Planning a longer cross-country

M

Maulrus

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jul 3, 2012
Messages
16
Display Name
Display name:
Maulrus
I am a couple of days away from my final stage check. I've done a couple of cross countries, but they were both to airports only a bit more than 50 miles away, and basically amounted to straight shots. I found out today that for my stage check and checkride, I'm gonna be planning a flight well over 200 miles. I'm not worried about that; there are a million airports along the way, and pretty distinctive coastline, so checkpoints should be plentiful. However, I am wondering primarily about how I should use VORs when planning.

Like I said, my previous cross countries were pretty much straight lines. Gulfport has a VORTAC, and I tracked in on it just for practice's sake during those cross countries. It didn't really factor into planning, however, as it was a short, direct flight. My question is, what should I do with the VORs, with respect to my initial flight plan? I'm thinking that I'll plan my route primarily along the radials of the numerous VORs along the way, but I guess I'm wondering if I should utilize them in my checkpoints somehow? I really just don't know what the examiner will be looking for.

Also, question unrelated to VORs but relevant to my flight: I will be flying through the Gulfport TRSA on the way there. Is there any reason, flying several thousand feet above TPA, that I would not be able to fly directly through the center of the airspace? The same question applies for Class C, I guess.
 
I always use pilotage (landmarks) for long xc's if pushed to. But in reality I use the GPS and follow the pink line. I didn't use any VOR's for my xc's.
 
I'm a student, so take my advice with a grain of salt:

If you want, you can plan your flight VOR to VOR and track like that. On one of my XCs, I could have planned it as a straight shot with a small descent to get under some Class B, but instead I went around it and use a VOR as a checkpoint. It keeps you practicing your instrument skills. Plus, if your plane is so equipped, you can just punch the autopilot on and do something else for a minute. Whatever that might be.

If you ever get super lost, just punch something in the GPS and follow the pink line.

Although I should really utilize it, I seldom use the GPS. It's just too easy hahaa.
 
Maulrus said:
Also, question unrelated to VORs but relevant to my flight: I will be flying through the Gulfport TRSA on the way there. Is there any reason, flying several thousand feet above TPA, that I would not be able to fly directly through the center of the airspace? The same question applies for Class C, I guess.
Click to expand...

No reason at all. Call up the relevant TRSA facility and get TRSA services - much like getting flight following. Tell them you are direct ABC and they will tell you if there is a problem. Class C is the same.
 
whatever you did for your 50 miler, do it for your 200 miler, only longer...:D

No, really... If you're using VOR to navigate and have two, Track one and use the other to cross reference your position at strategic points. You might also consider using VFR flight following services with center.

... if you're above the airspace, you don't have to check in...

Good Luck... and have fun! ;)
 
Last edited:
HerrGruyere said:
Although I should really utilize it, I seldom use the GPS. It's just too easy hahaa.
Click to expand...

My plane had no nav radios to begin with. Would have been a waste of money to install, but there is a portable nav/com in the flight bag if needed. Just haven't need it for 18 years now..........as the GPS won't give up. On the other hand, most of my flying is cross state mountain flying. I go where VORs don't, and don't always care to be high enough to get a line of sight for VOR reception.

L.Adamson
 
For primary training, plan pilotage/DR because that's the main training objective at that stage. Electronic navigation is effectively part of your emergency procedures on the practical test (you are normally tested on it during the hooded portion of the test). Yes, you could use VOR stations as your checkpoints, because they are easy to identify visually (although not the easiest things to spot at a distance), but don't plan to use their electronic signals unless you get lost.
 
I would certainly recommend tracking VORs, but use them to verify you are on course. During day time where landmarks are plentiful as you said they are, pilotage should be your #1 form of navigation.
 
Ron Levy said:
For primary training, plan pilotage/DR because that's the main training objective at that stage. Electronic navigation is effectively part of your emergency procedures on the practical test (you are normally tested on it during the hooded portion of the test). Yes, you could use VOR stations as your checkpoints, because they are easy to identify visually (although not the easiest things to spot at a distance), but don't plan to use their electronic signals unless you get lost.
Click to expand...

