Filing Direct

ianwild
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 1:57 pm

Filing Direct

Post by ianwild »

So last night during some R/W IFR training, my CFI told me he only ever filed direct and would never dream of filing a specific route unless he had a strong preference about wanting a certain routing over another (eg inland versus a coastal routing).

His reasoning being that not only is it easier, if you have a comms failure and end up having to fly your filed route then you can just go direct. Seems pretty logical to me and I wondered if there were any counter arguments / disadvantages to that. Does it make a difference to ATC?

Ian
Marcus Becker
Posts: 982
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 5:12 pm

Re: Filing Direct

Post by Marcus Becker »

Sometimes there isn't a problem doing that. Make sure you are aware of any restricted/prohibited airspace, altitudes are appropriate, and the system allows it. If you're flying IFR between 2 SoCal airports in a Q class aircraft, chances are slim to none you will be able to file direct because of TEC routing. Personally, I would prefer having at least one sure fire way of getting to an IAF if I go lost comms and would be sure my routing included one if I could but it sure isn't required. Why not file using available airways and request direct if you can?
Image
ianwild
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 1:57 pm

Re: Filing Direct

Post by ianwild »

Thanks Marcus. I don't think my CFI ever expects to get the Direct he files, more he just lets the ATC system provide the route they probably would have cleared anyway and the direct is just a fallback for lost comms.

Ian
Keith Smith
Posts: 9939
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

Re: Filing Direct

Post by Keith Smith »

Not sure why the cfi is under impression that having filed direct means he can go direct under lost comms.

The cleared route would take priority.
Ryan B
Posts: 856
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 2:37 pm

Re: Filing Direct

Post by Ryan B »

Where are you doing your flying? If you're well outside of contested airspace you'll probably get direct often. I work traffic in northern MN and nearly all of our GA IFR clearances are direct. If you fly east coast or west coast (like PE service area), you're going to get TEC routing or other canned routes. It's all efficiently planned out routing due to traffic/wx patterns/airspace etc.

I can't remember where I read it, but direct is somewhat frowned upon because of search and rescue (in certain situations). At least if you file multiple points (in a non radar environment), ATC/first responders would know where you last reported over and at what time. But if you know your flight will be entirely in radar coverage I don't think it really applies.
PE ID: 29
FAA ATCS
FAA PPL ASEL
stevekirks
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2014 6:00 pm
Location: KSGF
Contact:

Re: Filing Direct

Post by stevekirks »

Speaking of filing and direct...on the Western Expansion, I've done some short hops for FSEconomy flights. Would it be useful to controllers if I filed a route with the IAF for a procedure as the last waypoint?
Steve Kirks (sKirks on Twitch)
KSGF--I-10 rated
Student Pilot
I invented the Alphabet Challenge, what's your excuse?
Alphabet Challenge
Ryan B
Posts: 856
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 2:37 pm

Re: Filing Direct

Post by Ryan B »

stevekirks wrote:Speaking of filing and direct...on the Western Expansion, I've done some short hops for FSEconomy flights. Would it be useful to controllers if I filed a route with the IAF for a procedure as the last waypoint?
This is what I do in Socal area if there is no TEC route. It's common rw practice from what I've seen too.
PE ID: 29
FAA ATCS
FAA PPL ASEL
Keith Smith
Posts: 9939
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

Re: Filing Direct

Post by Keith Smith »

stevekirks wrote:Speaking of filing and direct...on the Western Expansion, I've done some short hops for FSEconomy flights. Would it be useful to controllers if I filed a route with the IAF for a procedure as the last waypoint?
Useful for sure and more reflective of what you are actually wanting to do, right? Unless your goal is to shoot a visual, you probably don't actually want to go direct destination. At best, you want to go direct the IAF.

Even better would be to use airways and file above the MEA to guarantee obstacle separation. I say that because our minimum IFR altitude data is incomplete for ZSE and ZAB at the moment, making it hard to approve routes on unpublished/random routes.
Sean
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:03 pm

Re: Filing Direct

Post by Sean »

I was taught to always file direct and that most of the time you’ll get it, or if not you will receive a minor change from ATC. I tried filing direct today on pilot edge and was told that you cannot file direct and that I should take IFR lessons. Is this a Pilotedge thing or is there something I’m missing? I do realize if I had wanted to fly a VOR route ( I didn’t) I would use airways.
Thanks
Kevin_atc
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 7:01 pm

Re: Filing Direct

Post by Kevin_atc »

Sean wrote:I was taught to always file direct and that most of the time you’ll get it, or if not you will receive a minor change from ATC. I tried filing direct today on pilot edge and was told that you cannot file direct and that I should take IFR lessons. Is this a Pilotedge thing or is there something I’m missing? I do realize if I had wanted to fly a VOR route ( I didn’t) I would use airways.
Thanks
Where did you try to file direct to/from? If it was within Southern California, there’s no way you will get direct due to the complex nature of the airspace. But if it was from IFP-GCN, there should be no issue with direct. Regardless, like another poster said- there’s nothing wrong with filing direct...just be prepared for a reroute if you’re flying within complex airspace.
Kevin
PilotEdge Marketing
Want faster answers to your forum questions? Join our Discord community: www.pilotedge.net/discord
Post Reply