What’s your on course heading?

[flybill]

I have run into this several times on the ground and also in the air. Why does ATC sometimes ask you what your oncourse heading is to the destination? This has been asked after I was given my clearance.

 

[Captain Bubba]

Because ATC may not recognize your destination's identifier and they would like to vector you in more or less the right direction. Also depending on what constraints they have with your next handoff ATC facility they may be able to clear you direct.

 

[asicer]

I get asked "say heading" when my DG (usually a rental plane) has precessed 20 degrees in the previous 10 minutes and I forgot to reset it.

I get asked "say route of flight" when there's a couple different ways I could get to my destination (e.g. North vs South of a terrain feature, following one highway vs another highway, etc). Presumably, one way could involve a hand-off to a different ATC facility than the other.

 

[Brad Z]

I get asked "say on course heading" all of the time. 99% of the time a controller asks this question they'll get a response with the magnetic track to the destination.

 

[Clip4]

I get asked "say heading" when my DG (usually a rental plane) has precessed 20 degrees in the previous 10 minutes and I forgot to reset it.

I get asked "say route of flight" when there's a couple different ways I could get to my destination (e.g. North vs South of a terrain feature, following one highway vs another highway, etc). Presumably, one way could involve a hand-off to a different ATC facility than the other.

Look at you EFB or GPS.

 

[eman1200]

point and say "I'm going that way"

 

[NealRomeoGolf]

I get asked this a lot when heading home from the St Louis area. I have to cross their arrival corridor to the bigger airport and they need to know how far to vector me out until I'm no longer a problem. They are playing chess and thinking a few moves ahead.

 

[Velocity173]

I have run into this several times on the ground and also in the air. Why does ATC sometimes ask you what your oncourse heading is to the destination? This has been asked after I was given my clearance.

Knowing your on course heading (track) allows them to plan ahead around other enroute / arrivals. It allows them to verify your assigned altitude meets their MVA requirements. It allows them to plan ahead around SUA, anticipate sector hand off, or if clipping a sector, get coordination (point out).

For the most part, for TRACON / ARTCC their software will provide a track. If not, they either don’t have the newest software, don’t have your destination in the database, or they just don’t want to bother looking it up.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I get asked "say on course heading" all of the time. 99% of the time a controller asks this question they'll get a response with the magnetic track to the destination.

Only 99%? You actually know pilots who check the current winds aloft forecast and pull out an E6B to do a wind triangle before answering?

 

[midlifeflyer]

Because ATC may not recognize your destination's identifier and they would like to vector you in more or less the right direction. Also depending on what constraints they have with your next handoff ATC facility they may be able to clear you direct.

 

[texasclouds]

Uh, east heading 270…over

 

[luvflyin]

Knowing your on course heading (track) allows them to plan ahead around other enroute / arrivals. It allows them to verify your assigned altitude meets their MVA requirements. It allows them to plan ahead around SUA, anticipate sector hand off, or if clipping a sector, get coordination (point out).

For the most part, for TRACON / ARTCC their software will provide a track. If not, they either don’t have the newest software, don’t have your destination in the database, or they just don’t want to bother looking it up.

Yup. If they’d just ask ‘what’s your track’ instead of this ‘on course heading’ BS we wouldn’t have to be having these conversations. Of course[pun not intended] there is the occasional prehistoric non GPS equipped aircraft out there, then they will just figure it out the old fashioned way.

 

[Brad Z]

Only 99%? You actually know pilots who check the current winds aloft forecast and pull out an E6B to do a wind triangle before answering?

...or read the closest number on the magnetic compass and add a zero?

Seriously though, with high tech avionics, it's easy to give a precise and accurate heading. Regardless, even though they ask fo ra heading, I don't think they want a heading. Usually the difference is negligible for the reasons they're asking.

 

[coma24]

I give the magnetic course as I know that's what they're after, usually rounded to the nearest 5. They need to know roughly where I'm going and which sector to handoff to.

 

[RussR]

So the ironic thing, of course, is that they don't really want what they're asking for. They don't want your "on-course heading", which would be the heading you have to fly to maintain the desired course/track, adjusting for wind.

What they need to ask for is your "desired track to destination", to use reasonably standard GPS terminology. I would even accept "what is your course to destination" or similar. But putting the word "heading" in there doesn't accomplish what they want.

 

[luvflyin]

...or read the closest number on the magnetic compass and add a zero?

Seriously though, with high tech avionics, it's easy to give a precise and accurate heading. Regardless, even though they ask fo ra heading, I don't think they want a heading. Usually the difference is negligible for the reasons they're asking.

Yup. A neat thing about that is being able to get accurate winds aloft, right now, right where you are.

