follow roads vs. MLOD?

[GeorgeC]

tl;dr: Is it worth an extra 10% in distance to follow roads?

One of my aviation goals for the new year is to plan and execute a long-to-me XC day trip, around 200nm each way.

I've planned two routes, one that's more or less direct and has airports at most every 20 minutes or so, and another that's slightly out of the way, but more or less follows highways.

As a <100 hour pilot, the highway route seems to be the more conservative choice. Thoughts?

 

[PilotAlan]

Following highways usually keep you closer to airports, at least out west where Direct To can put you on a route with a hundred miles or more between airports. Often on XCs, a minor (2% difference) adjustment to course line make the difference between lots of airports and no airports.
If your route puts you over airports, I don't see a problem.

It depends on terrain as well. I don't stress about following roads out west, there's plenty of landing spots. In the South, everything that isn't a road or lake is either buildings or tress (or buildings under trees), so following roads becomes a survival strategy.
In the mountains (even the small hills you easterners call the Appalachians), roads may be the only landable areas.

So, the short answer is "it depends". The long answer is what is the terrain?

 

[GeorgeC]

The route is EMI-KSWF or thereabouts; lots of trees, some hills. I don't know if it's worth worrying over being leeward of the Catskills. The long cut would be to go via KMDT & KAVP to follow I-81 and I-84.

 

[PilotAlan]

The route is EMI-KSWF or thereabouts; lots of trees, some hills. I don't know if it's worth worrying over being leeward of the Catskills. The long cut would be to go via KMDT & KAVP to follow I-81 and I-84.

I don't know the area, but it seems like there's plenty of roads, and a couple of undeveloped sections that may be parks or conservation areas.
I'd probably go direct, with visual adjustments to avoid areas of solid tree cover or spots of rugged terrain. But that's me.

 

[Tony_Scarpelli]

I wouldn't worry about roads but its not a bad idea to plot your normal or most direct course and then see what airports are within glide distance on either side of your course. If you fly at 7000' rather than 3000 agl or 5000 agl you will double the amount of possible emergency airports en route that you could make in an emergency and at that altitude you can surely find a road to land on if there are no airports.

Anywhere map has a 'cone of safety' option which shows you when you are enroute and within the cone (a distance safe to glide to an airport) and the higher you go the more of your route is fully en-compassed in over lapping cones of safety.

I have heard of pilots plotting their course from airport to airport. At 10,000' you would be within glide distance for at least 15 minutes over each airport so if you crossed 6 or 7 airports you would almost be totally within glide distance of some airport.

 

[fgcason]

The whole point of flying is to not drive. If you want to follow roads, drive, otherwise pick a heading and go.

 

[GeorgeC]

That's cool. It would be nice to have a software-only version of the vp-400, too.

Anywhere map has a 'cone of safety' option which shows you when you are enroute and within the cone (a distance safe to glide to an airport) and the higher you go the more of your route is fully en-compassed in over lapping cones of safety.

 

[jwyatt]

That's cool. It would be nice to have a software-only version of the vp-400, too.

VP-300, aka Xavion is their iPad app In cooperation with the maker of xplane, which purports to be exactly that. It'll hook up to an AHRS for actual air data too, though that'll cost ya.
http://verticalpower.com/vp-300/

 

[GeorgeC]

I love it when a plan comes together.

 

[roncachamp]

tl;dr: Is it worth an extra 10% in distance to follow roads?

One of my aviation goals for the new year is to plan and execute a long-to-me XC day trip, around 200nm each way.

I've planned two routes, one that's more or less direct and has airports at most every 20 minutes or so, and another that's slightly out of the way, but more or less follows highways.

As a <100 hour pilot, the highway route seems to be the more conservative choice. Thoughts?

What's MLOD?

 

[DutchessFlier]

My! Look Out and Down.... (MLOD) Who knows?

By the way, I can't find EMI or KEMI anywhere? So, what is EMI?

You're better off flying at or close to victor routes in this area, and it tends to be pretty busy airspace. Stewart is easy to find, and MGJ and POU are close by as well.

Oh. the terrain is pretty rugged through eastern PA into SE NY.

 

[roncachamp]

My! Look Out and Down.... (MLOD) Who knows?

I would think the OP does, even if he is the only one that does.

By the way, I can't find EMI or KEMI anywhere? So, what is EMI?

Westminster VORTAC, about 25 miles northwest of Baltimore.

 

[Jim Logajan]

What's MLOD?

I'm guessing he meant to type MOLD for "more or less direct," a phrase that appears in the original post.

