Are "Popups" A Hassle?

[skym]

For the ATC guys: I frequently have departed VFR, but then do a popup
if needed. Frequently these are sortof foreseeable possibilities, but
often enough I have been able to proceed VFR all the way. I've often
wondered just how much of a hassle it is to ATC to have to deal with a
popup.

[[email protected]]

skym > wrote:
: For the ATC guys: I frequently have departed VFR, but then do a popup
: if needed. Frequently these are sortof foreseeable possibilities, but
: often enough I have been able to proceed VFR all the way. I've often
: wondered just how much of a hassle it is to ATC to have to deal with a
: popup.

... and a corollary: If one does *NOT* do a popup, but rather files IFR and
departs VFR, how much of a hassle is it to open said flight plan mid-stream? Picking
up a flight plan filed with a different FSS for departure 3 hours earlier is not
likely to work and will degenerate into a popup.


-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"skym" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> For the ATC guys: I frequently have departed VFR, but then do a popup
> if needed. Frequently these are sortof foreseeable possibilities, but
> often enough I have been able to proceed VFR all the way. I've often
> wondered just how much of a hassle it is to ATC to have to deal with a
> popup.
>

Depends on how busy the controller is and how far you need to go. If
there's not much going on it's a simple matter for the controller to issue a
clearance and enter it in the computer. If he's talking to a lot of planes
at the time he may not have an opportunity to enter it in the computer. If
it's not entered it's he can't let you go beyond his airspace.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

> wrote in message
...
>
> ... and a corollary: If one does *NOT* do a popup, but rather files IFR
> and departs VFR, how much of a hassle is it to open said flight plan
> mid-stream? Picking up a flight plan filed with a different FSS for
> departure
> 3 hours earlier is not likely to work and will degenerate into a popup.
>

Do you mean filing IFR from an untowered field and calling for clearance
shortly after departure? That usually works quite well as it is actually
easier for the controller.

[jmk]

skym wrote:
> For the ATC guys: I frequently have departed VFR, but then do a popup
> if needed. Frequently these are sortof foreseeable possibilities, but
> often enough I have been able to proceed VFR all the way. I've often
> wondered just how much of a hassle it is to ATC to have to deal with a
> popup.

I think it VERY much depends on the facility. I've talked with
controllers from several different facilities, asking a question
basically "if I want to descend through the clouds to land, would you
rather I go to FSS first, or just call you for a pop-up?" Invariably,
out here in the middle of the CONUS, the answer has been "just give us
a call - it's no more work for a pop-up than it is getting the
clearance strip through the computer."

Only once have I had a controller ask me to file with FSS first, and
that (strangely enough) was coming into El Paso, TX.

[[email protected]]

Steven P. McNicoll > wrote:
: > ... and a corollary: If one does *NOT* do a popup, but rather files IFR
: > and departs VFR, how much of a hassle is it to open said flight plan
: > mid-stream? Picking up a flight plan filed with a different FSS for
: > departure
: > 3 hours earlier is not likely to work and will degenerate into a popup.
: >

: Do you mean filing IFR from an untowered field and calling for clearance
: shortly after departure? That usually works quite well as it is actually
: easier for the controller.

I'm primarily used to untowered fields, so the clearance delivery and void
time et al can be kinda a pain. It was the "shortly after departure" that I was
thinking about. Basically, planning to make the trip VFR, but filing an IFR plan in
case the weather's worse than you expected. If you're 2 hours down the road VFR
without having opened your IFR flight plan and you try to open it then and get a
clearance, it's probably been flushed from the system and is as bad as a pop-up.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[Steven P. McNicoll]

> wrote in message
...
>
> I'm primarily used to untowered fields, so the clearance delivery and void
> time et al can be kinda a pain. It was the "shortly after departure" that
> I was
> thinking about. Basically, planning to make the trip VFR, but filing an
> IFR plan in
> case the weather's worse than you expected. If you're 2 hours down the
> road VFR
> without having opened your IFR flight plan and you try to open it then and
> get a
> clearance, it's probably been flushed from the system and is as bad as a
> pop-up.
>

Even if it's still in the system the controller working the airspace two
hours down the road from your filed departure point isn't going to have the
flight plan. And you shouldn't expect him to.

[Bob Gardner]

File an IFR flight plan with OTP (VFR-on-top) in the altitude block, then
convert it to a "hard altitude" when you need to. Take off and fly VFR while
enjoying the warm fuzzies of constant ATC contact.

