Cleared Direct Destination?

[ibaflyer]

The other day, there I was, on an IFR flight plan to OSU (Don Scott Field) for the Ohio State Game. (Another subject all together) Level, 6000' about 12NM, east of the APE VOR heading to OSU. The controller calls me up and says Lance XXXXX proceed direct OSU.

I do not have RNAV but I do have a non-IFR GPS. So, could I use the GPS and go direct? or continue to the VOR and fly the outbound heading for OSU?

Just so you are aware, at 6000' I was almost on top, in and out of the clouds. Bases were around 4500' so I did need to stay IFR to get down.

 

[OtterFO]

When I was flying with a non certified gps, and a controller cleared me direct, I'd say something like "How about a heading of xxx for vectors" the controller would almost always say something like "yeah, that looks good"

The way I chose to interprate the clearence was that I was on radar vectors.

 

[PeteCO]

Yep

Yeah, Deakin did a column on Avweb some time ago about legally flying IFR on a non-certified GPS.

Very cool - www.avweb.com

 

[KingAirer]

"In short, that handheld GPS that the FAA seems to hate so much is a very valuable tool in the cockpit, even when IFR, and should be fully used for situational awareness, and to some degree, for navigation. As with all devices, it should be cross-checked by other means. "

This is the closing line in that article. In my opinion you cannot file and use full GPS capabilities with a handheld. If you look at the last line, with only a handheld GPS, and going IFR to a destination hundreds of miles away you have no way to back it up and isnt a good idea. Otters idea is the best one.

 

[avbug]

I've flown coast to coast on a handheld GPS a number of times. Also with just a sectional, or with basic victor navigation, and even just dead reckoning. You can go direct with any of those means.

Unde IFR, you must be able to reliably fix your position. You may not have an IFR approved GPS unit, but that doesn't mean you don't have other ways to fix your position. If you can navigate by waypoints using bearing and distance from surface navaids, you can fix your position. If you can make the flight with radar guidance to fix your position, you are covered.

You cannot fly IFR using a non-approved GPS as the sole means or primary means of navigation. However, so long as you can reliably fix your position, then you may make the flight.

A more common method is to simply make the trip as a radar vector. However, you can get your heading and course information from a handheld GPS for personal planning purposes. You can then plot a series of fixes on the chart that correspond to the course (mentally, or actually jot them down) and fly point to point in this manner.

The bottom line is that you can accept the clearance so long as you can navigate there with approved means. As you will have been using most of those approved means since you were a student pilot, then there should be little issue about taking the clearance. If you aren't approved-GPS equipped, you can't accept the clearance as a GPS clearance...but then it wasn't given as one, was it?

 

[KingAirer]

How are you going to navigate off airway in a straight line with approved means IFR, without RNAV or GPS(approved)?

 

[avbug]

You're joking, right???

How do you suppose we did it BEFORE we had rnav/gps???

 

[KingAirer]

If you are in the clouds IFR, i dont see how looking at a sectional is going to work.

 

[avbug]

Actually, it would. However, we don't use sectional's for IFR, do we. Except for an excellent backup to understanding the terrain beneath you in the event of an emergnecy, generally a sectional chart isn't part of IFR navigation.

There are many other ways to reliably fix a position than using a GPS, or reading a sectional. Are you familiar with any of them?

 

[tarp]

You're joking, right???

How do you suppose we did it BEFORE we had rnav/gps???

Av,

We don't agree on much, but I am LMAO on that one.

Reminds me of a trip I did as a favor for an IFR student. Long, long X-C to mid Florida. I must have been day-dreaming because faster than I could say "No" my student accepted direct to an intersection about 140 miles away.

I laughed, teased and then laid my plotter down on the chart came up with something like a 208 heading, put my finger up in a mock where's the wind blowing from, clicked in about 12 degrees of wind correction and arrived about a quarter mile off the intersection. ATC never said boo and the student learned a lot about our old friend "Dead" and when to accept short cuts.

No one seems to know how we did that triangulate thing in our heads - you know before RNAV. Guess it was all magic, smoke and mirrors!! Still smiling - fly safe.

