Today on VATSIM, this happened to me while I was arriving to EKCH, but I can’t understand where I went wrong. I just would like to follow the correct procedures without bothering the controllers and others…
There was only the approach controller, and on the first contact, he just told me “expect radar vectors” for the ILS22L, to descent etc, without giving me a clearance for a specific STAR. I understood this as “maintain the same heading until I give you further instructions”.
After about 10 minutes, he contacted me saying that I wasn’t following the STAR. Now, how do I know which STAR I have been cleared to? Does flying over the first waypoint of the STAR (which was the last viewpoint of my flight plane) automatically authorize me to follow that STAR withouth any clearance?
Expect vectors does not mean to keep the current heading, it is only information for planning.
If a controller wants you to keep present heading it would need to be via an explicit instruction. I don’t know ekch’s procedures but if you were already on the star when entering the airspace of the approach controller, he would just expect you to continue on the star that you are already on and otherwhise if in doubt just ask.
Here it gets a bit tricky. In some countries, you need to file your STAR (I don’t remember if this applies to Denmark) and in that case, you are expected to follow the STAR until the charted clearance limit. Now, even IRL, the fact that some countries require you to file a STAR and others don’t means that most pilots will ask ATC to confirm the STAR/transition they are expected to fly before reaching the last waypoint along their route regardless of the country they fly in and vice versa, ATC will normally still give a specific clearance for that STAR/transition.
But this brings us to the second problem: while many STARs/transitions here in Europe only begin within the TMA and are thus usually cleared by APP, it is also not uncommon for them to begin outside of the TMA in which case they are cleared by ACC (just look at the US where some STARs can begin hundreds of miles from your destination); however, on VATSIM, not all of these positions are always staffed which can of course be particularly problematic when the procedures are runway-/flow-/mode-dependent, which is one of the reasons why you may see controllers in some places send you contact mes way before you reach their airspace or send you conditional contact mes early on telling you which STAR/transition to fly and/or when exactly to call them - but if you are not given any further information/clearance by ATC in that regard, you can usually assume that what you are currently flying is fine (though, as Louis says: best practice would definitely be to ask ATC to confirm that whichever STAR/transition you are flying is fine with them).
Pilot pre-files a route including STAR. Pilot follows pre-filed route.
Pilot enters a controllers area.
A. Unless ATC notifies changes, pilot continues as pre-filed including the published STAR (if included in prefile)
B. If ATC requires changes to the pre-filed route they will state like “From XXXXX, cleared the ABCD1B, Desend via the STAR, expect radar vectors for ILS xx.”
Effectively what you have pre-filed is your cleared route and without changes from ATC is what you should navigate. If I am given “expect radar vectors” or “expect the ils rwy xx” I continue on my prefiled route to the last point. IF ATC wants me to alter the pre-filed they WILL state the change clearly. Anything else is added to the end of your prefiled route.
No, in Denmark the STAR/SID is NOT prefiled, but given by atc. You should have been given a clearence for the STAR and if you didn’t it is an error on the atc side. “Expect vectors” means exactly that - it is not a clearence to fly a certain heading. I sat as EKCH_K_DEP, so I was’t part of the arrival team tonight, but EKDK_CTR usually tells you to “expect NNN arrival” and the next controller (EKDK_E_CTR or EKDK_B_CTR who were online tonight) gives you the arrival clearence, e.g. “Rednose 111 clearend inbound Copenhagen on the TUDLO3A arrival, descend to FL120”. When handed over to Approach, EKCH_W_APP (or EKCH_O_APP) will say “Rednose 111 identified FL120. Expect vectors (for runway 04L)”. But he still expects you to continue on the star until told otherwise.
If you logged on before the event start at 1700z and have entered the Approach controllers area, he might have seen you were already on the STAR and felt he didn’t need to clear you onto an approach you were already flying. I do not know if this was the case, but you can alway leave a comment on the VATSCA homepage or discord. We can always improove, atc as well as pilots.
SITUATION: There will always be many occasions where a pilot has no interaction with a controller over their entire route. There are many areas where the policy for controlling is that they issue the STAR/SID. There are just as many areas that the policy is that the ATC don’t issue SID/STAR.
