Kim Ellis wrote:Keith Smith wrote:Kim, it can be done with a r/w FMS, but if the virtual avionics aren't up to the task, or if you're equipped in the r/w with avionics that can't handle a mix of airways and random radials, you can always fall back on just flying using simple VORs. One of the guys on the flight was flying a T38/A, using VOR/DME and not much else.
The problem was I can't remember everything and I was very busy yesterday with non-sim things. BTW, is there no 'as filed' on PE?
Kim, I think that you are mixing up terminology and concepts with your reference to an "as filed" clearance. The name for the type of clearance to which you are referring is called an abbreviated clearance versus a full route clearance. An abbreviated clearance allows controllers to clear you "as filed" in order to reduce verbiage so long as the following conditions are met:
1) The route of flight filed with ATC has not been changed by the pilot, company, operations officer, input operator, or in the stored flight plan program prior to departure.
2) All ATC facilities concerned have sufficient route of flight information to exercise their control responsibilities.
3) When the flight will depart IFR, destination airport information is relayed between the facilities concerned prior to departure.
4) The assigned altitude, according to the provisions in para 4−3−2 (of the ATC handbook, 7110.65), Departure Clearances, subpara e, is stated in the clearance.
The last three are a bit more explanatory than required to answer your question, but please take a look at the first item. In the case of a route that requires editing (let's say because of the requirements of the overall ATC system due to the existence of coded departure routes, TEC routes, inter- or intra-facility LOA's (Letter of Agreements), or other routing that is in place due to system-wide delays, demands, and/or SWAP (severe weather avoidance plan) considerations), you will receive either an entirely new route which would require a full route clearance or an amendment that connects to a portion of your existing route, if that is at all possible.
In your case last evening, your route did not comply with a TEC route for aircraft flying from SBA to SAN; therefore, I could not issue you an abbreviated clearance (e.g., say "then, as filed") because I needed to change your route altogether.
When you have a moment, you may want to read through both of these documents:
AIM, Chapter 4, Section 4:
http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publicat ... 404.html.1
Instrument Procedures Handbook, Chapter 2:
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies ... /CH-02.pdf
The ATC system, to a large extent, is very fluid and dynamic. When it comes to routes, what may work one day may not work another day due to any number of circumstances, many of which I described above. As a pilot, you have to be prepared for route amendments, as is usually the case here in the N90 (New York TRACON) control area. With some research, you can discover the preferred routing and can even rely on past practice in order to better predict what may or may not work; but, depending on the day, it can be coin a toss at some airports as to whether or not your route will be accepted (or maybe that's just FRG!).
Fortunately for pilots in this area (SoCal), as long as you file the TEC route, you should be good to go, unless (as mentioned previously) there are LOA's (Letters of Agreement) between two airports that trump the actual predefined TEC route (e.g., TOA-SMO, EMT-LAX, etc.).