 

[KingAirer]

I understand that we can find out position through other means. Are you assured that your even going to be in range of other navagational aids while traveling on a direct route? No. Fixing your position and navagating are different. And by only being able to fix your position by approved methods you would be left to navigate with only the nonapproaved IFR handheld. What happens if you get a bad GPS signal? By taking this route you may not have an acceptable navagational facility in range.

VFR and Handhelds are not authorized for IFR NAVIGATION, instrument approaches, or as a Principal instrument flight reference. The may be used as an aid for situational awareness.

So again, my question, how are you going to navigate precicsely in a straight line, without GPS, with RNAV, without RADAR, in the clouds?

Look I understand how your able to work the system and follow the pink line on your handheld, but I dont think its legal or even smart. The controller doesnt care one way or the other and would love to say proceed direct and forget about you.

 

[Sctt@NJA]

Before Rnav and GPS the only "direct" was to an ndb or vor. Sure there were and are guys who would take a guess and dead reckon, but why? And I sure as heck you wouldnt do that in a non-radar , or mountainous area. The only proper response to a direct clearance that you have no approved way of navigating to is to say "unable".

I mean thats the proper response. You could use a non-ifr approved gps if you want, understanding that thats not legal.
But it is just as easy to ask for vectors, or direct to something you CAN navigate to.


tarp, I have done stuff like that too... but I knew it wasn't right and that I was cheating. The right thing to do is remind the controller of your equipment type so he can offer proper clearances to you.

 

[Vladimir Lenin]

good question

yea, they'll tell you that, and then in a second say something like "oh, you're not slant golf, ummm...continue inbound"

so, if you're in and out of clouds on a federal airway in class E, then you're in conditions below VFR mins and are on an IFR plan, thus having to abide by IFR rules. if the GPS is not authorized for IFR use, your sh!t out of luck, can't do it (legally)
but then again,if you're between VORs (assuming they're not Terminals), you still got 80NM below 18K to track outbound from one and inbound to another, change over point being halfway

 

[Northern Lights]

The right thing to do is remind the controller of your equipment type so he can offer proper clearances to you.

Reminds me of a United 727 flight from DEN-MSP a few years ago...

Being a pilot nerd I had to listen to ATC on the headphones for the whole trip. After diverting around some t-storms we ended up comming into MSP more from the NW than SW.
ATC: United 123 proceed direct to GOLFF.
Pilot: "uh, center...we're a slant jurassic here"
ATC: [laughing] "United how about heading XXX for direct the field!"

 

[avbug]

Holy cow. There can't be that many kids here that believe this garbage. Can't go direct without rnav or gps? Unbelievable.

So long as you're in the service volume of any number of combination of navaids, you can navigate with those navaids where ever you like. The distance doesn't matter. If I can get between two fixes and make it to each fix, I can do it.

If I make two fixes five miles apart, and can navigate from A to B, then I can do it. If I make five hundred fixes five miles apart, then I can do twenty five hundred miles, reliably fixing my position every step of the way.

Didja know that you must be able to do that anyway, even with the magic fix-all rnav or other means...or didja just fly around blindly following the box and not backing it up?

The only proper response to a direct clearance that you have no approved way of navigating to is to say "unable".

No! I say again, no! Not so. For someone who never knew anything else, that may be the case. However, that's a competency issue. If you truly have no way of navigating, that's one thing...but if you're saying that you can't navigate because you don't have a computer to calculate what "direct" is for you...then you're experiencing a competency crisis. A little like those that can't fly "raw data."

And I sure as heck you wouldnt do that in a non-radar , or mountainous area.

A great deal of my flying has been in non-radar environments, including much of my IFR flying...and almost all of it has been in mountainous areas. My sympathy meter doesn't run too high for that kind of sentiment. Aside from that, radar or not, one can always assure terrain separation by applying the information at hand...assuming you can read a chart. Again, a competency issue.

