In a few occasions, for instance, EGNX → ESGG, you must be above FL245 on SAPCO Y53 DTY P166 BANTO P155 SOMVA where FL250 is also invalid, however, Simbrief forces <FL240 up to SIVDA, which means that people consistently get technically correct routes that are against the SRD. Therefore, controllers on something like VATUK have to consistently look at why flight plans are wrong and amend them to follow the SRD.
This could be fixed if, when submitting a flight plan to the database, I could define something like SAPCO/+25500/SOMVA for a new min. The previous system of SAPCO/24000/SOMVA could still stay for maximums while also adding in a SAPCO/-24000/SOMVA format to allow for better clarity for future routes and even potentially make it such that any filed with the old format would basically automatically get reformatted to the new system for even more clarity.
This could also greatly improve FRA as certain countries, such as Germany, have FRA on a flight level minimum basis, so, for instance, you have to be above FL245 to enter a certain FRA corridor. If I could simply define a min of 245 for the German FRA leg, it would solve problems of pilots potentially getting a lower flight level for whatever reason.
At the very least, an implementation of a manual override for the maximum / minimum limits along a path would be really nice.
Thoughts?
That 24000 restriction doesn’t look like something that was manually entered by someone, or if it was, it’s erroneous. For example there is no specific restriction on the P155 airway that would require staying below FL245 until SIVDA, nor can I find anything in the RAD or SRD to that effect either.
Not that minimum altitudes aren’t a good idea, but you could have figured out a way to partially fix it using the existing system already 
( 45000/SOMVA/99999 )
The validator would probably even accept the whole flight above FL450, but the UK upper airways like P155 are often restricted to FL460 or below (and in some cases, FL430 or below), see:
EG_ENR_3_2_en.pdf (16.3 MB)
With this partial fix, the only ways a flight will be planned below FL260 would be:
- the aircraft is incapable of reaching FL260 (either generally or in some rare cases, due to very high weights)
- the user manually specified a lower altitude (for a ~650nm flight, it would be user error)
Regards,
Tim
P.S. the CFMU validator doesn’t actually seem to mind the low level until SIVDA at all, but since the restriction “mandating” it appears to be non-existent, it should be overridden anyway.
Intersting. Yeah I can’t see why there’s a restriction there, in my tired state I might have confused the low level L608 going a bit more south with the P166 airway
It does seem like your workaround does actually work really well for this, not sure how I didn’t know of its existence so I appreciate the suggestion there!
And yeah, for whatever reason Eurocontrol doesn’t mind but according to the SRD you have to be above 245 and not 250 on that route from EGNX → SOMVA, which is what tripped me up probably
Thanks for the help!
