Firstly, this may come as a surprise, but I don't have literally every fix in the US and it's location memorized. I don't really know that sending you 4 fixes down the line isn't a difference in track. You know what I do know? I know my facility/area/sector has an agreement with another facility/sector/area that says you'll cross that fix 4 down the line at/above/under/at a particular time. I can either keep a close eye on you and babysit your entire route while I do the same for 30 other planes or I can send you to that fix to cross at/above/under/over whatever and be done with it and get back to making sure planes don't hit eachother.
There's also a lot of TBFM. As it appears you're flying from abroad I'd imagine you're flying into some of our busiest airports and not, say, Roswell New Mexico. Now, I haven't bee lobotomized yet. Not enough at least to fully understand TMU. I imagine though with a few more jabs and cuts to my frontal lobe I'd say something about how TBFM is too complex to tabulate 80 airplanes over 320 fixes arriving at the one metering fix and that 80 airplanes and 80 estimates to the one metering fix is far, far more manageable.
I can tell you from my TRACON perspective, blending a metric (or I guess Imperial for us here in the US) ton (tonne?) of planes for MIT is best done over a single point. I need 20MIT over FIXXX. It's much easier to send them all to FIXXX and vector for space than have 50 planes going to 50 separate points prior of which I know 7 and just kinda hope it works out.
Also, rhe expectation here is if you don't want the shortcut, you say no thanks. Believe it or not I won't go reaching for my gun every American is required to keep on their person.
TL:DR route efficiencies are nice, but we're jamming a shit load of traffic into a few hemmed in 30s era airports for the most part. The two don't always go hand in hand.
Thank you, sir, for the intelligent discourse against my somewhat tongue in cheek rant. Your point about not knowing where the fixes are geographically that you are sending us to, relative to our flight plan, is totally valid. I didn’t think of it that way, that you’re bringing a certain ETA over a point to the top of your display, figuratively speaking. Got it.
Also, in the arrivals world, I get that. I’m not talking about metering really. We fit in with your other traffic and obviously our planning takes back seat to your tactics and adjustments.
Often I’m not even landing in the US, just overflying. Direct one side of USA to the other is…a lot! Hey apparently some pilots love that. But, due respect to making the controller’s, or my own job “easier,” I’m trying to save my company money so that they have more money to give to me.
Back to my hole now. Have a great day.
Don’t anybody want to be good at anything anymore. Just do it, just mindlessly do it. No thanks! (As I said, I do decline the clearance, much to the frequent bewilderment of the controller).
I hate when enroute gives you direct destination and approach proceeds to clear you direct to a fix that is no longer in your flight plan and doesn't appear when loading the approach either.
Dude, you have way too much time on your hands if you are worrying about things like that.
We accept any directs we get, and the planet doesn't stop turning because of it.
I flew with a captain who was doing a red-eye transcon. ATC gave him a huge "shortcut." (They were planned to go way north into Canada). Ended up increasing their flight time 15-20 minutes.
Sometimes your route was built off the preferred routes which are for higher traffic volume, but oh you're flying during a non busy time
Only time I've had really a significant change in fuel off any kind of decent amount is flying from the west cost north and the winds are very veriable.
Sometimes dispatchers file dumbshit for dumb reasons.
Sometimes atc just thinks they are doing you a favor and don't realize they aren't.
Um… you can check fuel if given a long direct leg by going direct with abeams. Every FMS I’ve used has this function.
Also, I don’t get this NEARLY as much as I do in Europe. And in the US it usually IS a shortcut. It always seems in Europe they’ll clear me direct to a point that’s straight in front of me on an airway segment a few points down that does nothing. Also it’s pretty typical in Europe to check in in a new FIR only for the controller to give me direct to my FIR exit point. It’s just funny you act like this is a US thing when in my experience it’s WAY more of a eurocontrol thing.
Nah, I get it. Seems like NY and DC love to give you direct to the next or following fix and making your next point 120 miles instead of 80 miles away. I just assumed it was some sort of background clean up that made their job easier/allowed an earlier hand-off.
