Jump to content
Kyprianos Biris

Flightplans Concorde Routes In Current Airacs

Recommended Posts

Kyprianos Biris

Because I always fly the Concorde on line on VATSIM network with live ATC and because there I am also an ATC (controller) I was always wondering about the original flight plans (FPLs) of Concorde and the fact that some points/names used in there are nowadays out of date in current AIRAC cycles and hence the FPLs will not appear as they should in today’s virtual ATC’s radars.

Note: This post is not VATSIM specific but applicable to IVAO flights as well since in both networks' Controllers use relatively latest AIRAC data for their Radars.

I saw this issue from the ATC’s perspective since I have seen enough invalid FPLs in other areas and having to amend them and then pass the revised clearance to the pilot is always a pain for both. Also this is a hobby and nobody is “obliged” to fly the correct FPL unless they want to simulate correct routes flying properly.

For example NATSM or SL2 or SM2A means nothing in today’s airway names and would not generate the intermediate points of these old airways in the ATCs flight strip or radar screen as it used to do in the past.
Another example, UPGAS is nowadays a border fix between EGPX Scottish and EKDK Copenhagen FIRs actually too close to London FIR (in ATC perspective) so as not to get it confused. So for the EGLL CPT departing (original) FPLs you may get a track line drawn on your ATC radar from MALBY (west of London) over to Denmark border and then back to MERLY sw of Swansea !

Another reason that I needed current flight plans is that I use software - FSBuild, VROUTE etc. - that generate flight logs and export importable flight plan files in various other utilities formats to be used for FS weather and other flight planning software like (Active Sky, FSCommander, Jeppesen JeppView4) and simplified paper printed flight logs with coordinates etc. If these programs do not get input in current AIRAC Fixes/Airways format they simply don’t generate the flight plan export files. These files are needed for quick and seamless preflight preparation in FS so I don’t loose valuable time setting up the flight with side running software.

I have never provided ATC in VATSIM areas where the Concorde still flies (virtually) from but thinking about these inconsistencies and the flight planning software needing current AIRAC data flight plans, I tried to create new ones as close as to the original Concorde ones (track over earth, turning points, deceleration/acceleration points, total mileage, equivalent SID-STAR points etc.) so that today’s ATCs and flight planning software can handle them more easily.

Therefore below are the FPLs as I file them on line with current data validity for routes that Concorde used to fly.

All popular FS flight planning tools like FSBuild , VROUTE etc. will generate the flight log and export files properly with these routes.

KEY:

Real Callsign: Callsign used during real life Concorde operations

Distance: Distance of the route's track in nautical miles

Subsonic Until: Remain subsonic until that given waypoint

Deceleration Point: Begin descent and deceleration at that given waypoint

Alternate Airports: Alternate airports available if it is necessary to divert.

FP Download Link: Download a provided flight plan for the routes in FSX ‘.fpl’ format for use with fuel calculation tools, moving maps, etc.

ATC Route: Route to be submitted to ATC if/when flying online (VATSIM/IVAO)

Raw Route: Route to be used in flight planning/viewing software (point-to-point; all unnecessary airway waypoints removed)

5-digit airac waypoints format: Used for route extraction via tools like VROUTE, FSBUILD etc. Depends on existence of waypoints in AIRAC cycles nav. database

7-digit Coordinates format: (see Meese's post on this) The flight plan as it would be filed with 7 digit simple coordinates format (minutes only without seconds) independent from nav. databases and tools.

1/2016 NOTE: As of 2016 flight plans will be progressively converted to 7-digit and 11-digit coordinates as the original ones and obsolete AIRAC fix waypoints will be replaced by nearest alternative ones.

________________________________________________________________________________

 

Westbound Routes

EGLL-KJFK

Real Callsign: BAW1/BAW3

Distance: 3150nm

Subsonic Until: KESUP

Deceleration Point: 60nm from KENDA

Alternate Airports: KEWR, KBOS

ATC Route:
N0550F280 CPT L9 MALBY DCT C/KESUP/N0740F280F450 DCT MERLY UL180 C/LESLU/N1100F450F600/M200F450F600 DCT SM15W NATSM SM67W KENDA/M100F490 N7A OWENZ DCT CAMRN

Raw Route:

CPT DCT MALBY DCT KESUP DCT MERLY DCT LESLU DCT 5041N01500W 5050N02000W 5030N03000W 4916N04000W 4703N05000W 4610N05300W 4414N06000W 4246N06500W 4200N06700W DCT KENDA DCT LINND DCT OWENZ DCT CAMRN

Flight Plan: EGLLKJFK.pln

CHANGELOG:

1/2015 update: removed obsolete BANCS & URTAK

2/2015 update: Gander oceanic points closer to original

4/2015 update: Added 7-digit format coordinates version and refined route closer to original

1/2016 update: 11-digit format and raw/atc versions on fcisuperguy's initiative

3/2016 update: ATC & Raw route & .PLN download on fcisuperguy's initiative

2/2017 update: Revised ATC route with more accurate speed/altitude data on fcisuperguy's initiative

 

EGLL-KIAD

Real Callsign: BAW189

Distance: 3278nm

Subsonic Until: KESUP

Deceleration Point: 4044N06955W

Alternate Airports: KBWI, KJFK

(NOTE: Special descent procedure required for Washington to avoid restricted airspace. Instructions available here.)

ATC Route:

N0560F280 CPT L9 MALBY DCT C/KESUP/N0740F280F450 DCT MERLY UL180 C/LESLU/N1100F450F600/M200F450F600 DCT SM15W NATSM SM67W DCT 4044N06955W/M200F500 4027N07230W/M130F500 DCT CAMRN/N0550F370 DCT KATVE V457 LRP DELRO3

Raw Route:

CPT DCT MALBY DCT KESUP DCT MERLY DCT LESLU DCT 5041N01500W 5050N02000W 5030N03000W 4916N04000W 4703N05000W 4610N05300W 4414N06000W 4246N06500W 4200N06700W 4044N06955W 4027N07230W DCT CAMRN DCT KATVE DCT LRP DCT DELRO

Flight Plan: EGLLKIAD.pln

CHANGELOG:

1/2015 update: removed BANCS & URTAK
2/2015 update: Gander oceanic points closer to original
1/2016 update: 11-digit format and raw/atc versions on fcisuperguy's initiative

3/2016 update: ATC & Raw route & .PLN download & Instructions on fcisuperguy's initiative

2/2017 update: Revised ATC route with more accurate speed/altitude data on fcisuperguy's initiative

 

EGLL-KBOS

Real Callsign: BAW9012

Distance: 2943nm

Subsonic Until: KESUP

Deceleration Point: 50nm from 42N067W

Alternate Airports: KJFK, KMHT

ATC Route:

N0560F280 CPT L9 MALBY DCT C/KESUP/N0740F280F450 DCT MERLY UL180 C/LESLU/N1100F450F600/M200F450F600 DCT SM15W NATSM SM65W/M100F490 SM67W DCT LFV DCT ARMUN V167 SCUPP

Raw Route:

CPT DCT MALBY DCT KESUP DCT MERLY DCT LESLU DCT 5041N01500W 5050N02000W 5030N03000W 4916N04000W 4703N05000W 4610N05300W 4414N06000W 4246N06500W 4200N06700W DCT LFV DCT OOSHN

 

Flight Plan: EGLLKBOS.pln

 

CHANGELOG:

1/2016 update: New entry. 11-digit format and raw/atc versions on fcisuperguy's initiative

3/2016 update: ATC & Raw route & .PLN download on fcisuperguy's initiative

2/2017 update: Revised ATC route with more accurate speed/altitude data on fcisuperguy's initiative

 

EGLL-TBPB

Real Callsign: BAW273

Distance: 3678nm

Subsonic Until: KESUP

Deceleration Point: 200nm from 1321N05937W

Alternate Airports: TFFF, TAPA

ATC Route:

N0560F280 CPT L9 MALBY C/KESUP/N0740F280F450 DCT MERLY UL180 C/LESLU/N1100F450F600 4859N01443W NATSP 2700N04748W 2438N05000W 1800N05539W/N570F390 1321N05937W DCT BGI

Raw Route:

CPT DCT MALBY DCT KESUP DCT MERLY DCT LESLU DCT 4859N01443W 4649N02000W 4500N02353W 4136N03000W 3422N04000W 2700N04748W 2438N05000W 1800N05539W 1321N05937W DCT BGI

Flight Plan: EGLLTBPB.pln

 

CHANGELOG:

3/2016 update: ATC & Raw route & .PLN download on fcisuperguy's initiative

2/2017 update: Revised ATC route with more accurate speed/altitude data on fcisuperguy's initiative

 

EGLL-CYYZ

Real Callsign: BAW99

Distance: 3281nm

Subsonic Until: KESUP

Deceleration Point: 5316N07230W

Alternate Airports: KIAG, CYUL

ATC Route:

N0560F280 CPT L9 MALBY C/KESUP/N0740F280F450 DCT MERLY UL180 C/LESLU/N1100F450F600 DCT UNLID DCT MALOT DCT 54N020W 56N030W 57N040W 57N050W PRAWN DCT LOMTA DCT TEALS DCT 5316N07230W 5055N07504W DCT YXI DCT YYZ

Raw Route:

CPT DCT MALBY DCT KESUP DCT MERLY DCT LESLU DCT UNLID DCT MALOT DCT 54N020W 56N030W 57N040W 57N050W DCT PRAWN DCT LOMTA DCT TEALS DCT 5316N07230W 5055N07504W DCT YXI

Flight Plan: EGLLCYYZ.pln

 

CHANGELOG:

1/2015: verified that PRAWN still exists in AIRAC1501 at N57 12.2 W059 10.8, if not in your navdata just delete it, no change in route. It is the Oceanic/Domestic border of Gander CZQX.

2/2015: Replaced ROUND with HENDY, added UNLID for avoiding Cork coast while in Transonic. Ref. route http://concordefpl.co.uk/toronto.html

3/2016 update: ATC & Raw route & .PLN download on fcisuperguy's initiative

2/2017 update: Revised ATC route with more accurate speed/altitude data on fcisuperguy's initiative

 

EGLL-BIKF

Real Callsign: BAW9034

Distance: 1262nm

Subsonic Until: KESUP

Deceleration Point: 62N020W

Alternate Airports: BIRD, BIAR

ATC Route:

N0560F280 CPT L9 MALBY DCT C/KESUP/N0740F280F450 DCT MERLY UL180 C/LESLU/N1100F450F600 51N010W DCT DOLIP DCT SOVED DCT 60N018W 61N020W DCT BASLU

Raw Route:

CPT DCT MALBY DCT KESUP DCT MERLY DCT LESLU DCT 51N010W DCT DOLIP DCT SOVED DCT 60N018W 62N020W

Flight Plan: EGLLBIKF.pln

CHANGELOG:

1/2016 update: New entry. 11-digit format and raw/atc versions on fcisuperguy's initiative

3/2016 update: ATC & Raw route & .PLN download on fcisuperguy's initiative

2/2017 update: point 60N018W replaced by 61N019W to abide with EGGX/BIRD (Shanwick/Reykjavik) airspace restrictions; KEF replaced by BASLU as valid BIKF initial approach fix. ATC route modified accordingly. on fcisuperguy's initiative

 

Eastbound Routes

 

KJFK-EGLL

Real Callsign: BAW2/BAW4

Distance: 3172nm

Subsonic Until: n/a

Deceleration Point: LULOX

Alternate Airports: EGKK, EGSS

ATC Route:

N0560F290 JFK3 C/SHIPP/N0740F280F450 DCT C/LINND/M200F450F600 3952N06815W DCT SN67W NATSN C/SN15W/N1100F450F600 DCT LULOX/N0550F370 DCT ASRAX UL180 ABDUK UL607 NUMPO UP2 OKESI P2 BEDEK

Raw Route:

SHIPP DCT LINND DCT 3952N06815W 4025N06700W 4307N06000W 4510N05230W 4554N05000W 4810N04000W 4926N03000W 4949N02000W 4941N01500W DCT LULOX DCT ASRAX DCT ABDUK DCT NUMPO DCT NIGIT DCT OCK

Flight Plan: KJFKEGLL.pln

CHANGELOG:

1/2015 update: removed obsolete URTAK and added KENDA to replace airway N15B

2/2015 update: SUPRY last before CZQX Oceanic, replaced 5020N SOMAX with 4920N BEDRA on fcisuperguy advice

4/2015 update: Added 7-digit format coordinates version and refined route closer to original. DOPHN for KZWY/CZQX Domestic FIR borders.

1/2016 update: 11-digit format and raw/atc versions on fcisuperguy's initiative

2/2017 update: Routing into EGLL (all fixes/airways from LULOX to NUMPO) revised to abide by EGTT (London) airspace restrictions. ATC route modified accordingly. on fcisuperguy's initiative

 

KIAD-EGLL

Real Callsign: BAW190

Distance: 3192nm

Subsonic Until: LYNUS

Deceleration Point: LULOX

Alternate Airports: EGKK, EGSS

ATC Route:

N0560F290 CPTAL9 SWANN DCT ENO DCT C/SIE/M150F290F450 B24 C/LYNUS/M200F450F600 DCT 40N067W DCT SN60W NATSN C/SN15W/N1100F450F600 DCT LULOX/N0550F370 DCT ASRAX UL180 ABDUK UL607 NUMPO UP2 OKESI P2 BEDEK

Raw Route:

SWANN DCT ENO DCT SIE DCT LYNUS DCT 40N067W 4307N06000W 4510N05230W 4554N05000W 4810N04000W 4926N03000W 4949N02000W 4941N01500W DCT LULOX DCT ASRAX DCT ABDUK DCT NUMPO DCT NIGIT DCT OCK

Flight Plan: KIADEGLL.pln

CHANGELOG:

1/2016 update: 11-digit format and raw/atc versions on fcisuperguy's initiative

2/2017 update: Routing into EGLL (all fixes/airways from LULOX to NUMPO) revised to abide by EGTT (London) airspace restrictions. ATC route modified accordingly. on fcisuperguy's initiative

 

TBPB-EGLL

Real Callsign: BAW272

Distance: 3688nm

Subsonic Until: n/a

Deceleration Point: TAKAS

Alternate Airports: EGKK, EGSS

ATC Route:

DCT C/1800N05533W/N0740F250F430 2423N05000W C/2700N04731W/M200F450F600 3356N04000W 4100N03000W 4500N02218W 4600N02000W 4740N01500W DCT TAKAS/M100F410 DCT ORTAC UL980 DOMUT OCK4B

Raw Route:

1800N05533W 2423N05000W 2700N04731W 3356N04000W 41N030W 4500N02218W 46N020W 4740N01500W DCT TAKAS DCT ORTAC DCT KATHY DCT HAZEL DCT OCK

(NOTE: Due to this flight being on the edge of Concorde’s range, you MUST accelerate to VMO (400kts) immediately after departure for increased fuel efficiency. Otherwise, you will NOT be able to complete the flight.)

Flight Plan: TBPBEGLL.pln

CHANGELOG:

1/2016 update: New entry. 11-digit format and raw/atc versions on fcisuperguy's initiative

3/2016 update: ATC & Raw route & .PLN download on fcisuperguy's initiative

2/2017 update: Revised ATC route with more accurate speed/altitude data on fcisuperguy's initiative

 

CYYZ-EGLL

Real Callsign: BAW98

Distance: 3358nm

Subsonic Until: 5055N07504W

Deceleration Point: LULOX

Alternate Airports: EGKK, EGSS

ATC Route:

TRNTO2 YEE DCT C/5055N07504W/N0740F310F450 C/5316N07230W/M200F450F600 DCT TEALS DCT LOMTA DCT PRAWN 57N050W 57N040W 56N030W 54N020W C/52N015W/N1100F450F600 DCT LULOX/N0550F370 DCT ASRAX UL180 ABDUK UL607 NUMPO UP2 OKESI P2 BEDEK

Raw Route:

YEE DCT 5055N07504W 5316N07230W DCT TEALS DCT LOMTA DCT PRAWN DCT 57N050W 57N040W 56N030W 54N020W 52N015W DCT LULOX DCT ASRAX DCT ABDUK DCT NUMPO DCT NIGIT DCT OCK

Flight Plan: CYYZEGLL.pln

CHANGELOG:

1/2015: verified that PRAWN still exists in AIRAC1501 at N57 12.2 W059 10.8, if not in your navdata just delete it, no change in route. It is the Oceanic/Domestic border of Gander CZQX.