 

[Bill]

I don't see what the big deal is, once you've been asked that question a time or two you know exactly what they're looking for and you reply in kind. It's not a big deal!

 

[Velocity173]

Yup. If they’d just ask ‘what’s your track’ instead of this ‘on course heading’ BS we wouldn’t have to be having these conversations. Of course[pun not intended] there is the occasional prehistoric non GPS equipped aircraft out there, then they will just figure it out the old fashioned way.

I used to say “what’s your on course to XYZ?” That way I didn’t expose my ignorance to not knowing the difference between mag heading and track.

 

[PaulS]

In flight, I get asked for my heading once in a while, that's what I give them, they correct for wind and are either trying to figure out the wind, or wonder if I am on the heading they gave me. Before take off, they ask for on course heading, that's what I give them. If they want the track, they will ask for it. This stuff isn't complicated, just give them what they ask.

 

[luvflyin]

In flight, I get asked for my heading once in a while, that's what I give them, they correct for wind and are either trying to figure out the wind, or wonder if I am on the heading they gave me. Before take off, they ask for on course heading, that's what I give them. If they want the track, they will ask for it. This stuff isn't complicated, just give them what they ask.

If before takeoff, how do you know what heading will be needed to fly a particular course?

 

[luvflyin]

I don't see what the big deal is, once you've been asked that question a time or two you know exactly what they're looking for and you reply in kind. It's not a big deal!

Yeah. But if ATC would just ask for what it is they want, folk wouldn’t have to go through that two or three times thing to figure it out. ATC is the bad guy here. I’m not saying all Controllers. But FAA leadership could put this to rest.

 

[David Megginson]

I have run into this several times on the ground and also in the air. Why does ATC sometimes ask you what your oncourse heading is to the destination? This has been asked after I was given my clearance.

In addition to what others have written, you might not be flying direct — perhaps you're planning a dogleg to avoid some hills, or fly over your great-aunt's hometown. They don't know when you're VFR. And in any case, while we've all gotten lazy following the magenta line (I'm equally guilty), pilots are still supposed to know their wind-corrected headings for each leg — it's PPL ground school 101.

If before takeoff, how do you know what heading will be needed to fly a particular course?

Some day ATC will use track instead of heading, but we're not there yet. That said, it's not too difficult — just take a WAG, and (if needed) add/subtract 5–20° based on where you know the wind is. For example, if you're flying south and the wind is 20 kt from the west, adding 10° to your track will close enough for most of us (OK maybe 45° for a C150 or a Cub ). Or if that seems too hard, look at the flightplan in your GPS or EFB app, and it will give you a wind-corrected heading for each leg (based on forecast winds).

Unless ATC actually gives you a vector, you don't have to follow the heading precisely; just give a rough idea. Once they say "cleared on route", then you can fly your actual route.

 

[PaulS]

If before takeoff, how do you know what heading will be needed to fly a particular course?

Flight planning. I plan a heading, adjust as necessary once airborne to maintain my desired track, it's all you can do. Generally they want a cardinal direction, but occasionally they will ask on course heading, that's what I give them. Usually that is because of arriving traffic, to get an idea if there will be a conflict. If there is a potential conflict they'll assign a heading on take off.

 

[David Megginson]

If before takeoff, how do you know what heading will be needed to fly a particular course?

(Or, more realistically these days, just look at the HDG column in your flight-planning app.)

 

[EdFred]

...or read the closest number on the magnetic compass and add a zero?

Seriously though, with high tech avionics, it's easy to give a precise and accurate heading. Regardless, even though they ask fo ra heading, I don't think they want a heading. Usually the difference is negligible for the reasons they're asking.

I usually get asked for the on course heading before I've made the turn to get on course, so it's not just reading the DG/HSI. I might actually be off 10-20 degrees heading vs course. I come back with "my course will be xxx." But my heading might be 20 degrees off depending how bad the winds are.

And when the winds have been screaming, I have gotten asked "what's your current heading." Usually when they tell me to fly a heading, and my track isn't what they expected. I answer with my current heading and get reassigned a new heading to compensate for crazy winds.

 

[Witmo]

If before takeoff, how do you know what heading will be needed to fly a particular course?

They're not scoring a bombing run; + or - 10 degrees of what ends up being the heading is close enough for government work.

 

[Deelee]

I got asked this the other day skirting the SFRA. I had flipped to HDG mode to clear out the old flight plan in the 430 (was doing practice approaches and was going to a different airport)... welp... forgot the AP was still on HGD and not GPSS.. was going pretty much in the right direction, but getting closer and closer to the SFRA boundary. On Saturday. 9/11.... Controller chimed in with something like, "Say heading and destination...".. I quickly flipped AP back over to GPSS and said... ahhh direct to blah blah... thanks!

