idea why the ATC computer would be generating=20
> clearances with the same airway mentioned twice?

In a non-radar environment, as I recall from the days before radar,
a non-compulsory reporting point becomes compulsory if it is mentioned
by name in a clearance.

I'd guess ATC *really* wants to know when you pass VALRE,
even if the radar goes out of service.

"John R. Copeland" wrote:

> In a non-radar environment, as I recall from the days before radar,
> a non-compulsory reporting point becomes compulsory if it is mentioned
> by name in a clearance.
>

The rules for non-radar have remained pretty much unchanged since whenever the U.S. signed onto the
ICAO conventions. I suspect we were pretty much in charge then. ;-)

A non-compulsory reporting point only becomes compulsory when ATC requests you report it.
Mentioning in a clearance does not make it a compulsory reporting point, nor has it since ICAO
conventions were established circa 1950.

If you have an authoritative cite, I would readily concede the point.

IIRC the compulsory reporting intersections were the filled in triangle.
Non-compulsory were triangles.
Compulsory wasn't required once you were in radar contact. Reaching a
previous clearance limit and the final approach fix were compulsory too.
Al

"John R. Copeland" > wrote in message
. ..
"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
> The stock clearance into HPN from the POU area is IGN V157 HAARP. It's
> been that for as long as I've been flying around here. Recently, they've
> started issuing IGN V157 VALRE V157 HAARP, which boils down to exactly the
> same thing (VALRE is just a bend in V157).
>
> Today, I asked the controller about it. His response is that he just
> reads
> what gets printed on the strip, and they've been wondering the same thing
> in the Tracon :-).
>
> Does anybody have any idea why the ATC computer would be generating
> clearances with the same airway mentioned twice?

In a non-radar environment, as I recall from the days before radar,
a non-compulsory reporting point becomes compulsory if it is mentioned
by name in a clearance.

I'd guess ATC *really* wants to know when you pass VALRE,
even if the radar goes out of service.

Hi Roy,
I don't have an answer but I may have a "clue." I too noticed that
clearances have been including a specific fix even though it was on the
airway in the original clearance. My clearance was
FRG..BDR.V91.MOONI.V91.GFL..4B6. Looking at the Lo-Alt Enroute Jepp, I see
that MOONI is on V91. However, after MOONI the airway changes to include
V39. From a software perspective, the computer may view the segment north of
MOONI differently requiring a call-out of MOONI. In your situation, the
system *may* be viewing the segment after VALRE differently because of the
dogleg.

We may never know if a programmer did something to cause this anomaly.
Probably not even that programmer! Makes me wonder if there's a defect
report somewhere...

Marco Leon

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
> The stock clearance into HPN from the POU area is IGN V157 HAARP. It's
> been that for as long as I've been flying around here. Recently, they've
> started issuing IGN V157 VALRE V157 HAARP, which boils down to exactly the
> same thing (VALRE is just a bend in V157).
>
> Today, I asked the controller about it. His response is that he just
reads
> what gets printed on the strip, and they've been wondering the same thing
> in the Tracon :-).
>
> Does anybody have any idea why the ATC computer would be generating
> clearances with the same airway mentioned twice?

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
> The stock clearance into HPN from the POU area is IGN V157 HAARP. It's
> been that for as long as I've been flying around here. Recently, they've
> started issuing IGN V157 VALRE V157 HAARP, which boils down to exactly the
> same thing (VALRE is just a bend in V157).
>
> Today, I asked the controller about it. His response is that he just
> reads
> what gets printed on the strip, and they've been wondering the same thing
> in the Tracon :-).
>
> Does anybody have any idea why the ATC computer would be generating
> clearances with the same airway mentioned twice?


Don't know if anyone's still looking at this post, but I have another
theory -- you used DUAT or DUATS to file the flight plan. Both of those
systems (I am a lead programmer for DTC's DUAT system) have a requirement to
make sure the route of flight is validated by the ARTCC host computer
system. There was a situation where the ARTCC computers were rejecting the
DUAT flight plans (about 12 years ago) because the ARTCC computers don't
have all of the U.S. fixes in their databases. The solution for the DUAT
systems was to insert a fix along an airway when the airway leaves the first
center's airspace and enters another center's airspace.

Once the DUAT system sent the flight plan into the FAA's systems, the
controller just reads off the route as they get it.

Roy, my guess is that ATC started doing that to prevent pilots from
just going Direct To HAARP with their GPS as soon as they pass IGN,
thus skipping the bend in the middle of the airway.

Shaun Eli
www.BrainChampagne.com
Brain Champagne: Clever Comedy for the Smart Mind (sm)

FAA order B3838347 dated 07/01/2005 requires Air Traffic Controllers to
read bends at airway fixes within 75 miles of the departure airport.
Probably, that is what is coming into play here.

In article om>,
"Lynne" > wrote:

> FAA order B3838347 dated 07/01/2005 requires Air Traffic Controllers to
> read bends at airway fixes within 75 miles of the departure airport.
> Probably, that is what is coming into play here.

That explains it, thanks. Any idea what the logic was behind that?

Lynne wrote:
> FAA order B3838347 dated 07/01/2005 requires Air Traffic Controllers to
> read bends at airway fixes within 75 miles of the departure airport.
> Probably, that is what is coming into play here.

What? Never heard of that, and you'd think I would have.

Roy Smith wrote:
> In article om>,
> "Lynne" > wrote:
>
>
>>FAA order B3838347 dated 07/01/2005 requires Air Traffic Controllers to
>>read bends at airway fixes within 75 miles of the departure airport.
>>Probably, that is what is coming into play here.
>
>
> That explains it, thanks.




It doesn't explain anything because it isn't true.

"Lynne" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> FAA order B3838347 dated 07/01/2005 requires Air Traffic Controllers to
> read bends at airway fixes within 75 miles of the departure airport.
> Probably, that is what is coming into play here.
>

Really? How interesting. Could you post a copy of that order? Do you know
when the new system for designating FAA orders went into effect?

Lynne, thanks. Why within 75 miles of the departure airport? I'd
think that pilots would be MORE familiar with local bending airways
than with far-away ones. Or is an altitude consideration?

"Shaun Eli" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Lynne, thanks. Why within 75 miles of the departure airport? I'd
> think that pilots would be MORE familiar with local bending airways
> than with far-away ones. Or is an altitude consideration?
>

Lynne is a troll. There's no such requirement, no such FAA order.

"Lynne" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> FAA order B3838347 dated 07/01/2005 requires Air Traffic Controllers to
> read bends at airway fixes within 75 miles of the departure airport.
> Probably, that is what is coming into play here.
>

Are you sure that order didn't go into effect on 4/1/2005?