2/2015: Replaced ROUND with HENDY, added UNLID for avoiding Cork coast. Ref. route http://concordefpl.co.uk/toronto.html

1/2016 update: New entry. 11-digit format and raw/atc versions on fcisuperguy's initiative

3/2016 update: ATC & Raw route & .PLN download on fcisuperguy's initiative

2/2017 update: Routing into EGLL (all fixes/airways from LULOX to NUMPO) revised to abide by EGTT (London) airspace restrictions. ATC route modified accordingly. on fcisuperguy's initiative

 

KBOS-EGLL

Real Callsign: BAW9011

Distance: 2960nm

Subsonic Until: n/a

Deceleration Point: LULOX

Alternate Airports: EGKK, EGSS

ATC Route:

LOGAN1 C/SCUPP/N0740F270F450 DCT C/4246N06500W/M200F450F600 DCT SN60W NATSN C/SN15W/N1100F450F600 DCT LULOX/N0550F370 DCT ASRAX UL180 ABDUK UL607 NUMPO UP2 OKESI P2 BEDEK

Raw Route:

SCUPP DCT 4246N06500W 4307N06000W 4510N05230W 4554N05000W 4810N04000W 4926N03000W 4949N02000W 4941N01500W DCT LULOX DCT ASRAX DCT ABDUK DCT NUMPO DCT NIGIT DCT OCK

Flight Plan: KBOSEGLL.pln

CHANGELOG:

1/2016 update: New entry. 11-digit format and raw/atc versions on fcisuperguy's initiative

3/2016 update: ATC & Raw route & .PLN download on fcisuperguy's initiative

2/2017 update: LOGAN9 SID (outdated) replaced by LOGAN1 SID; routing into EGLL (all fixes/airways from LULOX to NUMPO) revised to abide by EGTT (London) airspace restrictions. ATC route modified accordingly. on fcisuperguy's initiative

 

BIKF-EGLL

Real Callsign: BAW9035

Distance: 1299nm

Subsonic Until: n/a

Deceleration Point: LULOX

Alternate Airports: EGKK, EGSS

ATC Route:

DCT C/PIXUM/M130F290F430 DCT C/61N018W/M200F450F600 58N015W DCT C/SOVED/N1100F450F600 DCT DOLIP DCT 51N011W DCT LULOX/N0550F370 DCT ASRAX UL180 ABDUK UL607 NUMPO UP2 OKESI P2 BEDEK

Raw Route:

DCT PIXUM DCT 61N018W 58N015W DCT SOVED DCT DOLIP DCT 51N011W DCT LULOX DCT ASRAX DCT ABDUK DCT NUMPO DCT BEDEK

Flight Plan: BIKFEGLL.pln

CHANGELOG:

1/2016 update: New entry. 11-digit format and raw/atc versions on fcisuperguy's initiative

3/2016 update: ATC & Raw route & .PLN download on fcisuperguy's initiative

2/2017 update: SUNAK replaced with PIXUM as valid BIKF departure fix; routing into EGLL (all fixes/airways from LULOX to NUMPO) revised to abide by EGTT (London) airspace restrictions. ATC route modified accordingly. on fcisuperguy's initiative

 

Air France Flights

 

LFPG KJFK

EVX KOTEM VEXEN PEMAK RATKA DINIM 5120N 5030N 4940N 4750N PORTI WHALE BOATE KENDA LINND OWENZ CAMRN

Mod. 3,317 nm
Original 3.334 nm

Subsonic until: 30 to KOTEM

Added: 2/2015

 

KJFK LFPG

SHIPP LINND KENDA JOBOC CARAC DOPHN SUPRY 4650N 4840N 4930N 4920N BEDRA TAKAS MOSIS GOBUR JSY INGOR LUKIP

Mod. 3,278 nm
Original 3.316 nm

Subsonic by: GOBUR

Added: 2/2015 Replaced 5020N SOMAX with 4920N BEDRA on fcisuperguy advice

 

LFPG GOOY
LGL UT176 KURIS TERPO ERIGA NOVAN KORUL 43N010W RIPEL ASGAM SAMAR DEREV AMDIB LIMAX YF
2.416 nm
Subsonic until: mid ERIGA-NOVAN

3/2015: 4310N, not an AIRAC fix, changed to 7-digit format



GOOY SBGL
BOMSA UA302 TAROT DCT KODOS UL206 BUGAT UZ59 MOXIP UM661 LOBIK UL340 ADA
2.767 nm
Subsonic by: LIVOD

12/2017: changed to route closer to Brazil's coast for 9.5 minutes of REC VOR DME reception


SBGL GOOY
ADA UL340 LOBIK UM661 MOXIP UZ59 BUGAT UL206 KODOS DCT TAROT UA302 BOMSA
2.767 nm
Subsonic until: LIVOD

12/2017: changed to route closer to Brazil's coast for 9.5 minutes of REC VOR DME reception



GOOY LFPG
YF LIMAX AMDIB DEREV SAMAR ASGAM RIPEL 43N010W KORUL NOVAN UN741 ANG H34 SABLE
2.406 nm
Subsonic by: mid NOVAN-ERIGA

3/2015: 4310N, not an AIRAC fix, changed to 7-digit format

Edited by Kyprianos Biris
Updated SBGL-GOOY-SBGL routes
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
John Barnes

Vatsim controllers will ​accept the old format and routing out of LHR. In other places around the world, you may need to contact ATC explaining your plan but i have never been knocked back on a Concorde routing.

Share this post


Link to post
Leemar Y

The same for ATC, in VATSIM Caribbean Division, in and out of Barbados. Since Concorde was a regular there, controllers in the Eastern Caribbean are taught to look out for unique, old Concorde routes.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Share this post


Link to post
SomeoneElse

Also, for info, the new york vatsim controllers forum still includes a sticky about how to deal with Concorde. I've never been challenged.

Share this post


Link to post
Ramón Cutanda

Thanks for those updated flightplans petakas!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Jonathan Fong

I know this may be a necro post, but here's an update about the flight plans based on AIRAC cycle 1501:

In the CYYZ-EGLL/EGLL-CYYZ plan, delete the intersection PRAWN from the flight plan. It's all the way in the mediterranean.

Share this post


Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

I know this may be a necro post, but here's an update about the flight plans based on AIRAC cycle 1501:

In the CYYZ-EGLL/EGLL-CYYZ plan, delete the intersection PRAWN from the flight plan. It's all the way in the mediterranean.

Certainly not a necro post in my view.

Thanks for the comment.

I just checked again and Canadian PRAWN :rolleyes: is still there in AIRAC 1501.

I use Jeppesen JeppView4 and they still have it in there and so does -updated with 1501 cycle- VROUTE that I use to store FPLs for later use export files.

The Libyan PRAWN (west of HLLB Benina Bengazi) is there indeed and there is another Australian PRAWN in Melbourne :) as well.

Which software are you using for navigation (that does not have the Canadian PRAWN) ?

I just updated the first post with minor changes (changelog below each) plus 4 new bonus entries for Air France flights as they used to take place connecting Paris with Rio De Janeiro.

Share this post


Link to post
Jonathan Fong

I see... I'm using FSC9 to check the flight plans with AIRAC 1501. Also, how would you request oceanic clearance with these flight plans? Haven't tested them on VATSIM yet... Would you request them with the SM track (ex. "Cleared via track SM 4650N 4840N 4930N 5020N") or would you read out the individual waypoints?

Share this post


Link to post
Jonathan Fong

Also, someone ought to sticky this as help to VATSIM fliers of Concorde. Currently enroute doing my first VATSIM "Blue Ribbon Route" (KJFK-EGLL), and it's FAR better than flying a 777!

Share this post


Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

I see... I'm using FSC9 to check the flight plans with AIRAC 1501. Also, how would you request oceanic clearance with these flight plans? Haven't tested them on VATSIM yet... Would you request them with the SM track (ex. "Cleared via track SM 4650N 4840N 4930N 5020N") or would you read out the individual waypoints?