Bob Gardner

"skym" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> For the ATC guys: I frequently have departed VFR, but then do a popup
> if needed. Frequently these are sortof foreseeable possibilities, but
> often enough I have been able to proceed VFR all the way. I've often
> wondered just how much of a hassle it is to ATC to have to deal with a
> popup.
>

[Peter R.]

skym > wrote:

> For the ATC guys: I frequently have departed VFR, but then do a popup
> if needed. Frequently these are sortof foreseeable possibilities, but
> often enough I have been able to proceed VFR all the way. I've often
> wondered just how much of a hassle it is to ATC to have to deal with a
> popup.

If it is a hassle to the controller, s/he will simply deny the request. A
couple of years ago I overheard a few different aircraft attempt to get
pop-ups when the weather began deteriorating (this happened over central
Pennsylvania). The controller, presumably very busy, denied them all. One
announced that he then had no choice but to land at the airport right below
him in order to remain VFR. However, the risk of being turned down
shouldn't deter you from trying.

In my experience, I once had a controller act noticeably perturbed when I
requested a pop-up, but he honored the request so I didn't really care that
he acted cranky; the IFR clearance got me home. Other times I used this
tool, the controller was happy to help.

And, in response to obtaining an IFR clearance on the ground or in the air
at a non-towered airport in the US, I fly weekly from an uncontrolled
airport. Unless the airport conditions are IFR, I always launch VFR then
obtain my (already filed) IFR clearance in the air.

For some reason in my case, when obtaining a clearance on the ground, ATC
will most times clear my aircraft only to the VOR located at this airport.
This makes for a high workload as I climb out, circle back over the VOR,
and contact ATC, all while student pilots fly the traffic pattern right
below.

However, obtaining the clearance in the air, I always get cleared to my
destination, so the workload and collision risk (circling at a popular VOR
used for training) are lower since I can turn to my destination first, then
contact ATC for the clearance.

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[[email protected]]

: Even if it's still in the system the controller working the airspace two
: hours down the road from your filed departure point isn't going to have the
: flight plan. And you shouldn't expect him to.


That's what I was saying. Although it is pretty sad that the nationwide
system cannot keep everything together in a unified way. It's not that it's that much
data... just that the system is so old that it cannot handle it. If a couple
megabytes of memory in a GPS can handle every APT, VOR, ADF, INT for all of north
america, regular computers shouldn't have trouble.

Anyway... I'm not really bitching... honest... :) Just that many of the
procedures are due to limitations in the infrastructure AIUI.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[Robert M. Gary]

If I'm just trying to get over an overcast, I find that a "to VFR on
top" clearance is easier because the clearance limit can be within the
controllers airspace. If you ask to pick up an IFR ATC needs to
coordinate that clearance all the way to the destination, but if you
just do the "to VFR on top" using a nearby limit (VOR, intersection,
etc) he can do it on his own. I suppose you could also ask for an IFR
clearance just to the VOR but the couple times I've tried that the ATC
guys seemed to think it was very odd.

-Robert

[Newps]

wrote:

>
> That's what I was saying. Although it is pretty sad that the nationwide
> system cannot keep everything together in a unified way. It's not that it's that much
> data... just that the system is so old that it cannot handle it. If a couple
> megabytes of memory in a GPS can handle every APT, VOR, ADF, INT for all of north
> america, regular computers shouldn't have trouble.

You don't know what you're asking for. A few MB of computer memory is
not the issue. If you take off VFR and fly from Miami to Seattle you
want you're IFR clearance to be ready at each controllers position along
the way. Do you have any idea how many IFR flightplans never get used
in the course of an average day?

[John Clonts]

Shouldn't he have some way of getting it though? (well, E.g. 30
minutes down the road rather than 2 hours) ?

Here's my specific example. I file IFR flight plan from Temple TPL to
San Antonio SAT. I take off VFR and head toward SAT. I'm in Gray
approach control's airspace when I take off, but 20 minutes later I'm
no longer in Gray's airspace. I decide I'd like to get my IFR
clearance so I call Houston Center. Should ZHU have a strip on me?
And if not, can they somehow pull it up, to give me a clearance using
that flight plan info?

I *think* the answers to those last two are no and no. But it seems
strange because it's all ZHU airspace, some of which is delegated to
Gray.