Have things changed since 1984? During my check-ride D/R and piltotage was also evaluated but I was required to tune and track a VOR station at the same time. Once established on course and after crossing the first checkpoint, we went on to other skills. But I'll concede to you on this, since it is what you do...:)
 
FlySince9 said:
Have things changed since 1984? During my check-ride D/R and piltotage was also evaluated but I was required to tune and track a VOR station at the same time. Once established on course and after crossing the first checkpoint, we went on to other skills. But I'll concede to you on this, since it is what you do...:)
Click to expand...

Same methods I used back in the early 80's for my X country stuff.... Use all the tools available but don't depend on any given one. IMHO.
 
FlySince9 said:
Have things changed since 1984? During my check-ride D/R and piltotage was also evaluated but I was required to tune and track a VOR station at the same time.
Click to expand...
Not sure how one could tune and track VOR station while doing pilotage/DR to another point. I suppose if there was a VOR station on the departure airport (or, as I suggested above, you were using a VOR station as a visual checkpoint), you could track the radial out to the first turnpoint, but that's not normally what DPE's do, and if you did it on your own, they'd probably kill your VOR receiver as soon as they determined that you were successfully tracking it.
 
In New Mexico and Colorado, VORs are easy to see and make for great waypoints. They are usually painted white, so you look for a white "wizard hat". However, make sure to pass them on the right, as any other point landmark actually.
 
Ron Levy said:
Not sure how one could tune and track VOR station while doing pilotage/DR to another point. I suppose if there was a VOR station on the departure airport (or, as I suggested above, you were using a VOR station as a visual checkpoint), you could track the radial out to the first turnpoint, but that's not normally what DPE's do, and if you did it on your own, they'd probably kill your VOR receiver as soon as they determined that you were successfully tracking it.
Click to expand...

No, after thinking about it some more, I remembered; what happened was, I planned a CC with VOR navigation. Once established on course/Radial, the DPE said, "rather than going to Kxxx, let's go to Kxxx. That is where the D/R and Pilotage came in.
 
zaitcev said:
In New Mexico and Colorado, VORs are easy to see and make for great waypoints. They are usually painted white, so you look for a white "wizard hat". However, make sure to pass them on the right, as any other point landmark actually.
Click to expand...

Why pass on them on the right? Is that a traffic avoidance thing?
 
FlySince9 said:
No, really... If you're using VOR to navigate and have two, Track one and use the other to cross reference your position at strategic points. You might also consider using VFR flight following services with center.
Click to expand...

On my paper sectional, I draw my course line, marking 10 nm hash marks. This permits easy computation of landmark to landmark timing. This provides a good way to challenge yourself by saying, "I just passed the highway intersection, and should be over the lake and it's dam that is 20 nm away in XX minutes." Then you see how close you get in real time.

The line (also colored with a highlighter) makes an easy aid to orient the chart in the direction of your travel so landmarks you see outside match the shapes on the chart. Lakes are great landmarks since they generally keep the same shapes.

On this line, I also write down the VOR frequency and the bearing I'm twisting the OBS to for my from. On the other end, I have the other VOR frequency and bearing for the TO. Writing on the chart next to my course line makes it easy to find the needed information.

To double check my course, I find a nearby VOR and have that tuned in the NAV2. Then on my chart, I've draw lines from that VOR to easy to determine landmarks along my courseline. Usually 2 or 3 depending on the distance between on-course VOR's. At the intersection of the VOR2 Radial and my course line, I've written down the radial info and have that set into the CDI#2.

Now, if I have my CDI#1 centered, I just noted that CDI#2's needle just swung into center, and I'm over the landmark on my chart, I'm exactly where I'm supposed to be.


VFR Flight Following (Radar Services) is a very good thing to make use of. Since you established this early on, ATC was already setup to know that that block of data on the screen is you. So if you get totally turned around, a quick calll to them "I'm a student pilot and I'm not sure if that city out in front of me is Dallas, Austin, or Houston" will get the help you need to get back on track.

