I found an issue with alternate routing out of ENGM
Simbrief chooses the nearest alternate as it’s C1 routing, meaning in this case it would send you to ENTO. This is perfectly fine, but when you study the routing you find that the alternate SID routing is missing the STAR
Meaning VIPA6D is the SID and TOR is the Transition in this case. But no STAR is chosen for the alternate which after waypoint NANON goes to TOR. This means you need to flyover the airport as the Transition point is further south, making a 180 turn for the approach strange.
If you so chooses ENCN as the alternate, which is an airport about 100nm further away or any other, you get a correct routing. Example ENCN
VIPA6D VIPPA OSVAL OSVA2L
As you can see in the thread linked post, this issue will cause wrong calculations for fuel and time.
…but it still flies past the airport and results in an even longer detour (and also seems to contradict EN2057 despite passing validation).
Presumably, in real life, pilots will get vectored by air traffic control and given vectors/shortcuts to avoid a course reversal and long detour, whenever possible, but as far as an IFR route that can actually be filed without special handling from ENGM to ENTO, VIPPA DCT TOR is the best option.
It is also marked as “real-world” which means it is present in the database of real-world filed routes that Simbrief has had access to since late 2025.
There are shorter routes available e.g. VFR-to-IFR but that’s only possible if the weather at ENGM allows for it, and Simbrief is not able to automatically plan such routes.
ENTO Alternate out of ENGM have three routing options after landing at RW19 at ENGM
VIPA6D VIPPA TOR (default one)
ATLA7D ATLAP ULMUG ULMU2S (alternate one)
TO903 (direct routing)
Of these three, I would actually prefer TO903 which would mean a more direct route as you potentially would get by ATC.
That said, I would prefer BAMIX STAR for both 17 and 35 runway but only BAMIX2S route through NANON waypoint that connects to TOR VOR. Point here is that if ENTO is selected as C1 Alternate, the routing out of ENGM would never fit wither RW17 or RW35 at ENTO, simply due to TOR VOR. You would essentially need to remove TOR VOR from flight plan and or manually add a star and fix for discontinuety or issues.
Any other near by airport selected, and your routing out of ENGM would include both SID and STAR, ENTO is the only one published with none.
Reason behind this I dunno, just thought it might be a routing issue by Simbreif, happen before, could happen again. Therefor I wanted it to be checked, just in case.
Adding on to this.. Original routing goes down to VIPPA due to applied SID, then back up to TOR VOR for a transition. Makes no sense other than it does this because it has no STAR
Example image, route from EGKK to ENGM with C1 Alternate ENTO
…but that routing has 264% overhead, not counting SID and STAR (vs 44% for VIPPA DCT TOR).
My main point though is, VIPPA DCT TOR is not an error or otherwise a bad route; it passes CFMU validation for both S and G flights, is even the recommended routing as per EN2057 in the RAD, and has been filed IRL (as per Simbrief’s database or of real-world routes, as well as on edi-gla):
It should also be noted that TOR is an Initial Approach fix for both runways (for the VOR-DME and ILS approaches); for runway 35, you join the racetrack procedure from TOR, and for runway 17, you do more of a “base turn” procedure.
Thus, with TOR connecting directly to the IFR approach(es), a STAR procedure is simply not required here.
Those that do not validate is Simbrief automatic routes. So by the notion of your own validation, “ATLA7D ATLAP ULMUG ULMU2S (alternate one)” and “TO903 (direct routing)” is offered by Simbrief but not valid if I understood you correctly. Yet they are validated by Simbrief if you analyze them.
Your route is valid for AIRAC 2609!
Route distance: 148 nm (+ 124.9%).
The main issue is ENGM, nice only two SID routes in the general direction of ENTO is routed through VIPPA, which essentially means if you follow the routing to the dot, it takes you past TOR VOR down to VIPPA.
Either way you have to manipulate the alternative SID offered by Simbrief in order to plan a divert to ENTO. Either with a direct route to a waypoint or airport, or vectoring by ATC. Second option is to add a STAR and approach into ENTO, which means BAMIX arrival. Then either an ILS or RNAV from there. Meaning you need can use both VIPPA or ATLAP SID out of ENGM. If so chooes VIPPA6D, you only need to remove GM607 waypoint and delete the discontinuety to route BAMIX for an arrival into ENTO.
Either way you look at it, VIPPA6D VIPPA TOR may be a mandatory suggestion, but it does not make sense to fly unless you fly VFR
This is just validation that the route waypoints and airways exist, not IFPS validation (the latter being required to be able to file a flight plan with Eurocontrol IRL).
Yes, and that is compulsory (IRL) if you are flying scheduled air service, you must file a route that goes all the way to VIPPA, this is a real-world rule (EN2057) listed in the RAD document. It is not compulsory for other flight types like General Aviation, where you may e.g. file via ATLAP instead.
No, this is not allowed. Arrivals into FARRIS_GROUP via BAMIX must file via XUKDI (rule EN5525), which is north of ENGM. Flights into FARRIS_GROUP which do not file via XUKDI are not allowed to file a route using the BAMIX arrival procedures.
The full course reversal does seem rather impractical indeed; nevertheless, this does not warrant Simbrief changing the ENGM → ENTO default routing from an IFPS-valid route to one that is not, or only valid for a subset of flights.
This is just validation that the route waypoints and airways exist, not IFPS validation (the latter being required to be able to file a flight plan with Eurocontrol IRL).
Fully understand, yet we do not file a flight plan with Eurocontrol, so that has for the sake of this disccusion nothing to do with Simbrief. Since of course this is flight simulation, we can file routes to alternate such as DCT BAMIX BAMIX2S with no issue in Simbrief. I get what Simbrief are doing here, VIPPA among a few others SIDs are the only SID’s out of ENGM that goes down towards ENTO
I see your point, don’t get me wrong.
Best option for me in case of a divert, is using C1 and set the departure from ENGM using no sid, then route a BAMIX arrival into ENTO with an ILS or RNAV approach. Thereby elimnate any VIPPA or ATLAP transition as so suggested by Simbrief.
By design, in the IFPS Zone, Simbrief will always provide an IFPS-valid route by default when one exists.
You are of course free to plan and file whatever you want, but Simbrief’s default route for a given airport pair cannot be changed to one that does not pass IFPS validation, when an IFPS-valid route exists (other than temporary event routes entered by an authorized user of an organization such as VATSIM or IVAO).
So in the case of ENGM → ENTO, VIPPA DCT TOR will/should most likely remain at the top of the list for the foreseeable future.
If you wish to plan another route, you can do so manually on your end, to whatever you like.
Yea, default It will remains everytime. My advice, simply delete it and use another more suited one. Pilots change OFP routing every day, delete routes, build new, delete waypoints, and or build complete new routes of filed plans. Simply do be more efficient, safe and practical.