I update FSC9 from Navigraph and it did not have any problem with PRAWN at AIRAC1501.

No, I would request by reading individual points because - as much as I would like to - SM in my opinion is not something I would consider "contemporary" in today's ATC service on Oceanic Tracks.

Some may know about it some may not and I would not blame them if they don't.

Also for example from W015 to W067 SM after MERLY was:

LESLU --> N50 41.0 W015 00.0 --> N50 00.0 W020 00.0 --> N50 30.0 W030 00.0 --> N49 16.0 W040 00.0 --> N47 03.0 W050 00.0 --> N46 10.0 W053 00.0 --> N44 14.0 W060 00.0 --> N42 46.0 W065 00.0 --> N42 00.0 W067 00.0

... whereas my FPL after MERLY is:

LESLU --> DINIM(N51 00.0 W015 00.0) --> N51 00.0 W020 00.0 --> N50 00.0 W030 00.0 --> N48 00.0 W040 0.00 --> N47 00.0 W045 00.0 --> N46 00.0 W050 00.0 --> PEPRA(N44 56.2.0 W056 13.9) --> WHALE(N42 11.9 W067 00.0)

So I tried to keep them as close as possible with easily identifiable contemporary fixes BUT they are not the same. For this reason I would not ask for SM clearance.

Share this post


Link to post
Jonathan Fong

I update FSC9 from Navigraph and it did not have any problem with PRAWN at AIRAC1501.

No, I would request by reading individual points because - as much as I would like to - SM in my opinion is not something I would consider "contemporary" in today's ATC service on Oceanic Tracks.

Some may know about it some may not and I would not blame them if they don't.

Also for example from W015 to W067 SM after MERLY was:

LESLU --> N50 41.0 W015 00.0 --> N50 00.0 W020 00.0 --> N50 30.0 W030 00.0 --> N49 16.0 W040 00.0 --> N47 03.0 W050 00.0 --> N46 10.0 W053 00.0 --> N44 14.0 W060 00.0 --> N42 46.0 W065 00.0 --> N42 00.0 W067 00.0

... whereas my FPL after MERLY is:

LESLU --> DINIM(N51 00.0 W015 00.0) --> N51 00.0 W020 00.0 --> N50 00.0 W030 00.0 --> N48 00.0 W040 0.00 --> N47 00.0 W045 00.0 --> N46 00.0 W050 00.0 --> PEPRA(N44 56.2.0 W056 13.9) --> WHALE(N42 11.9 W067 00.0)

So I tried to keep them as close as possible with easily identifiable contemporary fixes BUT they are not the same. For this reason I would not ask for SM clearance.

So, would you say something like this? (This example is for the JFK-LHR flight but should apply in a similar fashion to the other flights; Oceanic Radar wasn't online during my first KJFK-EGLL flt)

(callsign), requesting oceanic clearance to Heathrow.

(callsign, cleared to Heathrow via waypoints DOLPHN URTAK 4650N 4840N 4930N 5020N SOMAX, entry time __:__Z

Share this post


Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

Ooops you just pointed me out that I had not updated the KJFK->EGLL (URTAK no more!) even though I had the update note below. Done now.

Yes but with 4650N as first point since this would be the first Oceanic.

Reference: http://www.vatsim-uk.co.uk/oceanic-procedures/

"Good day Gander, (Callsign) request oceanic clearance".

"(callsign), Good day, go ahead".

"(Callsign) request 4650N 4840N 4930N 5020N SOMAX at Flight Level 510 cruise climb block up to FL600 and Mach 2.0 Estimating 4650N at 1943ZULU".

and at same time by having typed it and ready to send it I would send by text "4650N 4840N 4930N 5020N SOMAX FL510 FL600 Mach2 4650N 1943z" to help the ATC and myself in reading it ;-)

Later at 4650N

"Gander (Callsign), with you.

"(callsign) Gander go ahead."

"Gander (Callsign) overhead 46North 50West at 1943, Flight Level 510 Mach 2, estimate 48North 40West at time 2030 49North 30West thereafter".

"(Callsign), roger 46North 50West at 1943, Flight Level 510 Mach 2, estimate 48North 40West at time 2030 49North 30West thereafter".

Share this post


Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

A thank you to admins for pinning the post. I will keep the first post updated as airac's update and I detect changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Jonathan Fong

I'd like to suggest that this page be changed into a "Concorde Route Page", with both fictional and modernized historic routes. For example, here's something to start it off:

This is a flight from EFHK to PANC in Concorde; it's specially made so that by using the "Great Circle" routing, one can get very close to the north pole. A realistic backstory might be that this route could be a summer-only seasonal route, a bit like the EGLL-TBPB-EGLL flights in winter.

Here's the route:

EFHK ANT HMF 7808E 8710N 8841N 8689N SCC BEETE ENN TAGER PANC

(NOTE: 8841N is the closest you'll get to the North Pole both in this route and in FSX. Any further and FSX starts to bug up.)

Also, here's a historic flight to add. It's a modernized version of LFPG-KJFK, made using parts read from the original AWC files that come with the ConcX and transplanting a bit from the EGLL-KJFK route.

LFPG SITET SALCO NAKID RATKA 5015N 5020N 5030N 4940N 4750N CARAC LINND CAMRN KJFK

Share this post


Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

fcisuperguy for the LFPG <--> KJFK route I have followed the documentation provided in FSLabs's folder \Flight Plan Routes\Air France\New York

I had not added them in the initial post, I just did.

Your route has some variations I would not do.

For example, 1st point SITET is not an SID point of LFPG, I use EVX which is one and it is also the one in the FSL suggested route.

Also SITET-->SALCO straight portion brings you closer than 20nm (11nm actually) to the cape northwest of Cherbourg, France and 10nm from Alderney island. Bang Bang :o !

Then in the US for some reason you go down to CARAC point for 60W which is at 43N instead of 44 14N (north abeam Sable island) which was the original route.

Check the route I added in the initial post to see differences.

In the VA I fly for we have dozens of such ad hoc routes like the EFHK->PANC you propose that fly across oceans or unpopulated overland portions all over the world. In this thread I wanted to mainly update the routes that were actually flown by BA & AF and that is why I have not added others in the initial post. Still though, anyone, feel free to add own ad hoc routes suggestions further down the post but I will not add them in the initial post for the sake of maintaining a page of original - updated - routes only in the 1st post.

The reason for not adding them was that If we go the virtual way with imaginary routes or BA/AF old charter/world tour routes it will be endless and hard to keep them constantly updated with current AIRAC cycles.

That is why I did not add such routes.

In this map you can see the route network we have in the VA.

http://hellasga.com/gallery/kyp/fs/fsx/fslabs-Concorde/globe

They are 140 routes, (incl. the return flights) impossible to maintain up to date in a post like this !

Share this post


Link to post
Jonathan Fong

fcisuperguy for the LFPG <--> KJFK route I have followed the documentation provided in FSLabs's folder \Flight Plan Routes\Air France\New York

I had not added them in the initial post, I just did.

Your route has some variations I would not do.

For example, 1st point SITET is not an SID point of LFPG, I use EVX which is one and it is also the one in the FSL suggested route.

Also SITET-->SALCO straight portion brings you closer than 20nm (11nm actually) to the cape northwest of Cherbourg, France and 10nm from Alderney island. Bang Bang :o !

Then in the US for some reason you go down to CARAC point for 60W which is at 43N instead of 44 14N (north abeam Sable island) which was the original route.

Check the route I added in the initial post to see differences.

In the VA I fly for we have dozens of such ad hoc routes like the EFHK->PANC you propose that fly across oceans or unpopulated overland portions all over the world. In this thread I wanted to mainly update the routes that were actually flown by BA & AF and that is why I have not added others in the initial post. Still though, anyone, feel free to add own ad hoc routes suggestions further down the post but I will not add them in the initial post for the sake of maintaining a page of original - updated - routes only in the 1st post.

The reason for not adding them was that If we go the virtual way with imaginary routes or BA/AF old charter/world tour routes it will be endless and hard to keep them constantly updated with current AIRAC cycles.

