Cleared Direct Destination?

[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

 

[avbug]

I never said it was a substitute, brightspark. Read the posts again.

I did say that a pilot who says it can't be done is suffering from a competency issue. The question was one of legality, and morphed into a discussion over weather it was possible.

For those who say it isn't, it is. To say otherwise is only to expose ignorance.

 

[Sctt@NJA]

Yeah and I hope everyone is up on their celestial navigation too. I can't believe how many people can't navigate by the stars! This is a basic navigation skill. If you aren't up on it you are incompetent. And if you dissagree with me then you are ignorant!

Sorry, just having fun. Feeling devilish.

 

[Hawker rider]

I might even go as far as saying that it is a substitute allright.

It all depends on the skill of the navigator, dead reckoning is a skill, and if you have it down good, you sure can do it to some pretty good accuracy too. For one, I think it'd be a great idea that a lot of people start using D/R as a primary means of naigation and then use the gps to back up your position every now and then. If you have one KNOWN position you can very accurately depict a track.

Especially within the continental US with it's abundance of naviagational beacons all over. And it doesn't make a lot of difference if you are going 160 knots or 480 knots, in fact I'll take the 480 knots since it'll be a little easier to calculate with.

It's a very bad thing to become solely reliable on the GPS unit, I've had quite a bit of RAIM errors when I was up the last time, and then the flight still has to be completed.

Back to the original post. Yes you can legally accept it, even with a handhelp GPS, as long as you have the necessary means of navigation to get yourself direct to that fix, heck I don't think that they'll frown upon you using a sextant to get yourself there. In the old days they flew over the ocean like that, and they also didn't have 5 extra hours worth of fuel with them to figure it out either.

Now the gps can't be your primary navigational instrument in this case, but it sure helps you to confirm your fix that you made by using all other means at your disposal

LOL, the sextant thing i posted at the same time as the previous pster, thought that was funny..

 

[KingAirer]

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

I disagree. You cannot do that accurately. FOr example say your flying outbound from ABC VOR on the 123ºRadial. Lets say UGLLY instersection is 25 NM out from that VOR on that same radial. Without DME, or someother navaid that can define that INTX you cannot do it. Especially not a stopwatch. Yes you could approximate your position based on an estimated GS, but you cannot acurately define this INTX.

 

[Sctt@NJA]

Ok lets bring this back to a practical question:

If you were flying along direct to PODUNK intersection (hmm to many letters, oh well) via modern FMS and it sh!t the bed on you bringing you to /a equipment, would you.

A: Advise ATC and request vectors and/or airway type routing.

B: Advise ATC and keep trucking to PODUNK via VOR cross radial checks and DR or whatever.

C: Don't advise ATC and keep trucking to PODUNK and whatever other direct clearance they care to assign cause it easy, basic navigating .

 

[avbug]

Scott,

That is practical if you're already flying with the bells and whistles. If you have an FMS issue, then certainly advise the controller of your equipment failure (as you are required to do, and request what assistance you must. To answer your question, assuming your have experienced degraded nav capability AND it is the best choice under the circumstances, selection A: advise ATC and request alternate routing or vectors.

However, this has no bearing, nor part in the original question of the thread, which was as follows:

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

The question was simple: could he use the GPS to go direct. Yes, he could, but not as a primary means of navigation. The question then followed, what are the legal ramifications. None. He could request a radar vector, but simply put, he's still legal so long as he is able to accurately fix his position.

As he was flying IFR on something other than RNAV, he had other means to accurately fix his position. We're not talking even a need to DR here, nor did anyone (least of all myself) suggest that he should. That was never the issue.

What did become an issue was those saying that without GPS or RNAV, it couldn't be done. Why, yes it can. In this case, he has GPS, albeit not approved. Regardless, it can still be done.

If he is using victor navigation and stays within the service volume, he can use that. Celestial nav is possible (don't know about you, but I do follow stars and constellations any time I can see them at night, sextant not withstanding). DR is a possibility. A combination of timing and electronic navigation is possible. The use of radar, vectors, and position fixing by that means is possible. Any combination of these is possible.

Further, the poster stated, as quoted above, that he could continue the flight outside IFR if necessary. There was no good reason why he couldn't continue the flight using his unapproved GPS, and could easily have been legal...either IFR or VFR.

My issue comes with those who are so small minded and who have let their personal skills deteriorate so far as to think that alternate means aren't possible, or aren't safe. That is simply false; it smacks of ignorance. So I ask again, just how do you think we did it before GPS?????????

 

[prpjt]

A little off topic, but I was just wondering how many times 'atpcliff' had to circle the globe on his trip from Texas to Detroit on that 135 degree heading. Now THAT's DR.

(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.)

Just kidding.

 

[Sctt@NJA]

I know perfectly well how the original scenerio works pre-GPS. Or non- rnav. You really think everyone here is a little kid?

First off the controller wouldn't have cleared him direct to an airport with no nav aide on it. He would have either flown an ATC vector to the field or he would have flown to the nearby VOR then outbound on a radial. Or he would have flown a vector to intercept a radial. Or he would have flown on published approach feeder routes.

 

[Sctt@NJA]

And really I know I should count to ten or something, but I need to say you are one pompous and arrogant guy. You write well though.

 

[avbug]

I know perfectly well how the original scenerio works pre-GPS. Or non- rnav. You really think everyone here is a little kid? First off the controller wouldn't have cleared him direct to an airport with no nav aide on it.

WRONG! Prior to GPS, one could, and often did, file from any point, to any point...and getting direct while doing it. That includes filing to a field or point without co-located navaid equipment. That's a fact, not arrogance.

Fact is, it can still be done today. An airplane really does fly when the radio quits, or when the FMS takes a siesta. It really does.

I guess we're all fortunate old Chris Columbus made it without GPS, else we'd still be sucking down cerveza and crumpets.