 

[luvflyin]

...Some day ATC will use track instead of heading, but we're not there yet... [/QUOTE]
I say the time is here. For the occasional pilot who says 'I need headings' they can just give a heading. I'm wondering what the arguments might be against that. There might something that I haven't thought of

 

[PaulS]

...Some day ATC will use track instead of heading, but we're not there yet...

I say the time is here. For the occasional pilot who says 'I need headings' they can just give a heading. I'm wondering what the arguments might be against that. There might something that I haven't thought of[/QUOTE]

That leaves the pilot to figure it out, and a potentially unstable flight path, where telling the pilot to fly a heading takes the guess work out of it and unless the pilot is unable to fly a heading, you get a stable flight path. I don't see any advantage to a track, come to think of it, a track generally is defined by flying to a fix. So if they want a track, they tell you to fly to the fix. I get that a lot too.

 

[RussR]

That leaves the pilot to figure it out, and a potentially unstable flight path, where telling the pilot to fly a heading takes the guess work out of it and unless the pilot is unable to fly a heading, you get a stable flight path.

I don't know, every GPS unit I've ever seen has the ability to display the ground track actually being flown. In fact, it's one of the techniques I show instrument students where they're having trouble staying on course (okay, your desired track is 174. See your actual track? It's now 165. That's why you keep going off course. Turn until it says 174.) It's not the only technique, certainly, but it is one of them.

I don't think it's any harder to hand-fly a track than fly a heading.

The issue would be that getting the autopilot to do it might be a little tricky. Yes, you could have it in heading mode and have it fly whatever heading equates to the desired track at that time, but now that IS introducing a layer of complexity that doesn't exist now.

 

[midlifeflyer]

...or read the closest number on the magnetic compass and add a zero?

Seriously though, with high tech avionics, it's easy to give a precise and accurate heading. Regardless, even though they ask fo ra heading, I don't think they want a heading. Usually the difference is negligible for the reasons they're asking.

I know I can give a very accurate course/track, even with an uncertified handheld. But how does our high tech avionics know what the winds will be 100nm later?

 

[David Megginson]

...Some day ATC will use track instead of heading, but we're not there yet...
I say the time is here. For the occasional pilot who says 'I need headings' they can just give a heading. I'm wondering what the arguments might be against that. There might something that I haven't thought of

Unfortunately, it's not up to you and me to decide in an online forum — heading is the standard practice now (at least below the flight levels and south of the Arctic Circle), so it will require changes to the system at the individual national level, and likely, ICAO (since lots of planes fly between countries). There's a lot below the surface — for example, switching to track would require a regulation that all aircraft have RNAV capability to fly in controlled airspace, then they'd have to define what you can get away with for VFR use (which might or might not include an iPad), etc. etc. Wheels within wheels: right now, it's still legal to go flying day VFR in a fixed-gear, fixed-pitch-prop plane with just magentic compass, altimeter, airspeed indicator, tachometer, oil temp/pressure, and fuel gauge (unless limitations in the POH specify otherwise), and that would have to change first.

ATC might give you a track instead of a heading if you make a special request, but they don't have to. I think a switch to track is inevitable, but there's a fair bit that has to happen first.

 

[David Megginson]

I know I can give a very accurate course/track, even with an uncertified handheld. But how does our high tech avionics know what the winds will be 100nm later?

https://www.aviationweather.gov/windtemp

My devices can get upper winds from SiriusXM here in Canada, so I assume they're also available via FIS-B in the U.S. And the upper wind forecasts don't change that often, so whatever your app picked up from the internet an hour before your flight is probably still good enough.

Note that no one here is saying heading vectors are better than track vectors, and insisting that ATC should stick with them forever and ever (amen); just that right now — September 2021 — that's our operational reality while interacting with ATC. And in any case, we've all been trained how to calculate headings based on forecast upper winds during PPL ground school, so while it's a bit of an annoyance, it shouldn't actually puzzle any licensed pilot (or else they couldn't have passed the PPL written exam).

 

[luvflyin]

Unfortunately, it's not up to you and me to decide in an online forum — heading is the standard practice now (at least below the flight levels and south of the Arctic Circle), so it will require changes to the system at the individual national level, and likely, ICAO (since lots of planes fly between countries). There's a lot below the surface — for example, switching to track would require a regulation that all aircraft have RNAV capability to fly in controlled airspace, then they'd have to define what you can get away with for VFR use (which might or might not include an iPad), etc. etc. Wheels within wheels: right now, it's still legal to go flying day VFR in a fixed-gear, fixed-pitch-prop plane with just magentic compass, altimeter, airspeed indicator, tachometer, oil temp/pressure, and fuel gauge (unless limitations in the POH specify otherwise), and that would have to change first.