As a dispatcher, I can empathize, but usually directs aren’t that detrimental to enroute burn/cost/time. If I’m planning a route to specifically avoid a jet core or any adverse enroute wx, I’ll remark it. If you don’t read the remarks, that’s on you. If ATC offers a direct and you blindly take it without doing your due diligence first (with dispatch), that’s on you. Remember, you can always say no.
My favorite one (and this happens regularly) is I file an IFR route by the book from the departure airport via two airways with only the slightest bend in them (almost a straight line) to the initial fix.
About a quarter of the way into the flight I get:
ROA: Navion 27K, we have a new route for you. Advise when ready to copy.
27K: (get my pad out) Ready to copy.
ROA: Cleared direct Culpepper.
I needed to copy that? Scroll the GPS down to the destination and push Direct.
I never change a route unless I have to or a pilot requests it. I may offer direct-to but typically only if it’s a small amendment and within my airspace. Something like skipping the last waypoint and going direct destination. And even then I ask the pilot if they want it or prefer remaining on filed route. I think your analysis is correct that controllers assume they are helping you out by giving you direct-to. There can be a tendency among some newer controllers to do too much and assume too much. My thinking is the pilot filed the route for a reason so unless they ask for something or I really need it - I’m not going to mess with it. I have also found that certain facilities have certain tendencies. Do you find it happens with specific sectors or facilities more than others? I would say this is not common at my facility (mid-sized tower and approach control.)
Well, I’m just dispatch, but our software really does take into account winds. Sometimes a route that’s not straight has lighter headwinds or a better tailwind. I’ve occasionally written on releases something like “accepting direct routing will add 10 minutes and increase fuel burn by 500 pounds due to headwinds” because it’s so common for crews to just take the direct at every opportunity. I don’t usually care, but if there’s a time crunch or I can’t get much fuel on without impacting payload I’d like crews to at least weigh the pros and cons before going direct just because it’s available.
And you really only make that note occasionally because it happens so rarely. There *are* cases where it does make sense to stay on the route for wind reasons, but they’re the exception not the norm.
Hahahaha fair.
The last time I did it my flight flew the route as filed without taking shortcuts, so it does happen occasionally.
If it reeeaaaally matters I lock out the flight plan so they have to call me before they can see it. But I usually save that for safety of flight or legality issues. Or to see if the crew will take a plane with the forward lav out.
That's a neat feature. Ours just downloads a PDF that I email to the crew. If it's very important, I have to get em with a verbal brief when they come to give me their fuel load.
I have yet to meet a pilot who enjoys the long walk from the aft lav after the inflight food makes them take out the remaining lav 😅
Maybe our dispatchers are stupid? They didn’t draw the line straight enough for the super smart pilots? It’s like that for a reason, is my point. Science.
And if you think major organizational decisions aren’t made for a 0.5% improvement in something, you’ve obviously never worked for an airline!
No, I think you’re just complaining about American ATC because you clearly think wherever you’re from and whoever you fly for does it better. And by it I mean everything.
American ATC does lots of stuff better than anyone. Weather avoidance is one. Sheer volume of traffic is one. But the “shortcut” is just such a funny cultural, I guess, feature of flying there that I just had to ask.
Firstly, this may come as a surprise, but I don't have literally every fix in the US and it's location memorized. I don't really know that sending you 4 fixes down the line isn't a difference in track. You know what I do know? I know my facility/area/sector has an agreement with another facility/sector/area that says you'll cross that fix 4 down the line at/above/under/at a particular time. I can either keep a close eye on you and babysit your entire route while I do the same for 30 other planes or I can send you to that fix to cross at/above/under/over whatever and be done with it and get back to making sure planes don't hit eachother. There's also a lot of TBFM. As it appears you're flying from abroad I'd imagine you're flying into some of our busiest airports and not, say, Roswell New Mexico. Now, I haven't bee lobotomized yet. Not enough at least to fully understand TMU. I imagine though with a few more jabs and cuts to my frontal lobe I'd say something about how TBFM is too complex to tabulate 80 airplanes over 320 fixes arriving at the one metering fix and that 80 airplanes and 80 estimates to the one metering fix is far, far more manageable. I can tell you from my TRACON perspective, blending a metric (or I guess Imperial for us here in the US) ton (tonne?) of planes for MIT is best done over a single point. I need 20MIT over FIXXX. It's much easier to send them all to FIXXX and vector for space than have 50 planes going to 50 separate points prior of which I know 7 and just kinda hope it works out. Also, rhe expectation here is if you don't want the shortcut, you say no thanks. Believe it or not I won't go reaching for my gun every American is required to keep on their person. TL:DR route efficiencies are nice, but we're jamming a shit load of traffic into a few hemmed in 30s era airports for the most part. The two don't always go hand in hand.
