Found a use for vectors to final

David Megginson said:
OBS mode in a panel-mounted GPS supports navigation to or from a waypoint. (that's the one exception to your statement that GPS is always going "to" something).
Click to expand...
The Garmins will sort of do it, albeit without a magenta line and the active waypoint will still be "to" the VOR. The Avidyne will not.
 
midlifeflyer said:
The Garmins will sort of do it, albeit without a magenta line and the active waypoint will still be "to" the VOR. The Avidyne will not.
Click to expand...
Ah, I didn't realise Avidyne's IFD series lacked that feature. Since they were designing slide-in replacements for the old Garmin GNS series, I'd assumed they'd have started with the same features.

I'll have to check next time I'm in my plane if my GTN 650 draws the magenta line right through the waypoint in OBS mode.
 
David Megginson said:
Ah, I didn't realise Avidyne's IFD series lacked that feature. Since they were designing slide-in replacements for the old Garmin GNS series, I'd assumed they'd have started with the same features.

.
Click to expand...
I don't assume two different companies will automatically approach and prioritize flight management tasks in exactly the same way. "Lack" is subjective. I'm sure there are those who chose IFDs who will be happy to point out what Garmin units "lack" (I realize you probably didn't mean it that way :D) I'm pretty sure "direct replacement" refers to ease of hardware installation, not cloning the app

Avidyne OBS mode assumes you are going somewhere via that random radial and automatically resumes automatic sequencing when you get there. Probably figures the "outbound to nowhere" scenario is not common enough to worry about.
 
Last edited:
midlifeflyer said:
Avidyne OBS mode assumes you are going somewhere via that random radial and automatically resumes automatic sequencing when you get there. Probably figures the "outbound to nowhere" scenario is not common enough to worry about.
Click to expand...
I agree it's pretty uncommon now in the RNAV world, but it didn't used to be. I often got clearances outbound via a VOR radial (off airway) back in the VOR days.
 
David Megginson said:
I agree it's pretty uncommon now in the RNAV world, but it didn't used to be. I often got clearances outbound via a VOR radial (off airway) back in the VOR days.
Click to expand...
Even back then, I don't recall a ""fly that radial outbound forever unless I tell you otherwise." it was (almost?) always "to" something. Might be until another fix (as in Russ' scenario) , to intercept an airway, etc, even if it's only "expected" at that point. Both units can do that, although "green needles" may be much easier, especially in the airway intercept scenario. (I wouldn't do that one even sitting on the ground unless, perhaps, I had a lot of time and it was a common clearance in an area where I flew often)
 
I understand the danger of flying the magenta line on approach since that hasn’t been surveyed and can lead to CFIT. However, when given enroute vector like this, you presumably would be above the MVA. So the routing is for ATC to separate you from someone or some airspace. Given that, how accurate would you need to be to get on course and simply set a heading until you could get the box programmed? I would think 3nm either side of an expected routing would be adequate and could be hand flown with a heading off or foreflight or similar until you had time to set up the box correctly? I know this isn’t considered correct but this kind of situation isn’t flying a surveyed route anyway.
 
Tokirbymd said:
I understand the danger of flying the magenta line on approach since that hasn’t been surveyed and can lead to CFIT. However, when given enroute vector like this, you presumably would be above the MVA. So the routing is for ATC to separate you from someone or some airspace. Given that, how accurate would you need to be to get on course and simply set a heading until you could get the box programmed? I would think 3nm either side of an expected routing would be adequate and could be hand flown with a heading off or foreflight or similar until you had time to set up the box correctly? I know this isn’t considered correct but this kind of situation isn’t flying a surveyed route anyway.
Click to expand...
If you need time to get the box set up, ask ATC for a vector to follow until you get the avionics set up.
 
Tokirbymd said:
I understand the danger of flying the magenta line on approach since that hasn’t been surveyed and can lead to CFIT. However, when given enroute vector like this, you presumably would be above the MVA. So the routing is for ATC to separate you from someone or some airspace. Given that, how accurate would you need to be to get on course and simply set a heading until you could get the box programmed? I would think 3nm either side of an expected routing would be adequate and could be hand flown with a heading off or foreflight or similar until you had time to set up the box correctly? I know this isn’t considered correct but this kind of situation isn’t flying a surveyed route anyway.
Click to expand...
It sounds like you are asking whether you need to be accurate when flying a heading assigned by ATC. Are you.
 
midlifeflyer said:
It sounds like you are asking whether you need to be accurate when flying a heading assigned by ATC. Are you.
Click to expand...
What I mean is if given “fly 360 intercept 090 radial from ABC to 30dme, then direct”. The 360 is a given. However if the 090 radial to a dme isn’t on an airway or a gps fix that may take a few min to program. Getting “close enough” using moving map foreflight etc for a bit on a heading then programming seems ok to me
 
Tokirbymd said:
What I mean is if given “fly 360 intercept 090 radial from ABC to 30dme, then direct”. The 360 is a given. However if the 090 radial to a dme isn’t on an airway or a gps fix that may take a few min to program. Getting “close enough” using moving map foreflight etc for a bit on a heading then programming seems ok to me
Click to expand...
The heading is the heading is the heading. You should have more than enough time between receiving the vector and the radial to tune the VOR or program the GPS (assuming that course was not part of your clearance to begin with). Things just don't happen that fast. ATC is used to giving those instruction to pretty fast aircraft.

Foreflight? Sure. It's a chart so I would definitely take a quick look to get an idea where that radial is in relation to me and to confirm the VOR ID and frequency, but beyond that, I wouldn't waste the time I could be using to set up the certified boxes.

In terms of doing it with a GPS, we're talking less than a minute if you know how. Maybe half that to do it old school - tune the VOR and twist the dual. Pretty basic task. I can't even count the number of times I was given an instruction to intercept a radial when I was training. But if you don't know how, even an hour wont be enough.

edit. I need to add this. If the time is too short to set it up, new school or old, speak up. "We need time to set up. Can you turn us on to the airway?" only takes a few extra seconds, avoids a potential deviation and is a better choice than visually winging it with your EFB.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top