-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
A Point-to-Point through the FARs
- Thread starter Gatordev
- Start date
I did a bunch more Googling today and still can't manage to get a reference, but it appears sometime around 2012-13 the FAA removed the non-RNAV "Fix-to-Fix" procedure from ATC's rule book, with certain exceptions (military being one). I also found a few threads on other forums (with former Airwarrirors regular Hacker) talking about how the AF has removed the procedure, as well, to get inline with the FAA.
One note........I've never been to Mayport, but their mix of one million helo spots as well as arresting gear made me giggle.
Also, RNAV =/= GPS in all cases. I remember doing VOR/DME based RNAV in the Piper Arrow, back when IFR GPS was like a billion dollar proposition. It was an actual RNAV box, not just doing random point to points manually.
Also, RNAV =/= GPS in all cases. I remember doing VOR/DME based RNAV in the Piper Arrow, back when IFR GPS was like a billion dollar proposition. It was an actual RNAV box, not just doing random point to points manually.
RNAV has never = GPS. RNAV stands for Area Navigation (rho theta, Loran, INS, GNSS, etc).
But...what you describe is what Randy was talking about earlier (specifically rho theta). The last VOR/DME RNAV went away sometime around 2012, which is when (apparently) the FAA (and the Air Force) divested themselves of non-RNAV "fix to fix" navigation.
It was maybe mid 2000, before our MD 80s got ANY area nav, we were running only VOR/DME. Would blow the minds of the GA pilots looking into the cockpit. The guys that knew how flew finger derived point to points occasionally. Key was radar environment. Don't know about the requirement to know cross track error. Not on track get back on. What, I'll try harder if further off track? How knowing how far off is necessary when in radar contact I don't know.
It wasn't really. In doing the research, I found the requirement (mid-2000's) for ATC to give you a PTP was specifically being in a radar environment. Looking at the current instruction I mentioned earlier, it's still a requirement to allow DoD to do it.
Like they taught us back in VT-10 on day one with our penciles? Eventually you just said screw it and used your fingers to get you started in the right direction for a point to point then sweetened it up? Heck testing the new Nav and glass cockpit in the S-3 I still did that (never trusted the magenta). Out of Pax one day to San Dog, “hey Washington Center...RNAV direct Tinker” (to get our burgers then continue on). Got lazy and after a few hours I look over at my pilot as we blindly fly the needle...”do you have any fucking idea where we are?” I had lost the bubble on where my nearest divert was and my in-flight SA low light was full RED. After that I went back old school with my charts and fingers. That was my learning moment, I got lazy and it sucked me in. I still found I would scan the steam gauges vice the electronic displays for sure at the Boat. Just something about reading the trend of a VSI needle more than a readout. Same with airspeed. Dinasaur I am/was.
ATIS
I'm not very smart, or aren't following. They have a TACAN but can't fly to the NRB 183/5?
What don't I get?
I think it's mostly don't want to because they don't think it is legal.
This is not without controversy...
You're following. The argument is that when flying a radial, you can measure how far off that radial (or GPS course line) that you are (ie, XTK) by the deflection of a CDI (or GPS CDI/XTK distance). But when you moving from one point in space to another point in space with just a VOR/DME or TACAN, you're not able to measure any deviation from the initial required course because there is no way to depict the course line. Essentially, as the argument goes, you're homing, not navigating.
Like many things that are different between the services, I think it's a matter of comfort level. Apparently the FAA is no longer as comfortable with it either.
I guess I don't know what I don't know.....but if you told me to fly to that fix I could probably hit it within a couple of miles without even trying very hard. What is the actual tolerance when cleared to a fix?
Granted, I'm using an HSI so it's a little easier...but illegal?
Granted, I'm using an HSI so it's a little easier...but illegal?
It's probably in the PTS, which I'm too lazy to go look it up on Foreflight. I want to say MPTS CTS was .5 nm, but it's been a while.
Again, it's not that you're not capable of doing it. It's that you can't measure how accurate you are at doing it, if that makes sense. Again, so goes the argument.
Hitler? Heck, substitute “Navy” for “Air Force” and the first 2/3 of that rant could be “Meridian Sim Instructor Debriefs Averaged-Out Early-Stage RI.” ?
PTP was one of those things that was a huge sweat in flight school but I never used in the fleet. That and failed card. Dual EGI or computer failure in a 60 left you with the b/u attitude indicator so all you could do was ask for start/stop turn from ATC or see if you could figure out how to use a wet compass when you were somewhere other than Pensacola and the MAGVAR was different from the Pcola specific rules you learned in flight school.