OPERATION: I always try and file SID/rwy ROUTE STAR/rwy before I take off. I believe that this covers every situation because it shows that unless it changes that is what I’m doing. IF ATC get involved they can issue anything they want, and amend the FP, and the pilot must follow it. I believe that if I include it in my FP it is a request all the time even the route is a request at the time a ATC comes into the picture.
BELIEF: If I have filed SID ROUTE STAR and I enter a controllers AOR, then I am presumed to be cleared the filed plan UNLESS the ATC states otherwise.
I think that’s a very sensible approach as long as you make sure that the SID/STAR are actually filed (SimBrief, e.g., will add them to your OFP but if a given country doesn’t require them to be filed, it will not add them to the VATSIM flight plan) and - of course - file something sensible (i.e. don’t file stuff that is by ATC only and check if there are maybe some published assignment rules if you have multiple options to choose from).
I fly EKCH at least twice a week so got quite used to the excellent ATC controllers. For 22L arrivals the A_Atis in most cases specifies you should expect or use the C STAR. This is the STAR that starts with what normally is your last waypoint, followed by C at the end i.e. ERNOV2C, TESPI3C, TIDVU2C, MONAK3C, TUDLO3C. Hence the ATC controller does not have to specify the STAR, you should already know it. And if you filed a non “C” STAR, you should adapt your FMC to the “C” STAR. When the other runways are in use I mostly get the STAR from the center, and if no center, from approach. Or they may just state they will vector, which means they should give you a vector BEFORE you pass the last waypoint on your flightplan. On the other hand it is good practice to plan your “logical” STAR in the flightplan - Simbrief will in most cases suggest a STAR. Note that your last waypoint, in combination with the active runway for arrivals, will for many airports already define your STAR (i.e. you will only see one choice that starts with your waypoint). For EKCH, the A’s are for 04L, the B’s for 12, the C’s for 22L, the D’s for 30. Before your flight you should always get a good feeling of this STAR situation of your arrival airport. It is easiest with NAVIGRAPH, but you find reasonably decent charts also for free (these are of course somewhat outdated). Hope this helps, Raf
Just to clarify: my concern is not directed at the controller, which was undoubtedly excellent. In fact, I started from the premise that I was not very familiar with this procedure (e.g. automatic clearence for a STAR) and I don’t know where I went wrong.
Absolutely, I confirm everything you said. My last viewpoint was TESPI (but no STAR was filed), and according to the flight plan (by navigraph), I should have taken a TESPI3C for the 22L (the ‘C’ STAR requested from the ATIS). I have no problem understanding the STARs and what is (or was) required by the ATIS, but I just expected a clearance. It has happened to me before (no in EKCH) that the STAR was different from the one established at the last viewpoint, so I assume it could always change. I didn’t know that in this situation my STAR was automatically define and authorized. Thanks for the help!
Yesterday, Rwy 04L/R was in use during the evening, so a TESPI3A is used. No star filed is what is used in Denmark, so that’s fine. The situation as I understand it is, that no center controller was online at the time. In EKCH it is the center controller, which gives you inbound clearence, as it is him, who is in charge of the holds, if they are used (they are positioned outside the APP controllers area).
So when you come from uncontrolled airspace and get in touch with the APP controller, he’ll usually give you the STAR clearence, but if you’re well inside his area, when he logs on, he might no give you a clearence, as you are already (presumably) flying on a STAR.
These things happens, when the real word and VATSIM are not in sync (no 24h coverage) and are usually no big deal, but obviously atc got a bit surprised, when you started flying vectors (?), when he said “expect vectors”.
Lesson to be learned: Be alert to the fraseology, know its meaning and always ask when in doubt, before doing some action.
Hopefully we’ll see you many more times in Danish airspace.
Yesterday afternoon RWY 22L was in use, so the TESPI3C was correct. The controller was online for a while. Yes, usually, I expect a STAR (at least that’s always been the case) from APP if the center is not online. All this made me think about what I explained above.
He was surprised when I started flying vectors, and I was surprised that I had to follow a STAR without having a clearence for a STAR
Actually, I had no doubts until he told me I was making a mistake, but I understand my error now!
).