That is why I did not add such routes.

In this map you can see the route network we have in the VA.

http://hellasga.com/gallery/kyp/fs/fsx/fslabs-Concorde/globe

They are 140 routes, (incl. the return flights) impossible to maintain up to date in a post like this !

I see... Regarding the LFPG route, I simply tried to transplant parts of the routes that worked well. I have to step up my game... If possible, I'll try to help updating routes as AIRACs update.

Share this post


Link to post
Magnus Meese

The Mike, November and Oscar tracks are still very much accepted, and for me prefered, amongst us NAT-controllers (They're based on coordinates, not waypoints after all). Papa (Barbados etc.) will proably need some explanation amongst a few controllers however, but if the controller doesn't know it, just ask for a Random Route clearance and provide your full track in the clearance request.

Share this post


Link to post
Jonathan Fong

Hey, I have a bit of advice regarding all the routes from JFK to either LHR or CDG. I recommend that the "5020N SOMAX" section be changed to "4920N 4915N", which according to the coordinate page I'll put below for the SM, SN, and SO tracks is closer to the original SM track coordinates (to be specific, the SM waypoints SN20W and SM15W). I believe the original coordinates were made this way because Concorde flights also went to CDG, and the coordinates above (4920N 4915N) allowed for an easier supersonic deceleration into French airspace (According to FSC9, the original ones give a turn coming into CDG while the revised ones are more or less a "straight in" line.

1qKY6FK.png

TL;DR: I recommend the section of the route(s) reading

"4650N 4840N 4930N 5020N SOMAX"

be changed to

"4650N 4840N 4930N 4920N 4915N"

Share this post


Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

TL;DR: I recommend the section of the route(s) reading

"4650N 4840N 4930N 5020N SOMAX"

be changed to

"4650N 4840N 4930N 4920N 4915N"

Done !

Actually since 4915N does not exist in AIRAC cycles I used for this BEDRA which is exactly this (i.e. N49 00.0 W015 00.0).

This was for the EASTBOUND flight plans for EGLL & LFPG, if you have a similar improvement for the westbound ones let me know.

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Herby Gore

This thread is a very good idea, Petakas.

I fly very often from and to France on VATSIM. So I know too well that the controlers in France are not familiar with the Concorde routes. To top it off, they expect pilots to fly RNAV procedure. Quite challenging with the old pointy! So be prepared before going around CDG when ATC is online.

I'm a bit surprised by the route shown in the 1st post for KJFK to LFPG. The traditional route was passing above Guernesey island and it was the point where the plane should return to subsonic flight. The GUR VOR still exists today and the route from there should be : GUR INGOR DVL LUKIP.

There was a STAR starting at DVL that no longer exist and that has been replaced by LUKIP which is just a few miles further East.

On VATSIM again, I know that all the controlers in Gander and Shanwick OCA know very well the 3 tracks used by Concorde (SM, SN and SO). And I think that using a different route may look strange to them.

I asked the question a while ago on VATSIM's forum and got pretty good answers: http://forums.vatsim.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=66002

Share this post


Link to post
Jonathan Fong

This thread is a very good idea, Petakas.

I fly very often from and to France on VATSIM. So I know too well that the controlers in France are not familiar with the Concorde routes. To top it off, they expect pilots to fly RNAV procedure. Quite challenging with the old pointy! So be prepared before going around CDG when ATC is online.

I'm a bit surprised by the route shown in the 1st post for KJFK to LFPG. The traditional route was passing above Guernesey island and it was the point where the plane should return to subsonic flight. The GUR VOR still exists today and the route from there should be : GUR INGOR DVL LUKIP.

There was a STAR starting at DVL that no longer exist and that has been replaced by LUKIP which is just a few miles further East.

On VATSIM again, I know that all the controlers in Gander and Shanwick OCA know very well the 3 tracks used by Concorde (SM, SN and SO). And I think that using a different route may look strange to them.

I asked the question a while ago on VATSIM's forum and got pretty good answers: http://forums.vatsim.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=66002

Nice route edit! Just checked it with FSC9, and the modified GUR INGOR DVL LUKIP route checks out fine. Also, I don't think that the old controllers will think the modernized routes look strange, as although it's a random route clearance, the route actually shows up fine for them instead of the SM/SN/SO/SP waypoints which if I remember correctly either throw an error and have to be overridden manually or just don't show up on the radar screens.

Share this post


Link to post
Jonathan Fong

I have a question: is this:

5430N 10000W

the same as this:

5410N/54N010W

?

AFAIK they should be the same... it's just that the first one has minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

I have a question: is this:

5430N 10000W

the same as this:

5410N/54N010W

?

AFAIK they should be the same... it's just that the first one has minutes.

With 5430Ν 10000W you mean N54 30.0 W100 00.0 (the way entered also in CONC INSs)

5410N means N54 00.0 W010 00.0 so its not the same

54N010W (I guess) is the same with the above.

The N/S E/W letter coding that goes in between or after the 4 digits to identify coordinates rounded without minutes has a specific format per ICAO.

See this old post about it by SST, just need to separate the spaces & line brakes since they have been all merged in one paragraph for some reason.

OK found it from my saved records, I copy paste it below.

By: SST

Posted 08 October 2011 - 06:30 AM

yycvor, on 10 Jun 2011 - 12:01 AM, said:

Ive done a forum search, google, checked the WIki page for help, and I still can not for the life of me be able to enter certain custom way points, Im getting format errors, or not in database, when I attempt the short and long version entry. Im attemping to fly CYYC-EHAM and am struggling to ge the FMC to use these way points. My route 5700N 10000W5930N 09000W6100N 08000W6300N 06000W6300N 05000W6200N 04000W6000N 03000W5700N 02000W Any help?

N latitude, W < 100 degrees longitude = xxxxN (eg: 6040N = 60N 40W)

N latitude, W > 100 degrees longitude = xxNxx (eg: 50N20 = 50N 120W)

N latitude, E < 100 degrees longitude = xxxxE (eg: 4507E = 45N 07E)

N latitude, E > 100 degrees longitude = xxExx (eg: 12E21 = 12N 121E)

S latitude, W < 100 degrees longitude = xxxxW (eg: 1041W = 10S 41W)

S latitude, W > 100 degrees longitude = xxWxx (eg: 05W60 = 05S 160W)

S latitude, E < 100 degrees longitude = xxxxS (eg: 0233S = 02S 33E)

S latitude, E > 100 degrees longitude = xxSxx (eg: 14S11 = 14S 111E)

Example: (taken from KLAX to YSSY United flight on FlightAware)

PRCH9 DINTY DUETS 3300N 13000W 3300N 13500W AXELE 3000N 14800W 2800N 15500W 2500N 16100W 2100N 16500W 1500N 16900W 1000N 17200W 0400N 17500W ARTOP 0600S 17500E 1100S 17000E 1500S 16700E 2100S 16300E 2700S 16000E MISLY B580 IFFEY MARLNF

From the above route:

3300N 13000W = 33N30

3300N 13500W = 33N35

3000N 14800W = 30N48

0600S 17500E = 06S75

1100S 17000E = 11S70

1500S 16700E = 15S67

It's fairly simple to remember. It's either a North latitude or a South latitude, paired with West or East longitudes; NW, NE, SW, SE.

If the West/East is greater > 100 degrees, the letter modifier will always be in the middle of the fix (xxNxx)

If the West/East is less < 100 degrees, the letter modifier will always be at the end of the fix (xxxxN)

North lat + West long = N as the modifier letter ( xxxxN / xxNxx )

North lat + East long = E as the modifier letter ( xxxxE / xxExx )

South lat + West long = W as the modifier letter ( xxxxW / xxWxx )

South lat + East long = S as the modifier letter ( xxxxS / xxSxx )

To code in custom Lat/Long coordinates it depends on the values of the Lat/Long.