 

[azure]

I'm guessing he meant to type MOLD for "more or less direct," a phrase that appears in the original post.

MLOD == "Magenta Line Of Death" is another possibility, as in the line from A to B on a GPS.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

MLOD == "Magenta Line Of Death" is another possibility, as in the line from A to B on a GPS.

That is typically what it means. In this context, of course.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

I've been a fan of following roads, easier and safer.

If this is your first longer x-country it's probably a good way to go.

When flying IFR (I follow Roads) even if the weather starts to get iffy it's easier to fly the road and if it really goes to hell, well your right over a (guessing) large road.

 

[jonnyjetprop]

Step One: plot direct course on map

Step Two: Is it ugly?..........No? Go Fly
Yes? See step three

Step Three: make one adjustment and repet step two.


All in good fun but this is really how I do it. I'll go direct as long as I'm happy with the result. If not, I start bending the route, making one adjustment at a time. Often making a single adjustment will fix things down the road. The surprising thing is how making small changes will sometimes only add a couple of minutes.

 

[DutchessFlier]

I would think the OP does, even if he is the only one that does.



Westminster VORTAC, about 25 miles northwest of Baltimore.

Thanks: the OP's post got me confused...and I know the EMI vortac well! Usually a route is described with the departure airport as the "from" location then navaids along the route then the destination field.

As far as going direct around these parts, well I suppose so, VFR, but be prepared for changes from ATC with flight following.

IFR-fuggeddahboutit

Just my 02cents

 

[roncachamp]

Thanks: the OP's post got me confused...and I know the EMI vortac well! Usually a route is described with the departure airport as the "from" location then navaids along the route then the destination field.

As far as going direct around these parts, well I suppose so, VFR, but be prepared for changes from ATC with flight following.

IFR-fuggeddahboutit

If ATC can change your route you're on more than just flight following.

 

[DutchessFlier]

Steve: I've been many times on VFR FF in the airspace in this region and ATC has requested me to vector or asked me for intentions to point me away from a current heading, of course at my "own discretion". ATC will always ask me for my destination when I request FF. It's not just flying close in to the bravo either...with arrival and departure routes for all the NY/NJ/PA region criss-crossing here, and at my usual altitudes, it's not unusual at all.

 

[roncachamp]

Steve: I've been many times on VFR FF in the airspace in this region and ATC has requested me to vector or asked me for intentions to point me away from a current heading, of course at my "own discretion". ATC will always ask me for my destination when I request FF. It's not just flying close in to the bravo either...with arrival and departure routes for all the NY/NJ/PA region criss-crossing here, and at my usual altitudes, it's not unusual at all.

ATC has authority to "move" VFR aircraft (assign headings, routes, altitudes), in Class B airspace, Class C airspace (including the Outer Area), and in TRSAs. When it happens outside of those areas the controller is overstepping his authority.

 

[Dr. O]

I'm an IFR pilot.

I follow roads, railroads, power lines, rivers, creeks, and sometimes the guy ahead of me.
In a pinch I will even follow the pencil line on the sectional, but that is mostly an act of desperation.
Forget the 10% or whatever. Listen to the words of wisdom from my son.

One time I was mumbling about trading the plane for something 'faster'. My son looks at me, cackles, and says, "Hey old man. You fly for fun and you only go somewhere to have an excuse to go flying. Why do you want it to be over sooner?"

 

[azure]

ATC has authority to "move" VFR aircraft (assign headings, routes, altitudes), in Class B airspace, Class C airspace (including the Outer Area), and in TRSAs. When it happens outside of those areas the controller is overstepping his authority.

Around here, controllers overstep their authority in this way fairly often. If the alternative is having to add about 50nm to my route to avoid Canadian airspace, vs complying with an instruction the controller is technically not authorized to give at the expense of about 5 extra nm, I'll gladly comply.

 

[roncachamp]

Around here, controllers overstep their authority in this way fairly often. If the alternative is having to add about 50nm to my route to avoid Canadian airspace, vs complying with an instruction the controller is technically not authorized to give at the expense of about 5 extra nm, I'll gladly comply.

Just say no.

 

[numl0ck]

Just say no.

Really??!! So when PVD tells me to remain clear of Class Charlie or (while outside the Charlie) to take a heading of XXX "for departing traffic" I'm supposed to say no? What does telling them no gain me? Personally, I'd rather move for the big jets then have them run me over.

 

[Tony_Scarpelli]

Really??!! So when PVD tells me to remain clear of Class Charlie or (while outside the Charlie) to take a heading of XXX "for departing traffic" I'm supposed to say no? What does telling them no gain me? Personally, I'd rather move for the big jets then have them run me over.

