Bye bye VOR Airway Nav

[roncachamp]

I would define a GPS IFR routing as a routing which requires RNAV to accomplish. It certainly seems like a GPS DIRECT off-airway route between two fixes would qualify.

When you receive such a clearance, does the controller say "GPS direct", or just "direct"?

There is nothing to indicate to me as the pilot that there is no radar coverage on a portion of that route. Since there is nothing to indicate it I file direct. I'm cleared direct. At some point I drop off radar and that is how they choose to handle it. It seems like radar coverage is particurally weak around Pocahontas. I'd guess there is at least 20 miles of no coverage - maybe even more like 40.

I've found radar coverage to be particularly weak in the northwest Iowa area. There are certainly aircraft flying off-airway via RNAV outside of radar coverage from time to time in this region.

Back to my original question, what is the source?

The source is Order JO 7110.65T Air Traffic Control, see paras 4-1-1 and 4-1-2.

 

[gismo]

The problem is these systems are just too **** expensive. It's simply not worth it for an airplane that's worth less than $30,000.

VOR+DME was and is more expensive than IFR GPS if you buy new, the primary cost disadvantage of IFR GPS is the recurring DB expense.

ADS-B out, with the GPS requirement. Wait until the requirement comes out for the digital comm radios. What's the expected life of these new products? Will any of them actually last anywhere near as long as the stuff they are replacing?

Except for infant mortality they should have greater MTBF than the old stuff.

 

[Bob Noel]

VOR+DME was and is more expensive than IFR GPS if you buy new, the primary cost disadvantage of IFR GPS is the recurring DB expense.

How much is the installed cost of an IFR-certified WAAS GPS?

 

[jesse]

When you receive such a clearance, does the controller say "GPS direct", or just "direct"?

Cleared direct. But they know there is only one way I'm going to accomplish that. They also know that they have aircraft dropping off radar in those areas. They also seem to have a way for handling that.

That is why I was saying it seems as though in the real world there are plenty of controllers clearing aircraft off-airway direct knowing the GPS is how they'll do it in non-radar areas.

 

[Fearless Tower]

VOR+DME was and is more expensive than IFR GPS if you buy new, the primary cost disadvantage of IFR GPS is the recurring DB expense.

Except we are not talking about taking VFR only planes and making them IFR capable. We are talking about a very large portion of the GA fleet that is already IFR capable with VOR/DME and suddenly preventing it from using the system.

 

[roncachamp]

Cleared direct. But they know there is only one way I'm going to accomplish that.

Because GPS is the only means of off-airways navigation beyond navaid usable limits?

They also know that they have aircraft dropping off radar in those areas. They also seem to have a way for handling that.

That is why I was saying it seems as though in the real world there are plenty of controllers clearing aircraft off-airway direct knowing the GPS is how they'll do it in non-radar areas.

What's to handle? When the aircraft drop off radar they're not being provided services IAW required procedures.

 

[jesse]

Because GPS is the only means of off-airways navigation beyond navaid usable limits?

It's the only means that I have available in the aircraft, and the only means the vast majority of all light single engine aircraft have when filing /G. If you're hoping that most BE33/G's are running around with a different kind of RNAV you'll be disappointed. .

What's to handle? When the aircraft drop off radar they're not being provided services IAW required procedures.

Must you try to run people in circles so much? I was originally responding to a post where someone said ATC would not clear you off-airway in a non-radar environment with GPS routing. I've had them do it and it seems fairly common so I was curious.

So if I'm not understanding something how about you try and provide a clear answer? We're not all controllers and we don't get subtle wording hints.

 

[Bob Noel]

Must you try to run people in circles so much? I was originally responding to a post where someone said ATC would not clear you off-airway in a non-radar environment with GPS routing. I've had them do it and it seems fairly common so I was curious.

I should not have said "won't". It is my understanding that the controller should not give such a clearance.

 

[Tom-D]

How many of you folks remember the old Dee Dee-Daa Daa airways?

progress is a wonderful thing.

your needles and gauges will turn into some thing else some day with or with out your in put.

 

[Fearless Tower]

How many of you folks remember the old Dee Dee-Daa Daa airways?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

 

[roncachamp]

It's the only means that I have available in the aircraft, and the only means the vast majority of all light single engine aircraft have when filing /G. If you're hoping that most BE33/G's are running around with a different kind of RNAV you'll be disappointed.

I posted the routing requirements. If you examine them you'll see that "ensure the aircraft is /G" is not a requirement of off-airways routes beyond navaid usable limits.

Must you try to run people in circles so much?

I'm just following your lead.

I was originally responding to a post where someone said ATC would not clear you off-airway in a non-radar environment with GPS routing. I've had them do it and it seems fairly common so I was curious.

I believe the person that said that did so under the assumption that ATC will adhere to Order JO 7110.65.

So if I'm not understanding something how about you try and provide a clear answer? We're not all controllers and we don't get subtle wording hints.

What more do you want? I already said radar is required for off-airways routes beyond navaid usable limits and I provided the source as you requested. Do you have another question?

 

[Fearless Tower]

 

[Everskyward]

Except we are not talking about taking VFR only planes and making them IFR capable. We are talking about a very large portion of the GA fleet that is already IFR capable with VOR/DME and suddenly preventing it from using the system.

From post #1...

Therefore, the FAA is beginning to discontinue VOR service from facilities in CONUS and intends to have a minimum network in place in 2020. This discontinuation of VOR service will affect approximately half of all VORs in CONUS. Remaining facilities will be used for terminal and enroute functions and reviewed for discontinuation at a later date to move to a totally RNAV airspace system.

If a minimum network is still in place in 2020 I would not call that "suddenly". I think quite a few IFR airplanes already have IFR GPS and many would have gotten IFR GPS by 2020 in any case.