LiveATC Discussion Forums
Air Traffic Monitoring => Aviation Audio Clips => Topic started by: rickeyy on July 12, 2008, 03:51:53 PM
-
KLAS-Jul-12-2008-1730Z.mp3
-
Help a brother out here and post the approximate minute mark within that 30 minute clip where this was said. :)
-
I got the clip on the PC but do not know how to post it Thought I did it right
-
I think this is it
-
Ok so the clip is 31:36 long. Where in the clip is this "incident"?
-
OK so I think its the part which starts around 21:00.
-
If you listen to earlier portions, you'll hear where N317DJ is apparently having navigation problems. Tries to blame it on his lack of equipment!
The aircraft is an Eclipse Aviation EA500 'microjet' (as the controller called it).
-
WOW
That guy sounds like someone flying on (VATSIM)! LOL :-D
The fun starts after 16:00 on the tape
Transcript
"ya I understand sir and we could have if we where given permission to intercept one of those radials to go right to clarr off the radial but we don't have R-NAV yet"
Hello ? "we don't have R-NAV yet" Are you sure you didn't record this off vatsim ?? LOL
O-BOY I am glad I was not on that flight !
thanks for the recording
Now if I could only stop laughing :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
73
KB6HLM
Las Vegas, NV
Live webcam www.camradio.net
-
Somebody is in error here. It is either the controller or the pilot. RNAV is part of the equipment suffix. So either the controller thought they had RNAV (more on this in a sec) or the pilot incorrectly filed his aircraft as having RNAV or GPS.
The controller's advice at the 16:00 minute mark about finding the intersection is completely incorrect. The intersection may be defined by LAS and DAG radials. But he says you don't need RNAV to go direct to that point, which is absolutely wrong. That's the definition of RNAV, to be able to go direct to a point without flying the radial. The pilot is correct saying that if he was given direct to LAS or DAG, or given a vector to intercept one of the radials, they would have been able to fly over the intersection.
The SWA pilot later in the clip is incorrect in saying that he could have done it. That actually confuses me, as the SWA pilot has no idea what the eclipse is equipped with.
Part of the problem is controllers have gotten used to jet aircraft having DME-DME RNAVs or GPS and being able to send them where ever they wanted. Center controllers are used to this as NWA DC-9s are not capable.
Does anyone else know of a way to fly directly to an intersection without RNAV/GPS?
-
Does anyone else know of a way to fly directly to an intersection without RNAV/GPS?
ESP.
-
Somebody is in error here. It is either the controller or the pilot. RNAV is part of the equipment suffix. So either the controller thought they had RNAV (more on this in a sec) or the pilot incorrectly filed his aircraft as having RNAV or GPS.
I have been experiencing this scenario in reverse a lot these days. I always file IFR in a BE35/G (for those unaware, /G is RNAV/GPS equipment suffix), but many times I will receive the following instruction from ATC just after departing:
"Bonanza XXX, turn left 150, when receiving Rockdale VOR, direct Rockdale."
One time I replied to this by stating that I was a "slant Golf" and was direct Rockdale at this time, but the controller didn't acknowledge the discrepancy.
In any regard, good observation.
Does anyone else know of a way to fly directly to an intersection without RNAV/GPS?
Loran?
-
Loran?
That's not IFR. Controller could never ask you to do it legally. Plus, that'd be part of an RNAV suffix
-
That's not IFR. Controller could never ask you to do it legally. Plus, that'd be part of an RNAV suffix
Being a pilot who came to this party officially in early 2002, I know absolutely nothing about Loran (other than skipping over those pretty and colorful pages in the AIM). I had meant a smiley on that comment but sent it up too fast to catch that I was missing it.
-
"But he says you don't need RNAV to go direct to that point, which is absolutely wrong"
Well now thats funny as we here at Janet are given direct to (well you know) all the time without radials to or from any VOR and as you may have known we file as TYPE A
Now as to flying to a intersection without RNAV You bet ya its done all the time even with only TYPE A ! in other words you don't need to file as RNAV or GPS. to get direct to a intersection or anything else for that matter
Good Day
Unknown
One other thing I should add here as per
Quote from: cessna157 on Today at 07:31:15 AM
Does anyone else know of a way to fly directly to an intersection without RNAV/GPS?
Yes just look at your charts ! its as easy as that (No ESP needed) :-D
-
Yes just look at your charts ! its as easy as that (No ESP needed) :-D
Okay, I'm looking at my chart....now what do I do?
If you wanted to fly directly to an intersection, without first proceeding direct to a VOR/NDB or intercepting a defining radial first, how would one do that? You have no way of positively identifying the fix.
Yes, you could proceed by dead reckoning (throw out pilotage, we're IMC), but you wouldn't be flying directly to a fix. You'd be flying in the general direcion of a fix by guessing.
-
Does anyone else know of a way to fly directly to an intersection without RNAV/GPS?
The closest you get is:
"Approach, request radar vectors direct [INTERSECTION], we're /U"
--Carlos V.
-
Yes just look at your charts ! its as easy as that (No ESP needed) :-D
Really? And once you look at your charts what do use to navigate to the intersection? The heading bug set to an estimated heading? What positive course guidance are you following?