In your case, the coordinates will be entered like this:

5700N 10000W = 57N00

5930N 09000W = (not sure about 5930N 09000W but 5990N = 5900N 09000W)

6100N 08000W = 6180N

6300N 06000W = 6360N

6300N 05000W = 6350N

6200N 04000W = 6240N

6000N 03000W = 6030N

5700N 02000W = 5720N

I have used this coding repeatedly in the 744 and MD-11 FMC's crossing the ponds. I had this question myself several years ago and was lucky enough to find the post that I quoted above. (I copied it for my own future use.) Hopefully this will answer your questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Magnus Meese

Please file 7 or 11-digit coordinates (without spaces between lat/long), it's very much preferable for oceanic controllers (and the ICAO standard, according to doc 4444).

7-digit for whole Degree coordinates: 45N050W, 36N160W, 20S025E, etc.

11-digit for Degree Minutes (last two digits are minutes, not decimals, they only go to 59 before the first two/three digits changes up): 4530N05035W, 4059N09003W, etc.

Use whole degrees (7-digit) and every five or ten degrees lat/long (depending on wether you're flying north/south or east/west) to keep your route neat and tidy as long as you can, use Degree Minutes (11-digit) only when you need boom clearance or there are other factors that requires more finesse than whole degrees. In other words; 50N020W 51N030W 49N040W is much, much better than 51N024W 50N036W 4903N04844W (although, the last one is also legal). The Red Sea is one of the places that requires DegMin, or at least coordinates more spesific than every five or ten degrees lat/long, to keep away from both shores.

Also, ideally in an OCA you should have a posrep every 45 minutes or more often, in the Concorde that means you can get away with WPT-legs up to 800nm long, I usually aim for no more than 500-600nm in order to keep my route a bit more detailed. This is more for the routes going outside the normal Gander-Shanwick-area.

Share this post


Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

Please file 7 or 11-digit coordinates (without spaces between lat/long), it's very much preferable for oceanic controllers (and the ICAO standard, according to doc 4444).

7-digit for whole Degree coordinates: 45N050W, 36N160W, 20S025E, etc.

11-digit for Degree Minutes (last two digits are minutes, not decimals, they only go to 59 before the first two/three digits changes up): 4530N05035W, 4059N09003W, etc.

In other words; 50N020W 51N030W 49N040W is much, much better than 51N024W 50N036W 4903N04844W (although, the last one is also legal).

Useful tip Meese, thanks.

Indeed ICAO 4444 specifies this.

Ref. (from FAA so as not to link icao pdf)

http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/fss/AppendixA.htm

ITEM 15

- ( c ) Route

- (2) Significant Point

My questions:

What distinguishes then the use of 5-digit coordinates format (detailed in the above quoted old post from avsim) from 7-digit ?

i.e. 50N020W 51N030W 49N040W => 5020N 5130N 4940N

since these are the same points.

Is it for ease of flight plan composition (less text) ? and/or for FMC ease of waypoints entry ?

I ask this because in many (not all not) flight plans of real transatlantic flights I see they have the 5 digit format.

I have a feeling 5-digit type are predefined existing - often used - points in AIRAC cycles, like the 5 letter fixes, because by browing my map software I see that in some areas they exist and in some not.

As radar/oceanic procedural controllers is there something that makes you prefer the 7-digit over the 5-digit type ?

Share this post


Link to post
Magnus Meese

The difference is that the 5-digits are waypoints, not coordinates. Indeed, they are placed properly on their representative coordinates, but they're not everywhere, and they are ultimately navdata, not pure geographical positions. In order to be valid, they actually have to be a part of the AIRAC system, so in other words, if you don't use scrutiny when filing a 5-digit FP across lightly trafficed oceanic areas, you might just file waypoints that aren't valid. Interpretable, yes, but not existing in any database or AIP. When you file 7- or 11-digit you file a certain location on Earth, timeless and separate from all AIRACs. cycles and navdatabases, not risking that some half-asleep AIP-clerk has published 5130N at 51N032W instead of 51N030W (not that this actually have happened afaik, heh).

As a controller, the biggest problem is the fellows who have managed to file a route via f.ex. 5233N 5347N 5151N, etc. I understand where they're going, but I'll be damned if any controller or planner tool has any idea of what's happening. Also, our scopes are able to interpret 7-digit and 11-digit and give proper route draw-ups, estimates, etc regardless of where they are in the world. Thus, it is also a great way of filing VFR or military FPs, removing the need to fill the route-field with location names and so on. (I'm not sure of how capable the scopes in USA/Can are when it comes to coordinates). Lastly, a personal preference, I find them easier to read, interpret and visualize, even though they basically contain the same info.

Also, you won't have to remember where to put that pesky lat/long-letter in the waypoint when you're flying outside NAT ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

Dear Meese following your useful input I started updating the routes with the additional 7-digit format in the top post.

We need the 5-digit format for using it copy-paste in tools for extracting useful files for FS.

On the other hand 7-digit looks better to the not so experienced with nav. databases and AIRACs pilot or ATC so I keep both.

First update with both formats is in the couple of EGLL-KJFK and return flights.

Progressively as time permits I will be updating the rest of them to both formats.

Regards,

Share this post


Link to post
CaptKornDog

Any chance anyone has a "modern" routing for KIAD-LFPG and LFPG-KIAD? Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

By combining the "modern" of BA's coast to KIAD and AF's LFPG-KJFK:

LFPG KIAD
EVX KOTEM VEXEN PEMAK RATKA DINIM 5120N 5030N 4940N 4750N PORTI WHALE BOATE KENDA LINND OWENZ CAMRN METRO LRP DELRO

KIAD LFPG
PALEO V44 SIE N13C JOBOC CARAC DOPHN SUPRY 4650N 4840N 4930N 4920N BEDRA TAKAS MOSIS GOBUR JSY INGOR LUKIP

Was Air France doing Washington regularly ?

Share this post


Link to post
Jonathan Fong

Hey,

I have a few routes that I use often on VATSIM nowadays that I think are worthy of sharing here. These are as close as I can get to the routes that Concorde actually flew, with the only modifications being the replacement of waypoints which no longer exist with modern waypoints that are either in the same location or are very close by. These routes also use the original NAT SM/SN coordinates instead of the simplified versions used above so that Shanwick and Gander Radio can recognize them easily - I've found that contrary to what the main post says, Shanwick and Gander actually recognize NATs SM and SN fairly well (at least better than the random routings above) and will definitely accept them. I've provided both the raw plans (to put in your flight planner and for export to Concorde Performance System) and the flight plans that should be submitted to ATC on VATSIM/IVAO.

EGLL-KJFK

IRL Callsign: BAW1/BAW3

Distance: 3157.4nm

Raw Flight Plan (For Planning Purposes):

CPT DCT MALBY DCT KESUP DCT MERLY DCT LESLU DCT 5041N01500W 5050N02000W 5030N03000W 4916N04000W 4703N05000W 4610N05300W 4414N06000W 4246N06500W 42N067W DCT KENDA DCT LINND DCT OWENZ DCT CAMRN

ATC Flight Plan (For Submission):

N0550F260 CPT L9 MALBY DCT C/KESUP/N0740F280F430 DCT MERLY DCT LESLU NATSM C/5041N01500W/M200F450PLUS 5041N01500W 5050N02000W 5030N03000W 4916N04000W 4703N05000W 4610N05300W 4414N06000W 4246N06500W 42N067W KENDA/M100F490 DCT LINND DCT OWENZ DCT CAMRN

KJFK-EGLL

IRL Callsign: BAW2/BAW4

Distance: 3175.8nm

Raw Flight Plan (For Planning Purposes):

SHIPP DCT LINND DCT 3952N06815W 4025N06700W 4307N06000W 4510N05230W 4554N05000W 4810N04000W 4926N03000W 4949N02000W 4941N01500W DCT LULOX DCT ELRAG DCT NUMPO UP2 BEDEK OCK2F

ATC Flight Plan (For Submission):

N0560F290 JFK2 C/SHIPP/M200F430 A523 C/LINND/M200F480PLUS NATSN 3952N06815W 4025N06700W 4307N06000W 4510N05230W 4554N05000W 4810N04000W 4926N03000W 4949N02000W 4941N01500W DCT LULOX/N0550F370 DCT ELRAG DCT NUMPO UP2 NIGIT OCK2F

EGLL-KBOS

IRL Callsign: BAW9012

Distance: 2943.0nm

Raw Flight Plan (For Planning Purposes):

CPT DCT MALBY DCT KESUP DCT MERLY DCT LESLU DCT 5041N01500W 5050N02000W 5030N03000W 4916N04000W 4703N05000W 4610N05300W 4414N06000W 4246N06500W 42N067W DCT LFV DCT ARMUN DCT OOSHN

ATC Flight Plan (For Submission):

N0565F280 CPT L9 MALBY DCT C/KESUP/N0740F280F430 DCT MERLY DCT LESLU NATSM C/5041N01500W/M200F450F460 5050N02000W 5030N03000W 4916N04000W 4703N05000W 4610N05300W 4414N06000W 4246N06500W 4246N06500W/M100F490 42N067W LFV DCT ARMUN DCT OOSHN OOSHN3

NOTE: I highly recommend you also make a set of INS AWC cards for the OOSHN3 arrival for each runway, as it is an RNAV arrival.