--
Cheers,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ

[Nathan Young]

On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:46:30 -0600, Newps > wrote:

>
>
wrote:
>
>>
>> That's what I was saying. Although it is pretty sad that the nationwide
>> system cannot keep everything together in a unified way. It's not that it's that much
>> data... just that the system is so old that it cannot handle it. If a couple
>> megabytes of memory in a GPS can handle every APT, VOR, ADF, INT for all of north
>> america, regular computers shouldn't have trouble.
>
>You don't know what you're asking for. A few MB of computer memory is
>not the issue. If you take off VFR and fly from Miami to Seattle you
>want you're IFR clearance to be ready at each controllers position along
>the way. Do you have any idea how many IFR flightplans never get used
>in the course of an average day?

Note: I have never been in an ATC facility, so I have no idea how the
systems actually work, nor the limitations.

However, in terms of technology, managing flightplans for every
aircraft in the US would be a trivial problem. This is exactly what
database programs are designed to do.

Upon initial contact from the aircraft, the controller, should be able
to key the N-number into a database and see if there is a flightplan
available. In this manner, each controller would have access to each
flightplan, but only as they need it.

An aging utility would go through and remove old flightplans.
Security and redudancy issues aside, I could have something like this
running on SQL and webconfigured in less than a week.

What am I missing? I am eager to learn how the current system works.

-Nathan

[John R. Copeland]

"Newps" > wrote in message ...
>
> ... Do you have any idea how many IFR flightplans never get used
> in the course of an average day?

No, but that's something I've been curious about for many years.
Please give us a ballpark idea. 1%? 10%? More?

[Peter R.]

Nathan Young > wrote:

> What am I missing? I am eager to learn how the current system works.

Apparently you are unfamiliar with the less-than-stellar FAA history of
large software projects. Case-in-point: STARs

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[skym]

Thanks to all who replied. My concerns have been answered.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

> wrote in message
...
>
> That's what I was saying. Although it is pretty sad that the nationwide
> system cannot keep everything together in a unified way. It's not that
> it's that much data... just that the system is so old that it cannot
> handle it.
> If a couple megabytes of memory in a GPS can handle every APT, VOR,
> ADF, INT for all of north america, regular computers shouldn't have
> trouble.
>

Right. Let's put all the flight data in one system, give every controller
access to all of it, and make it easy to shut down the entire system.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> If I'm just trying to get over an overcast, I find that a "to VFR on
> top" clearance is easier because the clearance limit can be within the
> controllers airspace. If you ask to pick up an IFR ATC needs to
> coordinate that clearance all the way to the destination, but if you
> just do the "to VFR on top" using a nearby limit (VOR, intersection,
> etc) he can do it on his own. I suppose you could also ask for an IFR
> clearance just to the VOR but the couple times I've tried that the ATC
> guys seemed to think it was very odd.
>

If you cancel upon reaching VFR conditions you haven't operated VFR-on-top,
so why do you find that a "to VFR on top" clearance is easier?

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
>
> Note: I have never been in an ATC facility, so I have no idea how the
> systems actually work, nor the limitations.
>
> However, in terms of technology, managing flightplans for every
> aircraft in the US would be a trivial problem. This is exactly what
> database programs are designed to do.
>
> Upon initial contact from the aircraft, the controller, should be able
> to key the N-number into a database and see if there is a flightplan
> available. In this manner, each controller would have access to each
> flightplan, but only as they need it.
>

Only as they need it? How does the computer know what controller needs
access to the flight plan at any moment?


>
> An aging utility would go through and remove old flightplans.
>

Old flight plans are presently removed if they haven't been activated two
hours after the proposed departure time.


>
> Security and redudancy issues aside, I could have something like this
> running on SQL and webconfigured in less than a week.
>

But those are rather important issues.


>
> What am I missing? I am eager to learn how the current system works.
>

What do you want to know?

[[email protected]]

Newps > wrote:
: > That's what I was saying. Although it is pretty sad that the nationwide
: > system cannot keep everything together in a unified way. It's not that it's that much
: > data... just that the system is so old that it cannot handle it. If a couple
: > megabytes of memory in a GPS can handle every APT, VOR, ADF, INT for all of north
: > america, regular computers shouldn't have trouble.

: You don't know what you're asking for. A few MB of computer memory is
: not the issue. If you take off VFR and fly from Miami to Seattle you
: want you're IFR clearance to be ready at each controllers position along
: the way. Do you have any idea how many IFR flightplans never get used
: in the course of an average day?