Reread what he said or replied to.

 

[roncachamp]

Really??!! So when PVD tells me to remain clear of Class Charlie or (while outside the Charlie) to take a heading of XXX "for departing traffic" I'm supposed to say no? What does telling them no gain me? Personally, I'd rather move for the big jets then have them run me over.

Please reread my messages in this thread. If after doing that you still do not understand then by all means ask your questions again.

 

[douglas393]

Just say no.

Not trying to promote an argument, but I for one have no real desire to see if I can **** longer than ATC. If I am on flight following, and ATC asks me to do something, I will be honest, the first thought in my mind is not whether or not the request they are giving me is legal for them to give me, my first thought is can I do it safely, and if I can I will do it. If I cannot then I will say unable. I realize they are supposed to give me a reason for their request, and usually they will, but honestly I am flying to have fun and add enjoyment in my life, and getting into a ****ing match with ATC does not sound like a fun thing to do.

Just my naive, newbie thoughts.

Doug

 

[azure]

Just say no.

Well, sure I could, but then what? If the controller decides that he doesn't want to work me, then I get "squawk 1200, frequency change approved". Now I have no discrete code with which to cross into Canadian airspace (the scenario I was talking about), and I get to take the long way around to my destination unless I want to have a chat with the CBP at the other end. Not worth it to me.

 

[Alexb2000]

tl;dr: Is it worth an extra 10% in distance to follow roads?

One of my aviation goals for the new year is to plan and execute a long-to-me XC day trip, around 200nm each way.

I've planned two routes, one that's more or less direct and has airports at most every 20 minutes or so, and another that's slightly out of the way, but more or less follows highways.

As a <100 hour pilot, the highway route seems to be the more conservative choice. Thoughts?

This will be a day VFR trip.

I hate to give you the hard word, but you need to master your fear. I know this is a relatively new endeavor and you are trying to be conservative. That's great, but if you're going to fly then fly, which means going as direct as possible in most cases. Forget about roads and changing course to fly over/near airports in the daylight, none of that should factor into your flight planning.

Do all of your planing/preparations throughly, don't fall into the two big pilot traps no matter what (running out of fuel and VFR into IMC), and enjoy yourself. If something unexpected does happen, take a breath and think, fall back on your training, and you will have excellent odds.

Please don't think I'm just trying to be a jerk, I'm only trying to push you a little in the right direction.

 

[PilotAlan]

Step One: plot direct course on map

Step Two: Is it ugly?..........No? Go Fly
Yes? See step three

Step Three: make one adjustment and repet step two.


All in good fun but this is really how I do it. I'll go direct as long as I'm happy with the result. If not, I start bending the route, making one adjustment at a time. Often making a single adjustment will fix things down the road. The surprising thing is how making small changes will sometimes only add a couple of minutes.

This.
As usual, someone can say with one sentence what it takes me 500 words to say.

 

[PilotAlan]

Forget about roads and changing course to fly over/near airports in the daylight, none of that should factor into your flight planning.

I disagree. As stated better by johnnyjetprop, a small adjustment will give you a much better routing than the magenta line of death.
I like having a route that keeps several airports under me than none.

When my alternator tripped off in flight at 4pm on a Friday afternoon, there were three airports within radio reception that I could call and see who had an A&P on the field right now, so I could get the plane looked at rather than paying callout fees or getting stuck over the weekend.

When I *didn't* keep airports under me, and a sudden, unforecast undercast to the ground starting forming, I almost got caught over low IFR conditions because the nearest airport was 75 miles away. Darn near had to land on a road.

PS: I've flown my Cherokee VFR on four cross-countries from Denver to the east coast and back, plus four to Oshkosh and back, including one from Denver to St Louis at night. So I'm not shy or scared of flying cross country.
I've just decided that options are better than no options.

 

[Silvaire]

My advice is to form a good understanding of what exactly it is that you are doing. Any airplane, right down to the slowest and simplest, can take you over a place in practically no time at all where there are no roads or inhabitants for many many miles. The terrain below could be anything from cornfields to canyons.

So first off: I highly recommend a PLB of some sort. The McMurdos are less than $300 or you could go with a SPOT. A 406 Mhz ELT is a good investment as well but significantly more expensive. Be aware that a PLB doesn't do what an ELT does. You have to be conscious and able to activate it after the landing whereas the ELT will automatically set off in the event of a crash.