KBOS-EGLL

IRL Callsign: BAW9011

Distance: 2959.8nm

Raw Flight Plan (For Planning Purposes):

SCUPP DCT 4246N06500W 4307N06000W 4510N05230W 4554N05000W 4810N04000W 4926N03000W 4949N02000W 4941N01500W DCT LULOX DCT ELRAG DCT NUMPO DCT BEDEK OCK2F

ATC Flight Plan (For Submission):

N0560F280 LOGAN9 SCUPP C/4246N06500W/N0798F280F460 NATSN 4307N06000W 4510N05230W 4554N05000W 4810N04000W 4926N03000W 4949N02000W 4941N01500W LULOX/N0550F370 DCT ELRAG DCT NUMPO UP2 BEDEK OCK2F

Share this post


Link to post
Magnus Meese

The OOSHN3 is not available to the Concorde. It's RNAV1 requiering DME/DME/IRU or GPS.

RNAV1 actually does have DME/DME only approval criteria (irrelevant though, since the STAR requires IRU or GPS), but the Concorde doesn't fulfill those either, so RNAV1 is a big no go. More info on this in ICAO Doc 9613 Vol II, chapter 3.3.3.2.2

A few controllers might be annoyed or even try to convince you to fly the STAR, but just say you're unable and show them your shiny virtual FAA approval to enter the airspace on B-RNAV capabilities. The controllers are there to find a solution to adverse navigation performance capabilities :)

Otherwise, nice routes you've made there!

Share this post


Link to post
Jonathan Fong

The OOSHN3 is not available to the Concorde. It's RNAV1 requiering DME/DME/IRU or GPS.

RNAV1 actually does have DME/DME only approval criteria (irrelevant though, since the STAR requires IRU or GPS), but the Concorde doesn't fulfill those either, so RNAV1 is a big no go. More info on this in ICAO Doc 9613 Vol II, chapter 3.3.3.2.2

A few controllers might be annoyed or even try to convince you to fly the STAR, but just say you're unable and show them your shiny virtual FAA approval to enter the airspace on B-RNAV capabilities. The controllers are there to find a solution to adverse navigation performance capabilities :)

Otherwise, nice routes you've made there!

Great to know! Now I can delete my OOSHN3 AWC cards and force BOS_CTR to give me vectors ;) Thanks for the praise!

Share this post


Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

Hey,

I have a few routes that I use often on VATSIM nowadays that I think are worthy of sharing here. These are as close as I can get to the routes that Concorde actually flew, with the only modifications being the replacement of waypoints which no longer exist with modern waypoints that are either in the same location or are very close by. These routes also use the original NAT SM/SN coordinates instead of the simplified versions used above so that Shanwick and Gander Radio can recognize them easily - I've found that contrary to what the main post says, Shanwick and Gander actually recognize NATs SM and SN fairly well (at least better than the random routings above) and will definitely accept them. I've provided both the raw plans (to put in your flight planner and for export to Concorde Performance System) and the flight plans that should be submitted to ATC on VATSIM/IVAO.

EGLL-KJFK

IRL Callsign: BAW1/BAW3

Distance: 3157.4nm

Raw Flight Plan (For Planning Purposes):

CPT DCT MALBY DCT KESUP DCT MERLY DCT LESLU DCT 5041N01500W 5050N02000W 5030N03000W 4916N04000W 4703N05000W 4610N05300W 4414N06000W 4246N06500W 42N067W DCT KENDA DCT LINND DCT OWENZ DCT CAMRN

ATC Flight Plan (For Submission):

N0550F260 CPT L9 MALBY DCT C/KESUP/N0740F280F430 DCT MERLY DCT LESLU NATSM C/5041N01500W/M200F450PLUS 5041N01500W 5050N02000W 5030N03000W 4916N04000W 4703N05000W 4610N05300W 4414N06000W 4246N06500W 42N067W KENDA/M100F490 DCT LINND DCT OWENZ DCT CAMRN

FCI thank you for the input.

Before I consider amending the original just some questions which may come also out of things I miss:

Q1:

If ATC do recognize & accept the original Concorde routes why do we then need after "NATSM" all its coordinates ?

The whole point of entering an airway code is to avoid the listing of each individual point.

So my question is why not have this portion

... LESLU NATSM 42N067W ...

in what is submitted to ATC instead of the full details ?

Q2:

Also any reason why specifically in 42N067W you use 7 digit format instead of 11 format ( 4200N06700W )?

Q3:

My question to VATSIM/IVAO oceanic FSS ATC Controllers:

Does your ATC software decode "NATSM" of the flight plan in to a series of waypoints as done with nowadays' AIRAC cycles when it comes to AIRWAY names ?

Since I originally posted this topic I have observed that even 11 digit coordinates are OK for most flight planners for export of files used by FS so we may turn this in to a more generic routes listings topic that COORDINATES from the past are kept (instead of replacing them by 5 digit format as I did) but FIX names that are not valid any more are replaced.

Basically its the FIX names that have conflict with nowadays' ATC Radars software since these are the ones closer to departure/destination (Domestic ATC) usually.

So the 11 digit format coordinates can stay as they used to be and AIRAC fixes adjusted either to nearest contemporary or 11 digit equivalent. Just thinking out loud here.

Share this post


Link to post
Jonathan Fong

FCI thank you for the input.

Before I consider amending the original just some questions which may come also out of things I miss:

Q1:

If ATC do recognize & accept the original Concorde routes why do we then need after "NATSM" all its coordinates ?

The whole point of entering an airway code is to avoid the listing of each individual point.

So my question is why not have this portion

... LESLU NATSM 42N067W ...

in what is submitted to ATC instead of the full details ?

Q2:

Also any reason why specifically in 42N067W you use 7 digit format instead of 11 format ( 4200N06700W )?

Q3:

My question to VATSIM/IVAO oceanic FSS ATC Controllers:

Does your ATC software decode "NATSM" of the flight plan in to a series of waypoints as done with nowadays' AIRAC cycles when it comes to AIRWAY names ?

Since I originally posted this topic I have observed that even 11 digit coordinates are OK for most flight planners for export of files used by FS so we may turn this in to a more generic routes listings topic that COORDINATES from the past are kept (instead of replacing them by 5 digit format as I did) but FIX names that are not valid any more are replaced.

Basically its the FIX names that have conflict with nowadays' ATC Radars software since these are the ones closer to departure/destination (Domestic ATC) usually.

So the 11 digit format coordinates can stay as they used to be and AIRAC fixes adjusted either to nearest contemporary or 11 digit equivalent. Just thinking out loud here.

The reason I put NATSM is to essentially remind the controllers that the coordinates listed are for the NAT track specified, not just a random routing. I tend to add the full coordinates in just in case Shanwick and Gander don't have the coordinates in their software/on hand, so that they know where I'm headed. For question 2, there is no real reason why I put it in the shorter format - it was just simpler than typing it in 11-digit format. I agree with your idea that we should only adjust the AIRAC fixes and not the NAT coordinates, so that our routes are as close as possible to the routes flown IRL by Concorde.

In other news, I'm working on updating a few more IRL Concorde routes with the traditional NAt coordinates, namely KIAD-EGLL, EGLL-KIAD, BIKF-EGLL and EGLL-BIKF. I'll have those ready soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

The Mike, November and Oscar tracks are still very much accepted, and for me prefered, amongst us NAT-controllers (They're based on coordinates, not waypoints after all). Papa (Barbados etc.) will proably need some explanation amongst a few controllers however, but if the controller doesn't know it, just ask for a Random Route clearance and provide your full track in the clearance request.

