rnav and radar coverage

[Clark1961]

So we've all heard the rules for an off-airway clearance...on Friday I was given a clearance direct from GLD to SKIPI without radar coverage. I was told to report 105 miles east of FTG (for radio hand-off) and was asked my position when I happened to be about 12 miles from a VOR. From the radio chatter I was the only one in the area (the whole of eastern friggin Colorado) at low altitude on a clearance.

It all worked out fine but was sorta weird. In the past I've gone through the area at higher altitude just to get radar coverage. This time center didn't mention it and I didn't offer. I guess I'll just call it western-US rules and drive on...

 

[denverpilot]

Must be that fancy Free Flight stuff and they could see you the whole way with all that spiffy ADS-B technology.

 

[roncachamp]

So we've all heard the rules for an off-airway clearance...on Friday I was given a clearance direct from GLD to SKIPI without radar coverage. I was told to report 105 miles east of FTG (for radio hand-off) and was asked my position when I happened to be about 12 miles from a VOR. From the radio chatter I was the only one in the area (the whole of eastern friggin Colorado) at low altitude on a clearance.

It all worked out fine but was sorta weird. In the past I've gone through the area at higher altitude just to get radar coverage. This time center didn't mention it and I didn't offer. I guess I'll just call it western-US rules and drive on...

There was a change to Order JO 7110.65 a while back.


4−4−1. ROUTE USE

Clear aircraft via routes consistent with the altitude stratum in which the operation is to be conducted by one or more of the following:

c. Random routes.

1. When not being radar monitored, GNSS-equipped RNAV aircraft on random RNAV routes must be cleared via or reported to be established on a point-to-point route.

(a) The points must be published NAVAIDs, waypoints, fixes or airports recallable from the aircraft’s navigation database. The points must be displayed on controller video maps or depicted on the controller chart displayed at the control position. When applying nonradar separation the maximum distance between points must not exceed 500 miles.

(b) Protect 4 miles either side of the route centerline.

(c) Assigned altitudes must be at or above the highest MIA along the projected route segment being flown, including the protected airspace of that route segment.

2. Impromptu

PHRASEOLOGY−
DIRECT (name of NAVAID/waypoint/fix/airport)

NOTE−
A random impromptu routing is a direct course initiated by ATC or requested by the pilot during flight. Aircraft are cleared from their present position to a NAVAID, waypoint, fix, or airport.

3. Point-to-Point

PHRASEOLOGY−
After (fix) proceed direct (fix)

NOTE−
A point-to-point route segment begins and ends with a published NAVAID, waypoint, fix, or airport.

 

[Clark1961]

Thanks for the info Steve.

 

[dtuuri]

There was a change to Order JO 7110.65 a while back. <snip>

The same change seems to say airborne random route requests still require radar for GPS aircraft:

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.
NOTE−
1. Except for GNSS-equipped aircraft /G, /L, /S, and /V, not
on a random impromptu route, Paragraph 5-5-1,
Application, requires radar separation be provided to
RNAV aircraft operating at and below FL450 on Q routes
or random RNAV routes, excluding oceanic airspace.​

dtuuri

 

[Clark1961]

The same change seems to say airborne random route requests still require radar for GPS aircraft:

Nothing that Steve posted suggested otherwise. Note the requirement to be point-to-point.

 

[dtuuri]

Nothing that Steve posted suggested otherwise.

I didn't say the two statements were in conflict, why imply that I did?

Note the requirement to be point-to-point.

And your point is...?

dtuuri

 

[Clark1961]

I didn't say the two statements were in conflict, why imply that I did?i

You mistakenly infer that I made such an implication. All I did was point out a simple fact that you weren't addressing the routes that Steve addressed. Maybe you shouldn't be so friggin defensive.