Never be afraid to ask them for help and assistance, they are there to help you as needed.
 
Last edited:
This is my first post. When I took my private pilot check-ride the FAA guy told me to get down to 1500MSL which was about 1100 ft agl. He then picked a point on the map and told me to fly there...no VORs ...just use the map and what I could see on the ground. That was 1977.

It would be prudent to include some of that kind of flying from one of your checkpoints to another just to keep your skills up.

My 2 cents
 
Thanks everybody! As far as using two VORs, that's not so much of an option; the 152 I'll be flying only has one NAV receiver, so triangulating using two VORs would be tough. I think I'll slip in one radial along the route where it's convenient, just to demonstrate that I'm at least thinking about it, and stick to pilotage for my checkpoints.
 
HerrGruyere said:
Why pass on them on the right? Is that a traffic avoidance thing?
Click to expand...

VOR stations are places where traffic converges. It's not a good idea to overfly them directly, because someone else may have the exact same idea.

Also, maintain VFR altitudes precisely in the vicinity of a VOR, to avoid IFR traffic, which is on whole-thousand altitudes. If on a northerly or southerly course, nearly oncoming traffic is a possibility, so watch for it.
 
Following a coastline seems easier than following a needle, if that is your route. It is hard to get lost on a coastal route.
 
Maulrus said:
Thanks everybody! As far as using two VORs, that's not so much of an option; the 152 I'll be flying only has one NAV receiver, so triangulating using two VORs would be tough. I think I'll slip in one radial along the route where it's convenient, just to demonstrate that I'm at least thinking about it, and stick to pilotage for my checkpoints.
Click to expand...

That's inconvenient. You can switch if you want, but IMO it's better to use landmarks like you propose.

Any chance it has DME? That can be very convenient for VOR navigation, as long as you remember it's the straight line distance (so, if you're at 5000 AGL, it will never get less than 1 mile even if you fly directly over the station).

When flying directly to or from a station, DME also gives you your ground speed.

An examiner will expect you to understand and be able to use all equipment installed in the aircraft, and may fail equipment to test that you have a backup. This is very common for GPS's, but not so common for VOR receivers (it's not unheard of, though).
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
That's inconvenient. You can switch if you want, but IMO it's better to use landmarks like you propose.

Any chance it has DME? That can be very convenient for VOR navigation, as long as you remember it's the straight line distance (so, if you're at 5000 AGL, it will never get less than 1 mile even if you fly directly over the station).

When flying directly to or from a station, DME also gives you your ground speed.
Click to expand...

Do you mean the radial along the route we be inconvenient? Should I really just forget about VORs as far as planning goes? And the 152 I'm flying doesn't have DME. It is a bare-bones little trainer, for sure.

Also, yeah I suppose coastal flying will provide me with more than enough convenient checkpoints as is.
 
Maulrus said:
Do you mean the radial along the route we be inconvenient? Should I really just forget about VORs as far as planning goes? And the 152 I'm flying doesn't have DME. It is a bare-bones little trainer, for sure.

Also, yeah I suppose coastal flying will provide me with more than enough convenient checkpoints as is.
Click to expand...

No, using VORs can help provide course guidance, and this is helpful. What it can't do all by itself is tell you when to start your descent, for instance.

Just have a backup as well. VORs are not perfect, and you need an independent judgement of whether or not it is telling you the right thing. For instance, does that landmark you expected to show up on your left, really show up on your right? Then, you're off course to the left, even if the CDI says otherwise (but make doubly sure you've identified the landmark correctly -- perhaps by finding another one). It can also get confusing as you get near the station, because the needle moves rapidly -- do not chase it, but rather pick a heading, watch the TO flag change to FROM, and then reintercept the radial on the new course. Sometimes the needles flop around in turbulence, as well. That's never a problem for landmarks.

Note that, unless this aircraft is certified for IFR, the VOR is not required to have any relation to reality.