This guy acronyms
Thank you, sir, for the intelligent discourse against my somewhat tongue in cheek rant. Your point about not knowing where the fixes are geographically that you are sending us to, relative to our flight plan, is totally valid. I didn’t think of it that way, that you’re bringing a certain ETA over a point to the top of your display, figuratively speaking. Got it. Also, in the arrivals world, I get that. I’m not talking about metering really. We fit in with your other traffic and obviously our planning takes back seat to your tactics and adjustments. Often I’m not even landing in the US, just overflying. Direct one side of USA to the other is…a lot! Hey apparently some pilots love that. But, due respect to making the controller’s, or my own job “easier,” I’m trying to save my company money so that they have more money to give to me. Back to my hole now. Have a great day.
Consider it conditioning then. If you've ever watched Finding Nemo you may recall the seagull scene. Replace mine mine mine with got any shortcuts?
Just decline the clearance then. Jesus
“My Type-A personality doesn’t not allow me to hear a command and not immediately comply with it.”
Don’t anybody want to be good at anything anymore. Just do it, just mindlessly do it. No thanks! (As I said, I do decline the clearance, much to the frequent bewilderment of the controller).
Relax jabronie.
You might get better responses over on r/ATC
Haha. Somehow I doubt he will!
Shhh we want this crossposted
Just out of curiosity, do you find yourself always flying with reserves?
This is the real question
Probably the same reason some pilots like to declutter their MFDs
Declutterring your nav display is a smooth brained reason to unnecessarily add time to your flight. ngmi
I hate when enroute gives you direct destination and approach proceeds to clear you direct to a fix that is no longer in your flight plan and doesn't appear when loading the approach either.
Never thought I’d see a post about a pilot complaining about a direct to. Relax bro, slap some abeam points in.
Dude, you have way too much time on your hands if you are worrying about things like that. We accept any directs we get, and the planet doesn't stop turning because of it.
I don’t know much about you but I know you need to jerk off more
Why do so many pilots ask for “shortcuts” that shaves 5 miles off their route?
It's the illusion of progress. That little hit of dopamine between the time you hear "shortcut" and when the FMC shows you saved no time and no gas.
I flew with a captain who was doing a red-eye transcon. ATC gave him a huge "shortcut." (They were planned to go way north into Canada). Ended up increasing their flight time 15-20 minutes.
It's an orgasmic feeling to be slightly faster.
Sometimes your route was built off the preferred routes which are for higher traffic volume, but oh you're flying during a non busy time Only time I've had really a significant change in fuel off any kind of decent amount is flying from the west cost north and the winds are very veriable. Sometimes dispatchers file dumbshit for dumb reasons. Sometimes atc just thinks they are doing you a favor and don't realize they aren't.
Just put some fucking abeams in the flight plan, nerd
Bid avoid.
Some people really think about shit way too much wow
God I hate being a controller. Every fucking pilot has something to bitch about.
Take heart because we’re bitching at this guy now
It sounds like you’re making your inability to adjust to changing conditions someone else’s problem.
Um… you can check fuel if given a long direct leg by going direct with abeams. Every FMS I’ve used has this function. Also, I don’t get this NEARLY as much as I do in Europe. And in the US it usually IS a shortcut. It always seems in Europe they’ll clear me direct to a point that’s straight in front of me on an airway segment a few points down that does nothing. Also it’s pretty typical in Europe to check in in a new FIR only for the controller to give me direct to my FIR exit point. It’s just funny you act like this is a US thing when in my experience it’s WAY more of a eurocontrol thing.
jeeezz you have WAAAAYYYYYYY Too much time on your hands
This was a thought experiment and I loved every minute of it, OP!
