Which would you rather?

[ISaidRightTurns]

Thanks for all the answers. I win.

 

[Vector4fun]

Speaking of sequencing, why is it that Approach will slow you AND let you cut the corner on the arrival? Isn't that self-defeating?

Depends on the situation, if there's more coming from a different direction, puts you 3-4 miles in front, making a nice string for finals, but you'll have to slow earlier because of compression with the folks ahead. Not always the best technique, but if you don't have too many altitudes to use, then you work with what you have.

I notice some folks use a lot of vertical separation, while others play the game in a much more two dimentional manner. I use lots of vertical, but I've generally always had lots of altitudes available, and I was "raised" in a non-radar approach, where vertical is your best friend.

 

[User546]

Although you've already won the bet, I'd go with turn as well.

Much quicker, easier, and less to manage then a climb. If we really wanted to be 2 FL's higher, we'd probably already have been there by that time!

 

[91100 100 set]

Turn if it looks like a good direct clearance will be given to get us back on course.

Speaking of sequencing, why is it that Approach will slow you AND let you cut the corner on the arrival? Isn't that self-defeating?

What kind of money we are talking about? Fuel or time? I'll take a nice direct routing to the approach control gate and a reduction to some more fuel efficient speed if fuel is the issue. No sense in hauling ass all over some zig-zag arrival routing when you can get there in the same time going direct at a slower speed.