And don't forget to IDENT your VORs. It really sucks to intercept the wrong one. There is lots of restricted airspace in your neck of the woods, but the worst case is really bad. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
No, using VORs can help provide course guidance, and this is helpful. What it can't do all by itself is tell you when to start your descent, for instance.

Just have a backup as well. VORs are not perfect, and you need an independent judgement of whether or not it is telling you the right thing. For instance, does that landmark you expected to show up on your left, really show up on your right? Then, you're off course to the left, even if the CDI says otherwise (but make doubly sure you've identified the landmark correctly -- perhaps by finding another one). It can also get confusing as you get near the station, because the needle moves rapidly -- do not chase it, but rather pick a heading, watch the TO flag change to FROM, and then reintercept the radial on the new course. Sometimes the needles flop around in turbulence, as well. That's never a problem for landmarks.

Note that, unless this aircraft is certified for IFR, the VOR is not required to have any relation to reality.

And don't forget to IDENT your VORs. It really sucks to intercept the wrong one. There is lots of restricted airspace in your neck of the woods, but the worst case is really bad. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007
Click to expand...

Alright, thanks for the tips. This is also gonna be my first time flying into an MOA; no way around it, as my destination is nestled within the Eglin B MOA. Seeing as it's not a restricted area (and I'll be able to avoid the part of Eglin that IS restricted), do I need to get a clearance in there?

EDIT: I mean obviously I'm not actually going to be flying there, but I do want to be sure of the procedures involved in case it comes up as a question.
 
John221us said:
Following a coastline seems easier than following a needle, if that is your route. It is hard to get lost on a coastal route.
Click to expand...

You state the obvious with such subltey. Can't see the VOR for the ocean? :mad2: I totally missed the shoreline in the equation. :dunno:

That is really funny! :lol:
 
Maulrus said:
I think I'll slip in one radial along the route where it's convenient, just to demonstrate that I'm at least thinking about it, and stick to pilotage for my checkpoints.
Click to expand...
You can do that if you want, but it's really not necessary. The examiner will make you do XC navigation without any use of electronic systems, and will give you a radial to track as part of the instrument task whether you stick one in your XC nav plan or not.
 
Last edited:
AggieMike88 said:
On my paper sectional, I draw my course line, marking 10 nm hash marks. This permits easy computation of landmark to landmark timing. This provides a good way to challenge yourself by saying, "I just passed the highway intersection, and should be over the lake and it's dam that is 20 nm away in XX minutes." Then you see how close you get in real time.

The line (also colored with a highlighter) makes an easy aid to orient the chart in the direction of your travel so landmarks you see outside match the shapes on the chart. Lakes are great landmarks since they generally keep the same shapes.
Click to expand...

Generally, but not always. I had a pair of distinctly shaped lakes as one of my check points on a long xc. Seemed like a point i couldn't miss... Until i got there and found only one lake that looked nothing like either of the lakes on the map. Turns out they had a lot of flooding in the area and the two lakes merged into one big blob.

Having VORs and time estimates like you describe definitely helps when the earth doesn't match the map.
 
Ron Levy said:
You can do that if you want, but it's really not necessary. The examiner will make you do XC navigation without any use of electronic systems, and will give you a radial to track as part of the instrument task whether you stick one in your XC nav plan or not.
Click to expand...

Alright, thanks. I'm still curious about the MOA I'd have to fly through; there's no requirement to get a clearance if it's not restricted, right?
 
Nope, no requirement at all. But as a matter of safety, you should check with the ATC facility listed on the sectional margin to see if it's "hot" prior to entering. Also, ask the FSS explicitly during your weather briefing. If it is indeed hot and there really is no way around, over, or under, then it's a no-go.

It might be allowed to enter a hot MOA, but full of not-very-pleasant surprises, such as tactical maneuvering close to the ground at very high speed.
 
MAKG1 said:
Nope, no requirement at all. But as a matter of safety, you should check with the ATC facility listed on the sectional margin to see if it's "hot" prior to entering. Also, ask the FSS explicitly during your weather briefing. If it is indeed hot and there really is no way around, over, or under, then it's a no-go.