I wasn't actually referring to flight plans... those are dynamic data and not
everyone needs to know about it. Also, they're well-defined so shuttling them to the
appropriate facility is relatively straight-forward. I'm talking about navaids such.
I think one should be able to file a cross-country flight plan, starting at an airport
or perhaps a nearby point, and file with the endpoint being the IAF designator at the
destination airport. There may be something subtle about why one wouldn't
necessarily want to have a clearance to an IAF designator, but it's better than the
airport. At least the IAF has a procedure for arriving at an airport... flying over
the top at MEA doesn't.

If I were to try that, chances are they computers won't have any idea the
designator for the destination airport. THAT's what seems silly to me.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"John Clonts" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Shouldn't he have some way of getting it though? (well, E.g. 30
> minutes down the road rather than 2 hours) ?
>
> Here's my specific example. I file IFR flight plan from Temple TPL to
> San Antonio SAT. I take off VFR and head toward SAT. I'm in Gray
> approach control's airspace when I take off, but 20 minutes later I'm
> no longer in Gray's airspace. I decide I'd like to get my IFR
> clearance so I call Houston Center. Should ZHU have a strip on me?
>

The first Center sector should have a strip.


>
> And if not, can they somehow pull it up, to give me a clearance using
> that flight plan info?
>

Any facility hosted by the originating Center's FDP computer can pull it up.
Any Houston Center sector can pull it up and modify it. Only Gray approach
and the first Center sector will have control and be able to modify the
flight plan without overriding that restriction.

[John Clonts]

So, as the original poster, what did YOU mean by "popup"?

A) You filed an IFR flight plan but departed VFR and then, in flight,
contacted ATC to activate your flight plan

or

B) You filed no flight plan prior to takeoff. You departed VFR and
then, in flight, contacted ATC requesting an IFR clearance.

--
Cheers,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ

[Robert M. Gary]

> If you cancel upon reaching VFR conditions you haven't operated VFR-on-top,
> so why do you find that a "to VFR on top" clearance is easier?

Excellent question, and I would like to know the answer. If I ask for
an IFR clearance to the next way point just to pop up, I just get asked
what airport my destination is and then told it will take a while to
coordinate. If I ask for a clearance to VFR on top to the next way
point, the clearance comes right out. So, I agree, why is it different?

-Robert

[Ron Garret]

In article . net>,
"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote:

> > What am I missing? I am eager to learn how the current system works.
> >
>
> What do you want to know?

Since you asked...

1. What hardware does the current system run on? What operating system
does it use? Who wrote the software? What language was it written in?
How is flight plan data stored? Is it on hard disks? In a RDBMS? Flat
files?

2. How many flight plans per day does the current system handle?

3. How sophisticated is the current system in terms of auto-routing and
capacity management? Can it figure out that there are, e.g. too many
planes headed for a particular navaid at a particular altitude and route
new traffic some other way?

4. What actually happens when I'm waiting for my IFR release? Is the
computer involved, or is it just the controllers at that point?

rg

[Nathan Young]

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 10:55:40 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote:

>
>"Nathan Young" > wrote in message

>>
>> Upon initial contact from the aircraft, the controller, should be able
>> to key the N-number into a database and see if there is a flightplan
>> available. In this manner, each controller would have access to each
>> flightplan, but only as they need it.
>>
>
>Only as they need it? How does the computer know what controller needs
>access to the flight plan at any moment?

It would not have to know that, it is a reply/request based system.
The controller (client) would type in an N-number (the request), and
the server replies with flightplans on file for that N-number.

>> Security and redudancy issues aside, I could have something like this
>> running on SQL and webconfigured in less than a week.
>
>But those are rather important issues.

Yes, they are. My point was not to replace the current ATC system
with something I hack together in 1 week.

>> What am I missing? I am eager to learn how the current system works.
>What do you want to know?

I know so little about the current system, that I do not know where to
begin. Do you have a link to documents or websites which would
explain how FSS and ATC enter, share, and track flightplans - ideally
in a few pages, not a 400page technical document?

However, I will start with a few questions:

1. If I file an IFR with 1800WXBrief, what happens to that
information? Does it go to a nationwide database? From discussion
the in this thread, I gather it only is sent to controllers
responsible for the departure airport, or perhaps controllers for
nearby airspaces.

2. How does ATC communicate with adjacent Center/Approach facilities?
Is this a leased phone line arrangement? Do you dial a number or just
pick up the appropriate phone for each location?

3. When a facility hands off to another facility how does the info on
the strip get from the first controller to the 2nd?