Meese just quoting you here so you see it and report whether a simple NATSM will do for Euroscope, or whether as suggested in the post quoted by NHerby below, it should be

NATSM SM15 SM20 SM30 SM40 SM50 SM53 SM60 SM65 SM67 NATSM

or whether 11 digit format of each waypoint with NATSM preceded should be used.

This thread is a very good idea, Petakas.

I fly very often from and to France on VATSIM. So I know too well that the controlers in France are not familiar with the Concorde routes. To top it off, they expect pilots to fly RNAV procedure. Quite challenging with the old pointy! So be prepared before going around CDG when ATC is online.

I'm a bit surprised by the route shown in the 1st post for KJFK to LFPG. The traditional route was passing above Guernesey island and it was the point where the plane should return to subsonic flight. The GUR VOR still exists today and the route from there should be : GUR INGOR DVL LUKIP.

There was a STAR starting at DVL that no longer exist and that has been replaced by LUKIP which is just a few miles further East.

On VATSIM again, I know that all the controlers in Gander and Shanwick OCA know very well the 3 tracks used by Concorde (SM, SN and SO). And I think that using a different route may look strange to them.

I asked the question a while ago on VATSIM's forum and got pretty good answers: http://forums.vatsim.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=66002

Share this post


Link to post
Magnus Meese

Go ahead and file the tracks. Wether the client can interpret it or not doesn't matter much to us, as we don't have radar anyways. Of course we don't have a non-radar client, but access to flightplans and coms is the basic function of ES/VRC when controlling the OCA. We do of course "cheat" in certain cases, especially when ensuring separation from normal traffic and those who are flying DCT across :rolleyes: Maintaining separation however is done via plotting routes, altitudes and position reports in either Excel or in dedicated software or web-based clients. It's not as advanced as our real world counterpart, since they can easily calulate crossing paths several hours before they happen (the principle of an OCA clearance is that if you lose coms on entry, you should be separated all the way across the ocean), but it works. The Concorde, with its altitude block high above anybody else, is isolated and therefore very easy to control in that regard. You rarely have more than one or two, and even if you shold get ten of it at once, it's a simple matter of using 10 minutes separation on the same track or just push traffic over on the Oscar track.

Oh, and just in case someone's wondering, the pronounciation of the Sierra-waypoints for the Concorde is SMxxW, i.e. "Sierra Mike 2-0 West", etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Charan Kumar

No, our client doesn't decode NAT_SM or SN or SO, but some of us have the NAT_SM/SN track coded so we know where you are going. Just like IRL, we don't get too many concordes at the same time, so we don't necessarily have to worry about spacing. Its only pointy descends or climbs below 41K we have to worry, but that's usually outside the OCA, so it usually doesn't affect while controlling Oceanic.

Share this post


Link to post
Jonathan Fong

No, our client doesn't decode NAT_SM or SN or SO, but some of us have the NAT_SM/SN track coded so we know where you are going. Just like IRL, we don't get too many concordes at the same time, so we don't necessarily have to worry about spacing. Its only pointy descends or climbs below 41K we have to worry, but that's usually outside the OCA, so it usually doesn't affect while controlling Oceanic.

I see. Nice to get a NAT controller's POV on this matter. What would the most efficient method be for both parties in that case? Would it be to simply put NATSM in our FPs and lose the coordinates, put NATSM and the full coordinates in, or put NATSM and the abbreviated form of the coordinates (ex. NATSM SM15W)? Thanks!

EDIT: I'd also like to add a quick rule-of-thumb for those planning Concorde flights and who want to replace nonexistent waypoints with new ones - KESUP is close to where UPGAS was, and LULOX is close to where BARIX was.

Share this post


Link to post
Charan Kumar

I was trained on the Pacific side, but because of my knowledge with CONC I was able to bring it to NAT, but most, if not all controllers I have worked with in Oceanic recognize the NAT_SM/O/N and Concorde's special track and altitude requirements. Including NAT_SM should suffice. The instructors do discuss Concorde specifics, not sure if it's documented on the website itself.

And also, different clients decode it different. ES recognizes lat/long coords IIRC, but VRC won't unless that intersection is in the sector file. Sorry, again not being very specific, since I only control NATs twice in a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Charan Kumar

http://www.vatsim-uk.co.uk/oceanic-procedures/... Shanwick Ireland has their own documentation, basically telling them to take usual position reports.

Remember not every controller reads all documentation, so some may sound a little confused by the route. But your position report formats will not change, except that you will call every 15 mts instead of every 45 mts or an hr :D

Share this post


Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

http://www.vatsim-uk.co.uk/oceanic-procedures/... Shanwick Ireland has their own documentation, basically telling them to take usual position reports.

Remember not every controller reads all documentation, so some may sound a little confused by the route. But your position report formats will not change, except that you will call every 15 mts instead of every 45 mts or an hr :D

From the bottom of page

The CAA chart dated 1st Jan 1998 gives the acceleration point on the European side of the Atlantic as follows:

51 24 00 N 003 50 00 W

I wonder why they suggest this point. Its still not within 20nm from shore.

MERLY point (51 20 00 N 005 00 00 W) is the earliest you can assure 20nm separation from coast and hence the beginning of the Transonic phase.

The above suggested coordinates at the bottom of the guide are 43nm before (east of) MERLY just 6nm from coast of Bristol Channel.

Share this post


Link to post
Martin Tornberg

Interesting discussion. This is how my FPL look like most of the time (the TAS is obviously changing a bit from time to time) when flying Heathrow-JFK and back.

EGLL-KJFK

NxxxxF280 CPT L9 MALBY DCT KESUP DCT C/MERLY/M200F450F600 UL180 LESLU 5040N01500W 5050N02000W 5030N03000W 4916N04000W 4703N05000W 4610N05300W 4414N06000W 4246N06500W DCT 42N067W DCT KENDA/M100F390 DCT LINND DCT OWENZ DCT CAMRN

KJFK-EGLL

NxxxxF290 C/SHIPP/M200F450F600 DCT LINND DCT 3952N06815W 4025N06700W 4307N06000W 4510N05230W 4554N05000W 4810N04000W 4926N03000W 4949N02000W 4941N01500W DCT LESLU UL180 MERLY/NxxxxFxxx UL180 ABDUK UL607 NUMPO UP2 BEDEK

I always file with the 11 charachter format and ask oceanic clearance via NAT SierraMike or SierraNovember. And when I do my position reports I report "Sierra November 15 West at....." and so on.

I try to input my subsonic legs speed and FL as well to give a rough idea to the ATC what I'm looking for. 99% of the time coming in to Heathrow they always give me the subsonic FL that I looked for since I inserted it in the FP already.

I got the TAS in the FP from activesky which works like a charm.

And also I have the C/waypoint/M200F450F600 in the FP where I'm planning to do the acceleration and transonic climb. (I'm not sure though if I'm really allowed to typ /M200F450F600 already at MERLY but that's how I do it).

Share this post


Link to post
Jonathan Fong

Ahh, Martin Tornberg makes an appearance! Your flight plan (which I checked on VATAWARE while you were flying CONC once on VATSIM) is actually what inspired my set of updated FPs and what influenced my decision to add the full coordinates. I think you are allowed to type /M200F450F600 at MERLY, because you are transitioning to Mach 2 cruise in the block FL450-600. Usually I find that it isn't necessary to insert the subsonic leg speed/alt in the traditional BAW1/BAW2 routes as ATC is used to Concorde and knows that she spends some time at FL260 both on departure and on arrival to LHR - same with JFK. Otherwise, I also insert all speeds and alts.

Share this post


Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

And also I have the C/waypoint/M200F450F600 in the FP where I'm planning to do the acceleration and transonic climb. (I'm not sure though if I'm really allowed to typ /M200F450F600 already at MERLY but that's how I do it).

You are allowed because in FPL language it means "at MERLY I intend to leave current speed/altitude to reach later Mach 2 and cruise climb from FL450 to FL600"

Share this post


Link to post

×
×
  • Create New...