I don’t fly in Europe. I fly in North America and usually use Simbrief to suggest routes.
I definitely agree with Simbrief not giving all routes, because they do have issues itself, as do all sites that suggest routes. Prime example is that they assume that every aircraft is RNAV capable. If someone flies /A, /W, or /Z, they don’t include any non-RNAV SIDs or STARs to use.
This is where a pilot may want to look into everything that isn’t the norm or what everyone else is doing as not only will it help in their own flightplanning skills (instead of relying on something/someone else to do that for them), but also keeps ATC’s skills sharp as well.
BL.
1 Like
Well , when I goto Simbrief I am not looking for ALL routes but just one legit one for my direction of flight. Since the CJ4 is RNAV capable it is not a problem for me if simbrief includes those.
But that is hardly the point. the point is, when there are a dozen or more SIDs for an airport there are surely more than just “the one and only agreed upon / preferred” options to legitimately depart that airport.
or maybe add the preferred SID to the Atis?
Most places do. For example, during the times required, LAX and LAS both have “NOISE ABATEMENT PROCEDURES IN EFFECT” mentioned in their respective ATIS. That should give the pilot a good indication that nighttime SIDs/STARs or those for noise abatement are going to be required, especially if they are needed for runway operations.
Also, we do go out of our way to make sure that those are mentioned on the sector website for the airport in question. Los Angeles International Airport - Los Angeles ARTCC has:
Noise Abatement Operations between midnight and 6:30 AM local time, use runway 6R for arrivals and runway 25R for departures.
Some of these are not hard to find. Can we expect something like Simbrief to know about noise abatement procedures? No, especially when those who are filing plans there or are adding them to a suggested list do not take them into effect. We’d see pilots who just look at the list, pick one, and get something like:
KLAS CRESO V538 GFS WNCHL BOGET2
when they are flying a B763… BOGET2 has a note there specifically stating “this procedure NA for turbojets landing KLAX”.
There are procedures out there to keep traffic flowing, yes, but it is also to keep traffic separated. Imagine someone, who just because their aircraft is RNAV capable, files ANJLL4 into LAX in a SH36, having to stay 5 miles behind a heavy down that arrival stream, with an A380 behind them, and that SH36’s max forward speed being 140kts. What do we do?
We put them on a separate STAR or SID to keep them out of the main turbojet arrival/departure stream. That’s why we have separate procedures, with those being preferred for jets, props, etc., and this is something that Simbrief doesn’t get right. It isn’t the fault of Simbrief, per se; but more the fault of who feeds Simbrief those routes.
BL.
1 Like
yes I am aware about the noise abatement at KLAX. But those are way past my bedtime 
I was flying the TBM930 for a while in MSFS and remember sifting thru countless SIDs and STARs going “yep right direction…nope…Turbojets only…next” it was a pain.
Then the avionics in the CJ4 improved greatly and that has been my aircraft of choice since. I have not tried simbrief with the TBM (did not know about it at the time) but when I create a flightplan, simbrief asks for aircraft type. I figured that info would be used to determine correct SIDs and STARs. Maybe I am wrong there.
IH