If any Chicago area controllers are lurking and are interested in
providing a tour to your facility - feel free to email.

Nathan

[[email protected]]

B

[[email protected]]

B

[Newps]

Ron Garret wrote:

>
> 1. What hardware does the current system run on?

Propietary. Built just for the FAA.


What operating system
> does it use?

Same.



>
> 2. How many flight plans per day does the current system handle?

Millions.


>
> 4. What actually happens when I'm waiting for my IFR release? Is the
> computer involved, or is it just the controllers at that point?

Just the controllers.

[Everett M. Greene]

Newps > writes:
> Ron Garret wrote:
> >
> > 1. What hardware does the current system run on?
>
> Propietary. Built just for the FAA.
>
> > What operating system does it use?
>
> Same.
>
> > 2. How many flight plans per day does the current system handle?
>
> Millions.

Are you certain about that? It sounds high by several orders
of magnitude. Every airplane in the world would have to make
about a hundred flights per day to get to a million flight
plans per day.

> > 4. What actually happens when I'm waiting for my IFR release? Is the
> > computer involved, or is it just the controllers at that point?
>
> Just the controllers.

[John R. Copeland]

"Everett M. Greene" > wrote in message ...
> Newps > writes:
>> Ron Garret wrote:
>> >
>>
>> > 2. How many flight plans per day does the current system handle?
>>
>> Millions.
>
> Are you certain about that? It sounds high by several orders
> of magnitude. Every airplane in the world would have to make
> about a hundred flights per day to get to a million flight
> plans per day.
>
Within the U.S., the number of IFR airborne aircraft at any moment
peaks up to between 4000 and 5000 on most days now.
Overnight minimums typically get down to around 1000 at a time.
http://flightaware.com/analysis/graphs/total.rvt
I won't try to extrapolate that to a total daily count, though.

[[email protected]]

John R. Copeland wrote:
> "Everett M. Greene" > wrote in message ...
> > Are you certain about that? It sounds high by several orders
> > of magnitude. Every airplane in the world would have to make
> > about a hundred flights per day to get to a million flight
> > plans per day.
> >
> Within the U.S., the number of IFR airborne aircraft at any moment
> peaks up to between 4000 and 5000 on most days now.
> Overnight minimums typically get down to around 1000 at a time.
> http://flightaware.com/analysis/graphs/total.rvt
> I won't try to extrapolate that to a total daily count, though.

Also keep in mind that MANY flight plans are filed that are never
flown, but the system still has to keep track of.

I know locally there's a company that flies checks each morning. In
just one sector at the local center they have 7 or 8 automatically
generated flight plans each morning, going in and out of a set of small
airports. Those flight plans only get activated if the weather is IFR,
otherwise the company pilots fly VFR and the flightplans just timeout.
There's another company that has quit a few of their routes, but has
not cancelled their automatically generating flight plans for those
routes each morning. They're in the same sector mentioned above. The
facility has been after the company to stop the flight plans, but they
haven't done anything about it yet.

That's 10-11 flight plans per morning (never mind the rest of the
day...), in ONE single sector, that are processed by the system but not
included in the daily traffic count. It all adds up pretty quickly.

[Everett M. Greene]

writes:
> John R. Copeland wrote:
> > "Everett M. Greene" > wrote
> > > Are you certain about that? It sounds high by several orders
> > > of magnitude. Every airplane in the world would have to make
> > > about a hundred flights per day to get to a million flight
> > > plans per day.
> > >
> > Within the U.S., the number of IFR airborne aircraft at any moment
> > peaks up to between 4000 and 5000 on most days now.
> > Overnight minimums typically get down to around 1000 at a time.
> > http://flightaware.com/analysis/graphs/total.rvt
> > I won't try to extrapolate that to a total daily count, though.
>
> Also keep in mind that MANY flight plans are filed that are never
> flown, but the system still has to keep track of.
>
> I know locally there's a company that flies checks each morning. In
> just one sector at the local center they have 7 or 8 automatically
> generated flight plans each morning, going in and out of a set of small
> airports. Those flight plans only get activated if the weather is IFR,
> otherwise the company pilots fly VFR and the flightplans just timeout.
> There's another company that has quit a few of their routes, but has
> not cancelled their automatically generating flight plans for those
> routes each morning. They're in the same sector mentioned above. The
> facility has been after the company to stop the flight plans, but they
> haven't done anything about it yet.
>
> That's 10-11 flight plans per morning (never mind the rest of the
> day...), in ONE single sector, that are processed by the system but not
> included in the daily traffic count. It all adds up pretty quickly.