I'm going to assume you're thinking that you wouldn't do it because you have other means. Not that you can't. If you can't, it's a severe competency issue. If you won't, that's fine. Two different things, and I'm going to assume that it's a "won't" issue rather than a can't. If you're saying that it can't be done, you're quite wrong.

so, if you're in and out of clouds on a federal airway in class E, then you're in conditions below VFR mins and are on an IFR plan, thus having to abide by IFR rules. if the GPS is not authorized for IFR use, your sh!t out of luck, can't do it (legally)

Again, you're kidding, right? If you're on the federal airway, and have no GPS or have a GPS not authorized for IFR, then what is the big deal? Fly the airway like we always have, since long before GPS or RNAV. In fact, it's no issue at all...we're talking about direct clearances, but if you're talking direct between fixes on a published route, you had for darn sure better be able to navigate. Can't do it legally? Criminey.

So again, my question, how are you going to navigate precicsely in a straight line, without GPS, with RNAV, without RADAR, in the clouds?

Right back at ya. I've asked you several times now, and if it's not immediately apparent, then again, it's a severe competency issue. You ARE joking, right??

Are you assured that your even going to be in range of other navagational aids while traveling on a direct route? No.

Again, that comes back to the competency issue, doesn't it? (yes)

Fixing your position and navagating are different.

They are? Perhaps you don't regularly fix your position as part of normal navigation. But you really should. Your GPS does this for you. Your FMS does this for you. But you can do it too. The FMS calculates your position constantly, using many means...not just GPS...and presents them to you in a format that provides for constant corrections on course. The competency issue comes in by not being able to do this for yourself. You can, legally, and you should be able to do so. The mind-numbing awesome navigational capabilities that much of our modern hardware holds, have simply turned our mental hardware to mush, that's all.

And by only being able to fix your position by approved methods you would be left to navigate with only the nonapproaved IFR handheld. What happens if you get a bad GPS signal?

That statement makes no sense. Who cares if you get a bad GPS signal, especially if you're using other approved means to fix your position, and to navigate? Further, if one is left to fix position by approved methods, how is it that you state one is only left to navigate with the "nonapproved IFR handheld?" If one is navigating by approved methods, then one IS navigating with something other than a non-TSO'd or certificated unit. Problem solved.

Is it possible that we've created such a small "box" to think in that we can no longer access our most basic navigational skills and work outside of it? I never thought I'd hear a professional pilot say such things...but it is a new world. Good grief.

 

[KingAirer]

I think SCtt@NJ and I are thinking along the same lines. To be able to deterimine your position accurately using traditional means, other than seeing the ground, your going to need two of someting. Two VORs, VOR and NDB, VOR/DME etc... Are you sure that if you take this direct route you will have acceptable nav aids along the route? If youve done your homework ahead of time, maybe. But even then You are going to have your hands full trying to draw a stright line from point a to B with off route VORs.
You are correct that if you can determine your position then you would be legal. However, can you really be assured that you are on course at all times and on the straight line between your starting and ending point?

Good discussion guys.

 

[bigD]

Avbug, are you a ghost? Because you sound EXACTLY like my late grandfather.

When I was a student pilot, I remember sitting in my grandparents' living room reading about navigation via VOR. Gramps sat down next to me, took out a piece of paper, and drew a top down view of an airplane, an airport some distance away, and a VOR somewhere as well (but not directly between the airplane and airport).

He asked me, "Okay, tell me how you'd get to the airport if there were no landmarks on the ground to guide you." So I took a ruler and found the radial off the VOR for the airport, then told Gramps that I'd fly to the VOR, and then fly the radial from the VOR until I'm over the airport.

Now I don't remember the exact rant I received (it was 10 years ago), but Avbug's response certainly caused some deja vu! Lots of use of the words "you kids", "in my day", and something about being able to do this "all while being shot at by the Japs".

Anyway, he didn't give me the answer, but instead insisted that I stay in the living room for however long it took me to figure out how to get there in a straight line.

Heh. D*mn I miss him.

 

[avbug]

I am your grandfather. Sit up straight when I'm talking to you. In my day we didn't have computers and didn't need them. We used pen knives and carved in the palms of ourhands. And we were grateful. Sometimes we didn't have pen knives, we used broken glass, and I can tell you we were lucky to have glass. Used to be sod, instead. And we didn't have palms most of the time, because they were too scarred and bloody from working in the field. We had to scribble on goats hooves, and we were grateful for the goats. In fact, I loved those goats. Too often, some said, but I really loved those goats...

