MrNuke

The short answer is that it goes into an FAA computer system (various systems) for validation. So yes on a rudimentary level it has to be approved. I'm not really sure what you are asking on the last question? The aforementioned "approval" isn't clearance to actually fly yet. When you file a flight plan you list a departure time. Flight plans in the U.S. can be filed up to 24 hours in advance and are good for 2 hours after the departure time listed. About 30 minutes before your estimated time of departure the first "strip" is issued to the initial center where you'd be requesting clearance. In the case here being discussed departing Half Moon Bay, uncontrolled, you'd again call Nor Cal approach tell them who you are, where you're going, and request your IFR clearance. Assuming everything is good, they'd come back with the CRAFT. 1) Where you are cleared to. Here it would be SEEMS via the SEEMS ONE obstacle departure procedure. 2) Route: "cleared as filed" 3) Altitude: climb and maintain 3,000 expect filed altitude within 15 minutes of departure, etc. 4) Frequency: Contact Norcal Approach on 133.95 when airborne 5) Transponder Code: Squack 2254. You'd read that all back to them and they'd issue clearance. Being an uncontrolled airport adds another layer though. You need a release. Now pending weather, traffic conditions, controller load, etc. They may given you an immediate release i.e. full clearance you are good to now. That could also include Clearance void i.e. you can go now, but you need to go soon. Cleared to depart HAF, clearance void if not off within 5 minutes. They could tell you we aren't going to release you before a certain time. Lastly they could tell you to hold for release i.e. stand by we'll fit you in where we can. This is a pretty easy read that goes over most of this. https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim_html/chap5_section_2.html This is essentially what air traffic controllers are doing. The most common reason for a hold for release mentioned above would be to ensure separation of traffic. This is especially common at smaller reliever and or general aviation airports near much larger airports. The computer on a rudimentary level checks to make sure the flight plan is valid for an aircraft. Regulations and inspections ensure the aircraft has valid, functioning equipment to comply with IFR regulations. In the U.S. generally if it isn't used within 2 hours of the filed departure it is cancelled. Yes a new flight plan would be filed by and issued via ATC and disseminated to any center impacted just the same way filing an original flight would be. Any towered airport you tried to fly into in IMC. Air Traffic Control on some level via radar. You'd likely lose your license, face stiff fines, and potential jail time. Many a pilot have also inadvertently killed themselves and sadly others by doing this. This is a broad generalization but typically an ICAO flight plan is filed as well as one with the countries involved. This is also a reason why airlines have dispatchers whose purpose is to take care of this.

A tower isn't required for IFR flights to or from an airport. In real life, especially in this case the where the terrain does matter, you'd call Norcal Approach on a cell phone* to get your IFR clearance and release. Then you'd contact them on the frequency they gave you in the release once you are in the air. In this case that is likely another reason for the RNAV departure out of the water to establish altitude to get into radio and radar contact with ATC. As soon as that is established, they'd give you vectors to OSI. *The cell phone practice will vary from airport to airport. If it is expected that you'd be able to receive the frequency on the ground, you'd contact them over the radio just as you would at a towered airport.

My guess is that is probably Mount Diablo given the direction. For SQL given that is on the other side of the bay it isn't very relevant aviation wise. But again to your map question, this is an RNAV approach plate for SQL that has the terrain heights near the airport https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/2510/09219RY30.PDF And the SFO sectional that has the same for terrain and obstructions. https://skyvector.com/?ll=37.51185006382698,-122.24954223278024&chart=301&zoom=1

OSI is on the top of one of the higher "mountains" there. MSFS 2024 allows it to be picked up from the ground at Half Moon. If that isn't the case in real life you'd be picking it up really soon after takeoff. So in this case, I don't think your orignal premise really applies here. With that said... KHAF doesn't have a side, but it does have a RNAV obstacle departure off of Runway 30 that ATC will make you fly in IFR conditions, and HAF is notorious for often having fog. https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/2510/06675SEEMS.PDF So Matt, what would typically happen there if weather is bad is you'd fly that obstacle departure out over the ocean to get above the terrain and likely the fog layer and at some point, likely before Seems once you've gained sufficient altitude you'd be vectored back to OSI. The 530 absolutely picks up signals from VORs...

Yes. A VFR chart would do this. Presumably if it is that close to the airport an approach plate will as well. Much like your other thread today, knowing the airport in question would be helpful.

VFR that is fine, but is there not an established instrument procedure to get you to it? It's hard to give much more advice without knowing where you are talking about, but in real life you probably aren't directly navigating to a VOR you don't have a line of sight to. Many terrain bound airports i.e. Eagle Colorado or Jackson Hole Wyoming have VORs at the airport precisely for this reason.

What charts to do think are missing? LIDO is designed primarily for commercial aviation, so far starters, if it is an airport that doesn't see commercial aviation or very little commercial aviation LIDO probably won't cover it.

I opened mine just to check and it disappeared while I was looking. It is available in the open on their website and they appear to have moved the 777-300 over to it. Downloading it just now it recognized my 777-300 install for 2020 right away. https://pmdg.com/operations-center/

Are you not expected you cross DW990 at exactly 4,000 feet? Hence I wouldn't necessarily expect an "initial limit" your initial limit is the 4,000 foot altitude restriction. Assuming plate 10-3 is BEPAN2Q, that one you have a slightly better argument on, but even if you were told nothing you know at a minimum are probably cleared to 4,000 due to needing to be above it. I'd be more curious what BATC says after you are in the air at that point because you again have an altitude restriction at the next fix to be below 9,000 feet so you know even if you were given in initial "top" assigned altitude it isn't going to be greater than 9,000 feet. If BATC as my chart indicates tells you passing 2,000 feet to contact Dublin CTL and they tell you to climb and maintain 9,000 feet I don't see an issue here either.

The change log is for 1.38.2.0 that was released almost two months ago on October 1st.

Only overnight. It is a towered airport from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. also per the FAA on the same 126.0. @ryanbatc's KDTS is similar, that is a towered airport for most of the day from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. The simulator is treating places like these as untowered 24/7.

Like @ryanbatcsaid though any U.S. airport that has FAA charts is included as that data is available for free. That isn't LIDO. It is the FAA data. Given the proximity pull up ATL and make sure LIDO is selected and you'll see the difference between LIDO and the FAA data.

To be fair to this it has showed I've played the game 2 hours today on stream when I did a 5 minute flight and tried to reload the sim to see if I would actually get more than 5 planes. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining like some over the server stuff today, I completely get it on a launch like this, but I'd take those user stats with a grain of salt if it is counting time on a loading screen like me and a lot of others are on right now. It obviously is a fairly good representation though that a lot of people that had used it on steam are attempting/willing to switch right away though.

Yes it was a little bit of a pain to get through the EULA and xbox sign in for me at least.

Steam just dropped now.