OK, but that would amount to maybe 10K flight plans per day
nationally. That's still two orders of magnitude from 10**6.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Excellent question, and I would like to know the answer. If I ask for
> an IFR clearance to the next way point just to pop up, I just get asked
> what airport my destination is and then told it will take a while to
> coordinate. If I ask for a clearance to VFR on top to the next way
> point, the clearance comes right out. So, I agree, why is it different?
>

It's not different. It appears to be a lack of understanding on the part of
the controller. There's nothing wrong with asking for a clearance to a
waypoint, I have no idea why the controller would ask for your destination
airport. If you had wanted an IFR clearance to an airport I'm sure you
would have asked for that.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Ron Garret" > wrote in message
...
>
> Since you asked...
>
> 1. What hardware does the current system run on?
>

Old hardware.


>
> What operating system does it use? Who wrote the software? What language
> was
> it written in? How is flight plan data stored? Is it on hard disks? In
> a RDBMS? Flat
> files?
>

Beats the hell outta me.


>
> 2. How many flight plans per day does the current system handle?
>


Nationwide? I suppose it depends on how you count them. A single long
range flight plan might be processed by half a dozen center computers, do
you want to count each one?


>
> 3. How sophisticated is the current system in terms of auto-routing and
> capacity management? Can it figure out that there are, e.g. too many
> planes headed for a particular navaid at a particular altitude and route
> new traffic some other way?
>

Not the Flight Data Processing computer, it just processes flight data,
giving each controller along the route the necessary information.


>
> 4. What actually happens when I'm waiting for my IFR release? Is the
> computer involved, or is it just the controllers at that point?
>

Most likely just the controllers involved.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
>
> It would not have to know that, it is a reply/request based system.
> The controller (client) would type in an N-number (the request), and
> the server replies with flightplans on file for that N-number.
>

So what did you mean by "each controller would have access to each
flightplan, but only as they need it."?


>
> I know so little about the current system, that I do not know where to
> begin. Do you have a link to documents or websites which would
> explain how FSS and ATC enter, share, and track flightplans - ideally
> in a few pages, not a 400page technical document?
>

No.


>
> However, I will start with a few questions:
>
> 1. If I file an IFR with 1800WXBrief, what happens to that
> information? Does it go to a nationwide database? From discussion
> the in this thread, I gather it only is sent to controllers
> responsible for the departure airport, or perhaps controllers for
> nearby airspaces.
>

It will go to the ATC facility responsible for the airspace at the departure
airport. If that airport is within a TRACON it will likely also go to the
first ARTCC sector along the route. If it's near an ARTCC boundary it will
also likely go to the adjacent ARTCC. If that airport has a VFR tower it
will also go to the ATCT.


>
> 2. How does ATC communicate with adjacent Center/Approach facilities?
> Is this a leased phone line arrangement? Do you dial a number or just
> pick up the appropriate phone for each location?
>

Through dedicated phone lines. Controllers working adjacent airspace can
communicate at the push of a single button. Other facilities or sectors can
be dialed.


>
> 3. When a facility hands off to another facility how does the info on
> the strip get from the first controller to the 2nd?
>

Flight data is passed through the flight data processing computer. Strips
are printed, at those facilities still using paper strips, about half an
hour prior to entering the airspace assigned to that facility or to the
proposed departure time.

[Roger]

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 04:21:01 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote:

>
> wrote in message
...
>>
>> That's what I was saying. Although it is pretty sad that the nationwide
>> system cannot keep everything together in a unified way. It's not that
>> it's that much data... just that the system is so old that it cannot
>> handle it.
>> If a couple megabytes of memory in a GPS can handle every APT, VOR,
>> ADF, INT for all of north america, regular computers shouldn't have
>> trouble.
>>
>
>Right. Let's put all the flight data in one system, give every controller
>access to all of it, and make it easy to shut down the entire system.
>
The simpler you make a system from the user's point of view the more
complicated the programming, the more likely you'll end up with side
effects, and the more easily compromised the system and or data.

In a sensitive system the data needs to be compartmentalized and
redundant. It also needs to be isolated from the rest of the world,
but if stations/centers are to talk to each other then the data is
open to compromise.

