Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By AndyR
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1909102
In my case [usermention=7864]@Tim Dawson[/usermention] , I do the same thing over and over again. So the not working part is between hitting send and being met by Border Force maybe late the following day.

Not that mine are generally via SD.
#1909107
Tim Dawson wrote:

> Saying things “don’t work” isn’t really helpful because nobody involved at
> any stage knows what you’ve done or haven’t done.

[usermention=7864]@Tim Dawson[/usermention]

I have always used SD for GAR filing and never had an issue, ever.

Saturday night, from a hotel room in France on their WiFi and my tablet I did. I can't recall the exact wording of the fail notice, but I saw it three or four times and it had some mention of an issue with your server. This prompted me to try the government online system with the failure mention above, my names not being valid.

I reverted to SD successfully. Received an acknowledgement that I screenshotted. It was this image I was able to show the BF ladies. It was undeniable that I had done all that was required. They did claim that the outbound (Friday) one hadn't reached them. This would be the first time I have ever filed a GAR outbound.

I have no problem with the SD system and will continue to use it. After all it recognises Tibenham (though defaults to Priory Farm every time). On the govt site that is now my contingency, I have to enter a 12 figure map reference. See my OP.

Rob P
User avatar
By skydriller
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1909112
Rob P wrote:
> Tim Dawson wrote:
>
> > Saying things “don’t work” isn’t really helpful because nobody involved at
> > any stage knows what you’ve done or haven’t done.
>
> [usermention=7864]@Tim Dawson[/usermention]
>
> I have always used SD for GAR filing and never had an issue, ever.
>
> Saturday night, from a hotel room in France on their WiFi and my tablet I did. I
> can't recall the exact wording of the fail notice, but I saw it three or four times
> and it had some mention of an issue with your server. This prompted me to try the
> government online system

This is exactly what happened when I tried to use SD for online GAR. I just shrugged and moved on to using the BF/govt site. I have no idea if I screwed up or something else happened, I still think SD is the Dees Bees....

Regards SD..
User avatar
By Sir Morley Steven
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1909119
Earlier this year I used auto router to plan and file my IFR trip from Rodez, France to Blackbushe. Usually there is no problem, it does everything apart from pay for the avgas.
This time I was asked by the tower to call borderforce when I got back. Apparently they hadn’t received a return GAR at all.
I eventually spoke to a chap there who was sniffy about auto router and asked for evidence that they had filed the GAR for me, which I emailed them.
#1909122
Deffo a problem within Border Force. Their failure to receive proper notification at the sharp end does not depend on the method of sending. And yet they know there is a flight........just don’t have any details. When I have asked how they know there is a flight they cite “GATE”, which I assume is some sort of internal system.
Our local lot at Staverton (Bristol office) have given me an email for their duty officer, so we copy our NCU email to them.......and still they seem not to get full details.
There is a lot of experience, in systems and aviation, on here and I beleieve they have had several offers of help in testing and/or setup. None appear to have been accepted.
User avatar
By Sir Morley Steven
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1909123
Last year there was a NOTAM that along with all the other gubbins you have to send an “enhanced. Declaration” and gave an email address. After much telephoning I was told it was the old gendec with a new field saying I didn’t have covid. The email address on the NOTAM was incorrect as every time I sent one of the things it came back undelivered.
Well I kept my end of the bargain!
#1909124
That's pretty much my feelings after this debacle. I'll keep sending the GAR off the convenient SD platform and saving the submission receipt to show the officers who trek down to Tibenham (or 52.2722 00.1092 as they prefer it to be known) when their end fumbles the information supplied.

There's nothing so pressing in my life that I can't afford a few extra minutes on the airfield while they check out my holiday laundry

Rob P
#1909136
I, and 2 companions on their aircraft, returned from France 10 days ago; we all filed GARs via SD, and all appeared to work well. We each received emailed confirmations.

All 3 of us were called the following day by BF to request the details of the flights; claiming a problem with SD. I forwarded the email confirmation that I had received and they were happy. I’m unconvinced that it was a fault with SD, as I struggle to believe that SD generates the receipt and manifest number.

My return flight was also delayed, requiring a new GAR. Due to my need to cancel my scheduled arrival 15mins before my ETA, I called BF to inform them and cancel the first GAR; they had zero interest. I will continue to jump through the hoops, but have as much concern for the system as they appear to; as long as I can demonstrate compliance, the rest is up to them.
Rob P liked this
#1909145
My limited experience of the various systems has shown no problems when using ICAO codes, but some problems when using other details - postcode, co-ordinates etc.
Speaking to a BF officer a few years ago at an event at Duxford, I was told that those with ICAO codes are automatically assigned to a team, whereas the other ones need to be manually allocated and this is not always done in time.
I think the systems work, but maybe the back end process needs improvement?
Rob P liked this
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1909146
skydriller wrote:
> Exactly. But at least the UK has a GAR system.
>
> France, and most of the EU, has the requirement to use a designated
> Customs/Immigration airport... :|

When I read about this new electronic fangled thing they're introducing, I did wonder if that would provide an opportunity to move to a more GAR type system for France and other countries. It would be quite nice if that were the case.
User avatar
By skydriller
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1909155
Paul_Sengupta wrote:
> When I read about this new electronic fangled thing they're introducing, I did wonder
> if that would provide an opportunity to move to a more GAR type system for France
> and other countries. It would be quite nice if that were the case.

I also thought about that, but it doesnt seem to be the case, unfortunately, from what I have so far read about it, though I may have missed something.

Regards, SD..