ATC might give you a track instead of a heading if you make a special request, but they don't have to. I think a switch to track is inevitable, but there's a fair bit that has to happen first.

Yeah, there’s the ICAO standardization thing. As far as requiring RNAV to fly at all in Controlled Airspace I don’t see that as an issue. Controllers will still know how to say heading when needed. But yeah, it’s probably going to be quite awhile before Track becomes the norm and Heading the exception rather than vice versa.

 

[PaulS]

I don't know, every GPS unit I've ever seen has the ability to display the ground track actually being flown. In fact, it's one of the techniques I show instrument students where they're having trouble staying on course (okay, your desired track is 174. See your actual track? It's now 165. That's why you keep going off course. Turn until it says 174.) It's not the only technique, certainly, but it is one of them.

I don't think it's any harder to hand-fly a track than fly a heading.

The issue would be that getting the autopilot to do it might be a little tricky. Yes, you could have it in heading mode and have it fly whatever heading equates to the desired track at that time, but now that IS introducing a layer of complexity that doesn't exist now.

The problem is when one assumes constant winds, winds are seldom constant, either in velocity or direction when I fly, that would make maintaining a track more difficult than just flying a heading. When I'm flying under ATC direction, usually IFR, I'm flying from waypoint to waypoint, unless they are steering me around something or I am deviating around weather. I see no use in ATC assigning a track, it complicates things unnecessarily, specifically maintaining the track under constantly varying conditions. Fly a heading, if ATC needs to adjust you, it's a simple call for them. As a pilot, most of the time I have no idea why they've put me on a heading.

 

[RussR]

The problem is when one assumes constant winds, winds are seldom constant, either in velocity or direction when I fly, that would make maintaining a track more difficult than just flying a heading. When I'm flying under ATC direction, usually IFR, I'm flying from waypoint to waypoint, unless they are steering me around something or I am deviating around weather. I see no use in ATC assigning a track, it complicates things unnecessarily, specifically maintaining the track under constantly varying conditions. Fly a heading, if ATC needs to adjust you, it's a simple call for them. As a pilot, most of the time I have no idea why they've put me on a heading.

I guess I don't see how functionally it's any different, assuming hand-flying. You're just using a different reference indicator. If ATC assigns you a heading, you turn to that heading, but after that it's a series of small corrections, right? You are never perfectly aligned with that heading, you are always doing some small correction - the wind bumps you around, airplane isn't rigged perfectly, your foot is too heavy on the rudder, whatever. You're constantly correcting that heading.

If I was asked to fly a track, I would do exactly the same thing - turn until the GPS says I'm flying that track, then make constant small corrections to keep on that track. It's literally exactly what you're trying to do every time you currently fly any IFR procedure, whether it's a VOR radial, an ILS or a GPS procedure.

So really, the difference is not in execution, at least in my mind. Where there IS a difference is in current presentation methods. For heading, we have that nice big DG right in front of us. For track, there are a variety of methods - numerical on the GPS, ground track "diamond" on the DG on a Aspen or G1000 (etc.), perhaps some others. But if we had a ground track readout that looked just like a DG, I think the difference in flyability would be essentially unnoticeable.

For example, Foreflight's AHRS display shows ground track on a DG-like presentation. In this example, the track is 114. If ATC told you to fly track 120, I don't think it would take any different level of effort than now when they tell you to fly a heading.

Oh, and while we're at this admitted pipe dream, when we implement it we might as well do away with all this "magnetic north" stuff at the same time. If we're not setting a DG to a magnetic compass (or an HSI to a magnetometer), then Magnetic Variation is no longer important...

 

[Salty]

You gentleman impress me. I would have never thought this subject could generate this much discussion.

 

[Hang 4]

You gentleman impress me. I would have never thought this subject could generate this much discussion.

You underestimate the POA superpower.

 

[exncsurfer]

Anybody else get confused by 'on course' and 'own navigation' when you were training? At first I thought my CFI had a strange accent because he was reading back 'own navigation' and I though the was just pronouncing 'on navigation' strangely. Also was curious what 'on navigation' meant


edit: thanks @asicer for the memory jog.

 

[asicer]

Anybody else get confused by 'on course' and 'own course' when you were training? At first I thought my CFI had a strange accent because he was reading back 'own course' and I though the was just pronouncing 'on course' strangely.

I've never heard "own course". It's always been "own nav".