It might be allowed to enter a hot MOA, but full of not-very-pleasant surprises, such as tactical maneuvering close to the ground at very high speed.
Click to expand...

That makes sense, okay. Also it says Eglin B excludes the area under 1500 AGL, so I suppose I could keep that in mind. Thanks for all the help!
 
Maulrus said:
That makes sense, okay. Also it says Eglin B excludes the area under 1500 AGL, so I suppose I could keep that in mind. Thanks for all the help!
Click to expand...

That's just for the Crestview, FL Class E surface airspace (i.e., the dashed magenta circle around KCEW). The MOA extends to 1000 AGL normally, or 200 AGL by NOTAM.

That airspace is a total mess. That SFRA seems a lot like a Class B, just with a weird shape and some odd rules. At least there isn't a lot of restrictive overlying airspace (aside from the usual Class A).
 
Last edited:
Maulrus said:
That makes sense, okay. Also it says Eglin B excludes the area under 1500 AGL, so I suppose I could keep that in mind. Thanks for all the help!
Click to expand...
Combine that with the 91.119 minimum altitudes, and you might have a very narrow vertical window in which to operate. Choose wisely.
 
Look at this way - you can start at the top of the list

Getting from point A to point B, 250nm away. . . .

I'll use GPS.

What if that fails?

Then I'll use VOR's

What if that fails?

Then I'll look out the window.

What if that fails? [on top of a cloud deck]

Then I'll use a clock and timer and a slide rule and figure out when to turn.

What if that fails?

I'll use my radio and call ATC and get a vector.

What if that fails?

Then its not my day.

As for flying over a TRSA or a Class C - the BEST way to deal with airspace is have a plan and TELL them you want to do - overflying Class C you just tell them I'm going present position direct [some waypoint close enough that they'll know what it is - a Vor, an airport, not somoene's farm or a powerplant that is not a VOR check point] XXX, or along an airway - name it, or a heading. Then they can tell YOU if it is gonna be a problem.

Having grown up in NY and flown alot in NY airspace I've learned forgiveness [or tolerance or implied consent at least] is better than permission - the busiest controllers just want to know what you are doing - if it is a problem for them they'll let you know. NEVER contact a controller without knowing what you want from them and where you are going - where you are is pretty important too.
 
Ron Levy said:
Combine that with the 91.119 minimum altitudes, and you might have a very narrow vertical window in which to operate. Choose wisely.
Click to expand...

Okay, so staying under the MOA isn't an too good an option. However, as long as I can fly through it (barring some kind of active use, of course), I should be good.
 
MAKG1 said:
Also, maintain VFR altitudes precisely in the vicinity of a VOR, to avoid IFR traffic, which is on whole-thousand altitudes. If on a northerly or southerly course, nearly oncoming traffic is a possibility, so watch for it.
Click to expand...

This. I learned this quite vividly as a student. After dozens of flights to, from and around VORs, I NEVER saw any other traffic, despite looking continuously. Then the one day when I wasn't paying so much attention, and had drifted a few feet above my altitude, I caught a movement in my peripheral vision and glanced up in time to see the (presumably) IFR traffic passing in nearly the opposite direction, a couple hundred feet above me.

And as for the MOA, no, you don't need a "clearance" but you darn well better know whether it's active, which you determine from the controlling agency listed on the sectional, or frequently FSS or the local/TRACON controllers will know. And if it is, I'd keep out. If it's not, you're fine to go right on through. I have also found that the active hours noted on the sectional are not necessarily always correct.
 
Update: had the oral portion of my final stage check (had to defer the flight due to marginal weather). I passed, but the instructor recommended that I replan the latter half of my flight; I had it crossing through A-292 to the west-southwest of KCEW, rather than passing north to avoid it, and he said the DPE would be looking for me to dodge that (which makes sense, I guess; I know you can fly through alert areas but why do it if you can avoid it five miles north). So instead of going through A-292 and swinging north to avoid the main Eglin MOA, I'll just follow V241 right to Crestview. Thanks for all the help in this topic!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top