Secondly: prepare for the possibility of this mishap. One time we flew up to Montana for a gathering of Maule owners. We were fully equipped and after having set up camp we took off for an afternoon sightseeing jaunt over Glacier National Park. It was a beautiful day and when passing over one of the remote USFS strips my brother asked if I wanted to land there. It suddenly dawned on me that no, I didn't because we had foolishly left all of our gear back at that camp. We were in shorts and T-shirts with an empty cargo hold and any mishap of the slightest consequence could possibly have left us stranded at that strip overnight without so much as a six ounce hip flask of whiskey.

Wouldn't have been fun.

So I don't see following roads or civilization in general that much of a cop out. Ideally we want to go direct but bear in mind that the terrain below can look deceivingly benign from high altitudes. The Bermuda Triangle may sound scary but many, many times more aircraft have disappeared without a trace over the continental United States. It's a big place out there.

 

[Alexb2000]

I disagree. As stated better by johnnyjetprop, a small adjustment will give you a much better routing than the magenta line of death.
I like having a route that keeps several airports under me than none.

When my alternator tripped off in flight at 4pm on a Friday afternoon, there were three airports within radio reception that I could call and see who had an A&P on the field right now, so I could get the plane looked at rather than paying callout fees or getting stuck over the weekend.

When I *didn't* keep airports under me, and a sudden, unforecast undercast to the ground starting forming, I almost got caught over low IFR conditions because the nearest airport was 75 miles away. Darn near had to land on a road.

PS: I've flown my Cherokee VFR on four cross-countries from Denver to the east coast and back, plus four to Oshkosh and back, including one from Denver to St Louis at night. So I'm not shy or scared of flying cross country.
I've just decided that options are better than no options.

Sounds like the best thing to do is drive.

 

[PilotAlan]

Sounds like the best thing to do is drive.

Really? Usually the courseline adjustment is less than 3% in total time enroute.

Sounds like the best thing to do is actually LOOK at the line and make a decision. Last I checked the pilot makes the decisions, not a string or a computer.

 

[denverpilot]

Inlet a computer draw a line and then move itt around manually to match my desired navaids and visual aids. Especially since I'm /A (Well, still /U at the moment but the DME is back in a new shop. We shall see what they find...) The magenta line is only for situational awareness.

 

[Alexb2000]

Really? Usually the courseline adjustment is less than 3% in total time enroute.

Sounds like the best thing to do is actually LOOK at the line and make a decision. Last I checked the pilot makes the decisions, not a string or a computer.

Alan-

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but here is an example.

Dallas to Denver Google maps driving quickest 863 Miles
Dallas to Denver Airnav 560 miles

If someone is up just burning gas then fly airport to airport, follow major roads, only turn left, fly around lakes, whatever. However, if you are flying anything with the slightest intent of efficiency then a straight line is the obvious answer most of the time.

The real issue here is a lack of comfort flying pure and simple. You may have done 1,000's of hours of CC airport to airport along major roads, but I still believe you are flying those routes because of what might happen (mechanically) and not because you feel it is the best routing.

 

[roncachamp]

Not trying to promote an argument, but I for one have no real desire to see if I can **** longer than ATC. If I am on flight following, and ATC asks me to do something, I will be honest, the first thought in my mind is not whether or not the request they are giving me is legal for them to give me, my first thought is can I do it safely, and if I can I will do it. If I cannot then I will say unable. I realize they are supposed to give me a reason for their request, and usually they will, but honestly I am flying to have fun and add enjoyment in my life, and getting into a ****ing match with ATC does not sound like a fun thing to do.

Just my naive, newbie thoughts.

Given that flight following involves only traffic advisories and safety alerts, what might ATC ask you to do?

 

[roncachamp]

Well, sure I could, but then what? If the controller decides that he doesn't want to work me, then I get "squawk 1200, frequency change approved". Now I have no discrete code with which to cross into Canadian airspace (the scenario I was talking about), and I get to take the long way around to my destination unless I want to have a chat with the CBP at the other end. Not worth it to me.

So what you're saying is if you don't let the controller decide where your aircraft will go you can't go where you want to go so you put up with bad ATC service as the lesser of two evils. Bummer.

 

[azure]

Given that flight following involves only traffic advisories and safety alerts, what might ATC ask you to do?

"Squawk 1200".

So what you're saying is if you don't let the controller decide where your aircraft will go you can't go where you want to go so you put up with bad ATC service as the lesser of two evils. Bummer.

I never said I couldn't go there, just that the alternative route would be much more inconvenient than putting up with a short deviation. But my feeling is if I'm going to go all the way around Lake Erie to reach northern Ohio, I might as well drive.