One way of thinking that's not often presented, is simply getting from A to B without all the extra gear. If you're on the 180 radial of XYZ VOR, and want to get direct to a point on the 090 radial, it's not that hard. If you're 60 miles south, and want to go direct to a fix 30 miles east, it's simple. Without even having to do a lot of math, even.

Sixty is twice as far south, as you want to go east. Pick a point on your VOR navhead that's a thumb width down from the middle part of the instrument. Set your heading in the OBS. Now pick a point that's half a thumb width to the right of the center of the instrument. Now draw a line between them. Now draw a line parallel to that, which intersects the middle of the instrument.

The number over which that line passes on the upper right hand portion of the OBS dial will be the heading to which you must turn to go direct. Problem solved.

Now wind may affect that a bit, but you can account for wind very quickly, especially when making a series of such calculations as you move along. Just like DR navigation, updating fixes continuously means that your nav should get more and more precise as you fly...and yes, you can get there from here.

If you can draw a line on a chart, and then determine that you're staying on that line by running constant checks and then making the requisite corrections, you've met the requirements of the regulation. You're running a safe ship, and it's been done for a long time.

And yes, I'm grateful.

 

[Sctt@NJA]

Ok Avbug, you go ahead and do that when you are cleared direct to white intersection coming out on the Teterboro Five departure with no rnav or gps. Ya right. Lets get real shall we?

 

[StarChecker]

I flew the TEB 5 every night for over a year, single-pilot and was cleared direct everywhere, often with two VOR's and a DME. Get your chart out, pick a heading, and wait to get yelled at. Otherwise....you're doing fine.

 

[atpcliff]

Hi!

This is easy.

You tell the controller you have a VFR GPS, and you need a vector heading direct when able.

The controller tells you, fly heading 235 degrees, direct DQN when able. You are legally flying IFR under a controller's direction, until you can receive DQN with your VOR. If you want, when you switch to a new controller, you can ask for a new heading direct.

I had a similar situation a while back. I was flying a plane WITHOUT a GPS, IFR or VFR, and we didn't have a handheld either (this was a Wright Model B that we leased-hahaha!).

We were at about 1500' MSL out of a S. TX airport (at about o'dark:30). The controller asked if we had an IFR or VFR box to go direct to Detroit. I told him we had NO box, whatsoever, but we could take a vector, direct when able.

THe controller cleared us, heading 135 degrees, direct Detroit when able-it's about 1100 miles or so. I had the maps out, and tracked our position via VORs as we went along. Every time we got a new controller, I told him we were on a vector, direct when able.

Sometimes flying a night is great!

Cliff
SDF

 

[rettofly]

To be able to deterimine your position accurately using traditional means, other than seeing the ground, your going to need two of someting. Two VORs, VOR and NDB, VOR/DME etc...QUOTE]

Really! I guess my instrument rating doesn't count, since the Cherokee 140 I used for the check ride had only ONE VOR and no ADF. The DPE had me pretty busy doing an intersection hold using only the ONE VOR on board.
BTW: This was a loooong time ago, and I have since learned to cope with using multiple navaids, even GPS and FMS.

 

[ibaflyer]

well..... thanks for the information. I have enjoyed reading all of your comments. I guess I kind of did the right thing according to some of you.

I just looked at the old low alt. chart, looked at the APE VOR and picked a heading the I thought would get me there.

I NEVER EVER..thought of looking at the GPS to give me a hand with the heading. That may have been illegal

Thanks again for all of the information.

 

[KingAirer]

To be able to deterimine your position accurately using traditional means, other than seeing the ground, your going to need two of someting. Two VORs, VOR and NDB, VOR/DME etc...QUOTE]

Really! I guess my instrument rating doesn't count, since the Cherokee 140 I used for the check ride had only ONE VOR and no ADF. The DPE had me pretty busy doing an intersection hold using only the ONE VOR on board.
BTW: This was a loooong time ago, and I have since learned to cope with using multiple navaids, even GPS and FMS.