It's true the data is *relatively* simple and takes very little memory
for each way point. A hand held can hold all the data for the low
level enroute charts and approaches. It might be pressed to have all
of the low level and high level but lets assume it can. This is
static data in that it doesn't change, or has little change.

Then there are the many thousands of flights in the system daily. This
data is dynamic and takes many times the computing power to handle
compared to the static data. The varying data must be coordinated
through centers and with airports. As airplanes join and leave, climb
and descent they affect others in there area or possibly approaching
their area. If their speed changes, arrival times at reporting points
change this has a snow ball effect on planes that may not even be in
the air yet.

Add to this random failures in the system. By that I mean both
aircraft, RADAR, and the computer system itself. No system is without
some faults and they have a way of surfacing at the most inopportune
times.

Probably the best system I can think of would be a distributed
computing system that works much like a PtP system with systems
sharing information, but with checks and balances to provide data
integrity and security. Each system would *almost* work
independently, but share information and operate based on feed back as
well.

The worst and most dangerous approach from a system being compromised
and loss of data integrity would be a single central system feeding
various points/centers and airports. It lacks the ability to do the
checks and balances of a true and integrated distributed computing
system.

However any time a system has the requirement that parts in different
locations must communicate, that system is open to outside compromise
so additional measures such as encryptions and various methods of
verification must be used in addition to firewalls and other
protective software.

It's not nearly as simple as it sounds.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger]

On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:23:35 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

>Steven P. McNicoll > wrote:
>: > ... and a corollary: If one does *NOT* do a popup, but rather files IFR
>: > and departs VFR, how much of a hassle is it to open said flight plan
>: > mid-stream? Picking up a flight plan filed with a different FSS for
>: > departure
>: > 3 hours earlier is not likely to work and will degenerate into a popup.
>: >
>
>: Do you mean filing IFR from an untowered field and calling for clearance
>: shortly after departure? That usually works quite well as it is actually
>: easier for the controller.
>
> I'm primarily used to untowered fields, so the clearance delivery and void
>time et al can be kinda a pain. It was the "shortly after departure" that I was
>thinking about. Basically, planning to make the trip VFR, but filing an IFR plan in
>case the weather's worse than you expected. If you're 2 hours down the road VFR
>without having opened your IFR flight plan and you try to open it then and get a
>clearance, it's probably been flushed from the system and is as bad as a pop-up.

I've filed two stage IFR. Coming out of OSH to Newberry (ERY). Then
two hours later activating (picking up the clearance) the separate
plan from ERY to 3BS. No void times and other than the clearance it's
just like activating a VFR flight plan. Of course it probably works a
lot better out here in the sparsely populated areas in the middle of
the night.

I just called Minneapolis Center and said "This is November eight
thirty three Romeo IFR out of ERY for 3BS. There as a pause followed
by "stand by" followed by, Eight thirty three Romeo, climb to and
maintain seven thousand, cleared as filed which was direct. Other than
a call about every 10 minutes (I think to keep me awake) I didn't hear
anything until they passed me off to MBS approach which was just
before entering Cleveland center's airspace. MBS was "Descend to and
maintain 3000 at pilots discretion. Would you like to cancel now of
when on the ground?" (they wanted to go home) I said I'd be on the
ground in 5 minutes if they didn't mind staying with me. I called on
the RCO/GCO and they still got to leave on time.



Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>-Cory

[Robert M. Gary]

> It's not different. It appears to be a lack of understanding on the part of
> the controller. There's nothing wrong with asking for a clearance to a
> waypoint, I have no idea why the controller would ask for your destination
> airport. If you had wanted an IFR clearance to an airport I'm sure you
> would have asked for that.

Steve, Could it be a lost comm issue? Perhaps controllers don't want
to issue IFR clearances with clearance limits that are not airports?
I'm still not sure why it would be different for VFR-on-top though.
-Robert

[Mike Teague]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> John R. Copeland wrote:
> > "Everett M. Greene" > wrote in message
...
> > > Are you certain about that? It sounds high by several orders
> > > of magnitude. Every airplane in the world would have to make
> > > about a hundred flights per day to get to a million flight
> > > plans per day.
> > >
> > Within the U.S., the number of IFR airborne aircraft at any moment
> > peaks up to between 4000 and 5000 on most days now.
> > Overnight minimums typically get down to around 1000 at a time.
> > http://flightaware.com/analysis/graphs/total.rvt
> > I won't try to extrapolate that to a total daily count, though.
>
> Also keep in mind that MANY flight plans are filed that are never
> flown, but the system still has to keep track of.
>
> I know locally there's a company that flies checks each morning. In
> just one sector at the local center they have 7 or 8 automatically
> generated flight plans each morning, going in and out of a set of small
> airports. Those flight plans only get activated if the weather is IFR,
> otherwise the company pilots fly VFR and the flightplans just timeout.
> There's another company that has quit a few of their routes, but has
> not cancelled their automatically generating flight plans for those
> routes each morning. They're in the same sector mentioned above. The
> facility has been after the company to stop the flight plans, but they
> haven't done anything about it yet.

