WAC charts vs sectionals for VFR flight

What kind of chart do you use for VFR flight?

  • Sectional

    Votes: 49 89.1%

  • WAC

    Votes: 7 12.7%

  • electronic moving map

    Votes: 12 21.8%

  • something else

    Votes: 7 12.7%
  • Total voters
    55
  • Poll closed .
P

poadeleted3

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
2,055
Drove (YUCK!) my family down to Lancaster Airport yesterday to visit Airways pilot shop and pick up some charts for our flight to Charleston, WV, next weekend and other odds and ends for my flight bag like sic sacs and some "portable restroom" goodies.

I've never used anything other than sectional charts in my flying, since the ground detail is much better. Now, though, most of my cross countries are being done via GPS navigation, and I'm just using the charts to keep track of where we are in case of electrical failure, and not so much for primary navigation.

I noticed that I only need one WAC chart to cover all the flying I'm likely to do south of Philly, and another when I head north. I would have needed 2 or 3 sectionals, depending on the route I take, for the trip to Charleston. That certainly makes my cockpit organization easier, especially now that the cabin is more crowded with people. The detail seems more than sufficient for what I need. I was wondering what kind of charts others use for VFR flight?
 
Joe Williams said:
.....I was wondering what kind of charts others use for VFR flight?
Click to expand...

I use sectionals. It's just what I am used to.
 
Joe Williams said:
I was wondering what kind of charts others use for VFR flight?
Click to expand...

I use sectionals and Terminal Area charts (where applicable). They have more detailed information on them than WAC's. I even use them on IFR flights to identify landmarks and other particulars that don't show up on the IFR charts.
 
For the long flight I use the WAC's for they take up less room and they cover a larger area. I do have a backup of Sectionals and Terminals as well. For the long flight though the WAC's are great, less space and you are not changing them all the time. Also they are great for plotting the route before your trip.

All the charts have great pluses. Look at your needs and even I still carry a Rand McNally Road Atlas for it will tell the towns that even the sectionals do not have. The road atlas works great when you get the rental or loner car.


John J
 
On an aside, Joe said above he got some sick sacks from the pilot shop. I always make a point of grabbing several on EVERY commercial flight I take. You'd be amazed how fast seat mates hand them over if you ask "Uh, do you mind if I take your barf bag?" LOL

My friends are all trained to grab some for me when they fly too. Much cooler, IMHO, than ziplocks! LOL

S.
 
WACs miss things like, "Class E to the surface 1500Z-0500Z". They're OK if your are carrying the AFD (when VFR). But when the chips are down you want a sectional.

I use current sectionals for my origin, and terminus, and IFR current subscriptions for all the in-betweens...'cause after three near misses/25 years, I file eveytime (one near miss was on base in class D airspace!!).
 
Bruce, only 3 in 25 years? I've had 3 in as many years. As for filing, one of those near misses was while IFR with a -210 who also was IFR. We missed because I saw him through a hole as he was climbing into me.
 
Steve said:
I like the old Esso maps. The Rand/McNally atlases are hard to fold.

A couple of welcome center maps and a good pair of binoculars to read the water towers make "temporary mislocation" a thing of the past.
Click to expand...

Helicopter IFR: I follow roads :)

As a friend puts it: "Charts? We doan need no stinkin' charts! We get our maps at AAA!"
 
Sectionals in general, TACs when possible.

I use Flitesoft for planning which auromatically plots and prints my route on sectionals (or IFR charts). The charts are raster scans of the real thing complete with expiration dates.
 
SACs and TACs here too - never used a WAC - I like the detail. I suppose if I flew in the 10 thousands and above I'd want WACs tho...
 
I've used both over the years, but have migrated back to sectionals. I get the whole country in two bound books from Airchart. I just like the additional detail that you get with sectionals vs WAC's even though most of my x/c flying is IFR.
 
2 Sectionals; Denver and Cheyenne since we're right on the cut-off between the two; as well as the Denver Terminal area chart
 
Joe Williams said:
Drove (YUCK!) my family down to Lancaster Airport yesterday to visit Airways pilot shop and pick up some charts for our flight to Charleston, WV, next weekend and other odds and ends for my flight bag like sic sacs and some "portable restroom" goodies.

I've never used anything other than sectional charts in my flying, since the ground detail is much better. Now, though, most of my cross countries are being done via GPS navigation, and I'm just using the charts to keep track of where we are in case of electrical failure, and not so much for primary navigation.

I noticed that I only need one WAC chart to cover all the flying I'm likely to do south of Philly, and another when I head north. I would have needed 2 or 3 sectionals, depending on the route I take, for the trip to Charleston. That certainly makes my cockpit organization easier, especially now that the cabin is more crowded with people. The detail seems more than sufficient for what I need. I was wondering what kind of charts others use for VFR flight?
Click to expand...

Overall the sectionals are # 1, then moving map, then TAC, then WAC for me.
 
Joe,

WAC charts are great for initial flight planning, and that's what I use for long-range cross countries. There is certainly less chart-flipping that has to be done. However, I also use sectionals and transfer the course lines to them because of the better detail. If I'm flying through terminal areas I also pick up the Terminal Charts.

Call me anal-retentive, but I really like to know what I'm looking at, especially if I'm in an unfamiliar area. :)

Pilotage is one of my favorite things to do actually, and it's much more easily done using the sectional.

My best advice is to take both with you and try out the WACs for pilotage. You'll get to see their limitations (there is no dashed ring for Class D airspace, etc. etc.) as well as their strong points and can base your decision off of that.

For myself, I flight plan with WACs and will use them in the airplane in a pinch, but much prefer sectionals and terminal charts for actual navigation.

Carolyn
 
For VFR flights I carry sectional & terminal charts properly folded. I actually navigate with the 7 X 5 inch kneeboard "Trip Ticks" from Aeroplanner (Sectionals). Although all the planes I fly have IFR-certified GPS units, I like the challenge of pilotage and ded reckoning navigation (I don't want to lose the skill). WACs just don't have the detail required (for me)for pilotage in slow prop planes in the complex airspace on the east coast.

Tony
 
Last edited:
I use Sectionals and Terminal charts for VFR work, and Low Alt Enrouts for XC nav. WACs have very limited usefulness to me because of the missing info.
 
Richard said:
Bruce, only 3 in 25 years? I've had 3 in as many years. As for filing, one of those near misses was while IFR with a -210 who also was IFR. We missed because I saw him through a hole as he was climbing into me.
Click to expand...

Hey 3 is enough. But I'm rarely below one-five thousand just to avoid the traffic....
 
I was using my nice new WAC last night to try to pick a route to Charleston, WV. I can either go direct, which takes me over mountains with limited emergency landing opportunities, or add about 13 miles to my route and be over flat land, or mountains with at least an interstate to land on if all else fails. I laid out a route that included a leg between Lancaster VOR (LRP) and Hagerstown VOR (HGR). On the WAC, this route appeared to keep me well clear of P40 and it's restricted areas. Lay out the same route on a sectional, though, and you are cutting through the expanded P40 restricted areas. Not so cool, especially considering that I could instead go LRP to St. Thomas VOR (THS) just as easily and without adding any length to my trip.

I still kind of like the idea of using the WAC to back up the GPS/moving maps, but my wife/nagigator likes the sectionals better. She likes the extra details. Guess I'll be sticking with the sectionals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top