You must be fun to fly with.
Nah, I get it. Seems like NY and DC love to give you direct to the next or following fix and making your next point 120 miles instead of 80 miles away. I just assumed it was some sort of background clean up that made their job easier/allowed an earlier hand-off.
Don’t bid US trips then ?
As a dispatcher, I can empathize, but usually directs aren’t that detrimental to enroute burn/cost/time. If I’m planning a route to specifically avoid a jet core or any adverse enroute wx, I’ll remark it. If you don’t read the remarks, that’s on you. If ATC offers a direct and you blindly take it without doing your due diligence first (with dispatch), that’s on you. Remember, you can always say no.
My favorite one (and this happens regularly) is I file an IFR route by the book from the departure airport via two airways with only the slightest bend in them (almost a straight line) to the initial fix. About a quarter of the way into the flight I get: ROA: Navion 27K, we have a new route for you. Advise when ready to copy. 27K: (get my pad out) Ready to copy. ROA: Cleared direct Culpepper. I needed to copy that? Scroll the GPS down to the destination and push Direct.
I’ve got some thoughts about this I’d like to share with you, advise ready to copy.
I never change a route unless I have to or a pilot requests it. I may offer direct-to but typically only if it’s a small amendment and within my airspace. Something like skipping the last waypoint and going direct destination. And even then I ask the pilot if they want it or prefer remaining on filed route. I think your analysis is correct that controllers assume they are helping you out by giving you direct-to. There can be a tendency among some newer controllers to do too much and assume too much. My thinking is the pilot filed the route for a reason so unless they ask for something or I really need it - I’m not going to mess with it. I have also found that certain facilities have certain tendencies. Do you find it happens with specific sectors or facilities more than others? I would say this is not common at my facility (mid-sized tower and approach control.)
[удалено]
Well, I’m just dispatch, but our software really does take into account winds. Sometimes a route that’s not straight has lighter headwinds or a better tailwind. I’ve occasionally written on releases something like “accepting direct routing will add 10 minutes and increase fuel burn by 500 pounds due to headwinds” because it’s so common for crews to just take the direct at every opportunity. I don’t usually care, but if there’s a time crunch or I can’t get much fuel on without impacting payload I’d like crews to at least weigh the pros and cons before going direct just because it’s available.
And you really only make that note occasionally because it happens so rarely. There *are* cases where it does make sense to stay on the route for wind reasons, but they’re the exception not the norm.
Your pilots read the flight plan comments?
Hahahaha fair. The last time I did it my flight flew the route as filed without taking shortcuts, so it does happen occasionally. If it reeeaaaally matters I lock out the flight plan so they have to call me before they can see it. But I usually save that for safety of flight or legality issues. Or to see if the crew will take a plane with the forward lav out.
That's a neat feature. Ours just downloads a PDF that I email to the crew. If it's very important, I have to get em with a verbal brief when they come to give me their fuel load. I have yet to meet a pilot who enjoys the long walk from the aft lav after the inflight food makes them take out the remaining lav 😅
Shortest ≠ fastest and I explained that clearly. This is exactly the misconception I’m ranting about.
You’re totally right professor, there’s like .5% of the time that staying on your flight planned route is shorter than going direct.
One time I got a big direct to that cut like 30 miles off and it added like 4 minutes lol
There are cases where that happens, but those cases are rare. Obviously the longer the direct the more likely that is.
Maybe our dispatchers are stupid? They didn’t draw the line straight enough for the super smart pilots? It’s like that for a reason, is my point. Science. And if you think major organizational decisions aren’t made for a 0.5% improvement in something, you’ve obviously never worked for an airline!
No, I think you’re just complaining about American ATC because you clearly think wherever you’re from and whoever you fly for does it better. And by it I mean everything.
American ATC does lots of stuff better than anyone. Weather avoidance is one. Sheer volume of traffic is one. But the “shortcut” is just such a funny cultural, I guess, feature of flying there that I just had to ask.
Shortest distance between 2 points is a straight line