Does ATC reserve airspace for an un-activated IFR flightplan? or not until
you call for clearance?



Mike Teague - Vancouver WA, USA
-- Opie and Anthony - XM202 - O&A Party Rock!
-- Phil Hendrie = Radio Genius

[Dave Butler]

Mike Teague wrote:

> Does ATC reserve airspace for an un-activated IFR flightplan? or not until
> you call for clearance?

No airspace is reserved until a clearance is issued.

[Roger]

I know one pilot who would say a pop-up was a hassle<:-))

A few years back I was IFR from 3BS to OSH about two weeks before the
fly-in. Most of Michigan was socked in and I mean right down to ILS
minimums and controllers were busier than the proverbial one arm paper
hanger with an itch.

I was just barely on top, nearing the eastern shoreline of Lake
Michigan and talking to Minneapolis Center. A King Air out of an
airport NE of Traverse City "popped up" on frequency and called center
4 or 5 times. He tried to file and Center curtly told him to come
back after calling FSS and filing a pop-up.

As I said, Michigan was socked in. This guy had to have climbed up
through at least 5,000 feet of weather where you were lucky to see
your own wing tips and you could hear the tension in his voice.

Some where between 5 and 10 minutes later he came back on frequency
and told center he could not raise FSS from his altitude. (maybe he
really was scud running, but most of the state had ceilings well less
than 500 feet. The southern half was lucky to have 200 and people
were going missed on ILSs. That would *certainly* account for the
tension in his voice) At any rate that time center took the time to
let him file and gave him a clearance.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Steve, Could it be a lost comm issue? Perhaps controllers don't want
> to issue IFR clearances with clearance limits that are not airports?
> I'm still not sure why it would be different for VFR-on-top though.
>
>

You'd have to ask a controller that's unwilling to issue such a clearance.
I am not one of them.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Mike Teague" > wrote in message
...
>
> Does ATC reserve airspace for an un-activated IFR flightplan?
>

No.

[[email protected]]

On 26 Oct 2005 13:12:40 -0700, wrote:

>John R. Copeland wrote:
>> "Everett M. Greene" > wrote in message ...
>> > Are you certain about that? It sounds high by several orders
>> > of magnitude. Every airplane in the world would have to make
>> > about a hundred flights per day to get to a million flight
>> > plans per day.
>> >
>> Within the U.S., the number of IFR airborne aircraft at any moment
>> peaks up to between 4000 and 5000 on most days now.
>> Overnight minimums typically get down to around 1000 at a time.
>> http://flightaware.com/analysis/graphs/total.rvt
>> I won't try to extrapolate that to a total daily count, though.
>
>Also keep in mind that MANY flight plans are filed that are never
>flown, but the system still has to keep track of.
>
>I know locally there's a company that flies checks each morning.

Really?

I thought all the check flying guys were put out of business by the
new banking regulations requiring images.



> In
>just one sector at the local center they have 7 or 8 automatically
>generated flight plans each morning, going in and out of a set of small
>airports. Those flight plans only get activated if the weather is IFR,
>otherwise the company pilots fly VFR and the flightplans just timeout.
>There's another company that has quit a few of their routes, but has
>not cancelled their automatically generating flight plans for those
>routes each morning. They're in the same sector mentioned above. The
>facility has been after the company to stop the flight plans, but they
>haven't done anything about it yet.
>
>That's 10-11 flight plans per morning (never mind the rest of the
>day...), in ONE single sector, that are processed by the system but not
>included in the daily traffic count. It all adds up pretty quickly.

[John R. Copeland]

> wrote in message ...
> On 26 Oct 2005 13:12:40 -0700, wrote:
>
>>I know locally there's a company that flies checks each morning.
>
> Really?
>
> I thought all the check flying guys were put out of business by the
> new banking regulations requiring images.
>

Not out of business yet, but definitely in decline.
Some are trying to diversify into same-day package delivery.