Planning IFR Flights as /U

MrPlane

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Mar 16, 2018
Messages
2
Display Name

Display name:
MrPlane
I'm sure this will be an easy question, but I'm having trouble finding a concrete answer online. I'm deep into my IR reading right now, and it seems like everything is always somewhat is reliant on GPS in terms of the real world examples I'm finding.

If I were to fly a plane that is /U or /A is there a general rule of thumb about IFR flight planning and how to choose an initial departure waypoint? It seems like a lot of flight plans I see online between two airports have an initial fix of some part of the victor airway segment (Ex: DUMMY, LOTTS, etc). If I'm without a GPS, I imagine I'm not allowed to file with these waypoints as part of the flight plan? Does that mean that I have to always file using a VOR as my first point? What if the nearest one is over 40 miles away, or maybe obstructions between?

I'm sure these questions will get answered as I get into my training, but just something that seemed obvious that I wasn't grasping.

Thanks!
 
You can file a victor airway using an intersection. You can reference ODPs and DPs which will provide guidance as well.
 
It’s been answered correctly. Now how many posts will there be giving a “more correcter” answer from the peanut gallery?

Lol, I had a similar thought when I replied. (I wonder who the first is going to be to correct me...)
 
Lol, I had a similar thought when I replied. (I wonder who the first is going to be to correct me...)
It’s usually funny to see the same thing repeated a half dozen times by the chest thumping “expurts” because no one quite has their particularly insightful understanding and ability to convey the message.
 
You can file a victor airway using an intersection. You can reference ODPs and DPs which will provide guidance as well.

I would imagine it might be kind of hard to fly "direct" to that particular point with just the use of a VOR, no? Maybe I'm over complicating it. Would you have to intercept the Victor airway at a somewhat random point (albeit close by) and then just know you're over the intersection by reference to the intersecting radial?
 
I would imagine it might be kind of hard to fly "direct" to that particular point with just the use of a VOR, no? Maybe I'm over complicating it. Would you have to intercept the Victor airway at a somewhat random point (albeit close by) and then just know you're over the intersection by reference to the intersecting radial?

Yes, ideally you'd have 2 CDIs but you would fly to the victor airway and turn towards the intersection. If you only have one CDI/VOR head you'll need to be constantly switching back and forth between the two radials. Real world IFR tho, you'd most likely get radar vectors so in practice this would be a very rare occurrence.

I fly /A quite a bit and I'm 99% of the time I'm expecting to get the following clearance: Cleared to ABC airport, Fly runway heading, expect radar vectors to join V123, WAYPT, then as filed.
 
It’s usually funny to see the same thing repeated a half dozen times by the chest thumping “expurts” because no one quite has their particularly insightful understanding and ability to convey the message.
In some cases (definitely not all) it helps understanding to say the same answer in a different way.

I guess the only real addition to @labbadabba's excellent answer is to file to a nearby VOR. Technically, direct to an intersection requires RNAV capability. Even two VORs requires homing to some degree.
 
/A has DME so you can navigate to a waypoint designated on a radial.
 
Most pilots are not aware that without being within the service volume of a ground based facility, ATC can't give you a departure clearance when outside of radar coverage if any part of the route is within controlled airspace. It can be a nearby NDB but is normally a VOR (40 NM). An exception to this rule was added for GPS, but only within the last few years. This is from FAA order 7110.65. This may cause some airports to not be able to support IFR departures for /A and /U aircraft as the VOR network gets slimmed down. /G aircraft will be OK.

4−1−1. ALTITUDE AND DISTANCE
LIMITATIONS
When specifying a route other than an established airway or route, do not exceed the limitations in the table on any portion of the route which lies within controlled airspace.
<snip>
4−1−2. EXCEPTIONS
Altitude and distance limitations need not be applied when any of the following conditions are met:
a. Routing is initiated by ATC or requested by the pilot and radar monitoring is provided.
EXCEPTION - GNSS equipped aircraft /G, /L, /S, and /V not on a random impromptu route.
<snip>
b. Operational necessity requires and approval has been obtained from the Frequency Management and Flight Inspection Offices to exceed them.
 
It's the FAA's assinine (fortunately rescinded) thing to rename SIDs and ODPs as "Departure Procedure" and hide the distinction. Fortunately they've retreated from that.
 
Most pilots are not aware that without being within the service volume of a ground based facility, ATC can't give you a departure clearance when outside of radar coverage if any part of the route is within controlled airspace. It can be a nearby NDB but is normally a VOR (40 NM). An exception to this rule was added for GPS, but only within the last few years. This is from FAA order 7110.65. This may cause some airports to not be able to support IFR departures for /A and /U aircraft as the VOR network gets slimmed down. /G aircraft will be OK.
Yah. I always thought in this case I would have my initial be a VOR, but frankly I am lucky enough to be close to a couple few active ones. Never would have thought to file airway/waypoint since I can't identify it.

Incidentally I have learned to not file a close VOR when departing in IMC (especially /G) because the initial turn low to the ground can be a disorienting ***** :)
 
It's the FAA's assinine (fortunately rescinded) thing to rename SIDs and ODPs as "Departure Procedure" and hide the distinction. Fortunately they've retreated from that.

Just don’t look up “DP” in the urban dictionary.

Or maybe someone at FAA thought it would be funny to have all the pilots asking for DP procedures.

(Shrug...?)
 
Yah. I always thought in this case I would have my initial be a VOR, but frankly I am lucky enough to be close to a couple few active ones. Never would have thought to file airway/waypoint since I can't identify it.

Incidentally I have learned to not file a close VOR when departing in IMC (especially /G) because the initial turn low to the ground can be a disorienting ***** :)
Get more altitude before turning. You aren't literally turning 'direct' as soon as you are airborne just because they said "cleared to...via direct ABC then......" are you?
 
Just don’t look up “DP” in the urban dictionary.

Or maybe someone at FAA thought it would be funny to have all the pilots asking for DP procedures.

(Shrug...?)

I can guarantee you the punchlines were flying around the table when the committees were working on this
 
Get more altitude before turning. You aren't literally turning 'direct' as soon as you are airborne just because they said "cleared to...via direct ABC then......" are you?
Instructions were to make a 200 degree turn to the left upon entering controlled airspace, which is 700' agl.
 
Instructions were to make a 200 degree turn to the left upon entering controlled airspace, which is 700' agl.

OK. That don't seem all that low. Depending on terrain and traffic you could get something like that even if the first element in your clearance wasn't a nearby VOR.
 
Back
Top