Just curious how you defined the intersection with only one vor? Also, note that all the things i listed are navaids and not aircraft instruments.

 

[Vladimir Lenin]

Just curious how you defined the intersection with only one vor? Also, note that all the things i listed are navaids and not aircraft instruments.

alternate the navaid freqs and bearings??? it's time consuming and not the most accurate, but there's nothing in the FARs that says you have to have two VOR receivers

 

[KingAirer]

AHHHH...neither did I!

Look im saying you must be picking up 2 VORs. or 2 of something to triangulate or define your position.

 

[bigD]

Look im saying you must be picking up 2 VORs. or 2 of something to triangulate or define your position.

One VOR and a stopwatch works too. You don't need 2 VOR's, although it does make things easier.

 

[Vladimir Lenin]

AHHHH...neither did I!

Look im saying you must be picking up 2 VORs. or 2 of something to triangulate or define your position.

yea, but not necessarily at the same time

and for avbug, if everyone could navigate by dead reckoning while in clouds, we wouldn't need IFR navigation. Granted, with equip failure, it's the only way, otherwise it's just stupid. I don't know where you fly and what you fly, or whether you fly at all (having read some of your rants), but asking for a vector or declining "direct" would be the safest thing to do, IMHO

 

[Sctt@NJA]

"I flew the TEB 5 every night for over a year, single-pilot and was cleared direct everywhere, often with two VOR's and a DME. Get your chart out, pick a heading, and wait to get yelled at. Otherwise....you're doing fine."

Or you could save yourself a potential violation and remind them of your equipment type.

ATC makes mistakes. And nowadays they often assume everyone has some sort of area navigation. If you are cleared direct to some interesection and you wandered off course and they asked you what you were doing and you told them you only have 2 VORs and a DME they would say "Why didn't you say so? Fly heading XXX cleared direct XXX VOR when able"

Using Vors to do mental Rnav calculations for direct navigation (to someplace other than to or from a vor) is an oddball procedure that simply isn't necessary. Or expected by ATC. Or accurate. Or smart. By god especially if you are flying in amongst mountains. Heck they went to alot of effort to create airways that are reliable to navigate, have garaunteed radio coverage and terrain clearance ect. Why on earth would you throw that protection away?

Now all this being said, I have certainly flown direct without Rnav or gps. I have done it on small scales like the 30 miles or so between EWB and OWD where there is an ndb at OWD but you don't pick it up till about 10 miles out. Just flew a 350 heading till the NDB comes in. I have also flown from the Carolinas to the Northeast at night that way in a Cheyenne using a method like Avbug described. But we were well above any mountains and we weren't in a busy terminal area where tolerances are tight.

But really in the EWB to OWD case I should have asked for a vector and in the second case should have flown the airways, or taken a vector for direct when able to someplace up the road.

This is accepted, normal, pilot procedure stuff and I am fairly amazed at some of the opinions here

 

[Snoopy58]

Sctt@NJA,

I'll join you in amazement at some of the rants.

"XXX123, you're cleared direct PARKS"
"ah, sorry, we're slant alpha tonight"
"my bad, fly heading 080 & join the 12R localizer"

Is it POSSIBLE to fly a fix-to-fix accurately? Yeah, we did it all the time in the T-38. Is it a clever idea in a busy terminal area? Absolutely not. As winds change in the descent, you can either spend ALL your time continuously updating your track, or else you may end up flying a pretty curvy path "direct" to said fix.

As for drawing on my charts, that works a lot better when the charts don't have to last for several dozen flights in the same area before they get replaced.

In my small segment of the -121 world, we don't fly fix-to-fix in /A jets. It isn't considered a legal clearance, and I've NEVER had ATC take offence at us turning one down.

Like I said, I was pretty surprised at some of the posts here. Looks like some folks consider pilot DR an adequate substitute for an INS, and cross-tuning VOR's an adequate substitute for GPS or automatic DME/DME updates. Um, no, thanks! Not at 250+ knots!

Snoopy