-
Yes just look at your charts ! its as easy as that (No ESP needed) :-D
Okay, I'm looking at my chart....now what do I do?
If you wanted to fly directly to an intersection, without first proceeding direct to a VOR/NDB or intercepting a defining radial first, how would one do that? You have no way of positively identifying the fix.
Yes, you could proceed by dead reckoning (throw out pilotage, we're IMC), but you wouldn't be flying directly to a fix. You'd be flying in the general direcion of a fix by guessing.
You answered your own question "proceeding direct to a VOR/NDB or intercepting a defining radial first"
Now back to...... do I have to file RNAV/GPS in my flight plans the answer is absolutely not ! however if you are given direct to you must be able to except it If not refuse !
Please remember just because a pilot dose not file for lets say TYPE G dose not mean he cant except direct to such as the case with (Janet)
-
You answered your own question "proceeding direct to a VOR/NDB or intercepting a defining radial first"
Now back to...... do I have to file RNAV/GPS in my flight plans the answer is absolutely not ! however if you are given direct to you must be able to except it If not refuse !
Please remember just because a pilot dose not file for lets say TYPE G dose not mean he cant except direct to such as the case with (Janet)
"Proceeding direct to a VOR/NDB or intercepting a defining radial first" is not direct, that's the point he's trying to make. Direct would be present position direct to that intersection, not intercepting a defining radial and tracking towards it.
If N90 instructs me to proceed direct RYMES and I fly north to pick up the BDR R-288 first instead of turning westbound and tracking towards it, I will have a phone number to call after I land, guaranteed.
Most controllers I talk to check the equipment suffix (ie, slant golf) on the flight progress strip or URET before sending an aircraft direct to a fix.
-
"Proceeding direct to a VOR/NDB or intercepting a defining radial first" is not direct, that's the point he's trying to make. Direct would be present position direct to that intersection"
Yes thanks for pointing that out I miss spoke about that I should have said thats one way to find a intersection
Anyway the whole point I was trying to make here was its ok to fly direct too (????) even if you did not file TYPE /R-NAV or other
Now once again if you are given direct too if you cant except it DONT ! as far as flying direct to that intersection off the flight path without first given vectors from ATC you better be prepared to pull up that GPS or something to get you there !
As far as "Most controllers I talk to check the equipment suffix (ie, slant golf) on the flight progress strip or URET before sending an aircraft direct to a fix"
Yes underline Most controllers and some airlines are treated differently such as........ yep you guess it (JANET) :-D
-
Loran?
That's not IFR. Controller could never ask you to do it legally. Plus, that'd be part of an RNAV suffix
Bzzzzt! In Canada you can use LORAN-C For IFR Navigation:
COM 3.15.3 (http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/publications/tp14371/COM/3-1.htm#3-15-3) States:
"LORAN-C can be used for enroute IFR navigation subject to certain limitations and conditions. Operation in terminal control areas and during instrument approaches must be with reference to conventional navigation aids or IFR-certified GPS."
So technically you can use loran-c to go 'direct to' an intersection (since LORAN-C is part of the suite of tools you can use for rnav) as long as you are not in terminal control areas.
-
LORAN-C ? OMG is that still around ? WOW
I remember when my dad had LORAN-C on one his old boats years and years ago but never really used it as we preferred to use something even older a (sextant) for you young folks out there you will have to do a search on that one :-D
Do you have a old B/W television you watch as well (LOL) J/K
Anyway good luck with that :-D
-
Yeah, Loran still works.
What was the predecessor? I cannot recall the name? Omega?
It was another low frequency system, even more prehistoric than Loran.
-
yeah it was omega
-
Oh how spoiled we have become with GPS these days! OK- gonna sound like a crusty old one here- but way back when in Air Force Pilot training we did have to do this. It was call fix to fix. It was a real joy in the T-37. I can't remember how we did it. But I do remember when graduated to the T-38 it had an HSI. Wow- amazing technology! We would "visualize" the fixes overlayed onto the HSI and estimate a heading. Not an exact science. Usually you intercepted the radial within a mile or two (if lucky) and then followed the radial the remaining distance to the target fix. After initial pilot training- never did it again. Pay your dues type thing, I guess!
-
A simple explanation for those who want to know how to proceed from fix to fix. First time here. The minimum I can do for this interesting web page.
In order to imaging the fix in the RMI, you have to get a rough relationship between ACFT's DME distance and FIX DME distances: in the example 30 will be fond at the outer part of the RMI and 15 at the middle. Some other relationships could be i.e. 45 and 15: 45 (3/3) at the outer edge of the RMI and 15 at 1/3, etc
Regards,
Jaime
-
Oh how spoiled we have become with GPS these days! OK- gonna sound like a crusty old one here- but way back when in Air Force Pilot training we did have to do this. It was call fix to fix. It was a real joy in the T-37.
Were you allowed to do this while flying IFR?
-
Somebody is in error here. It is either the controller or the pilot. RNAV is part of the equipment suffix. So either the controller thought they had RNAV (more on this in a sec) or the pilot incorrectly filed his aircraft as having RNAV or GPS.
AND
Part of the problem is controllers have gotten used to jet aircraft having DME-DME RNAVs or GPS and being able to send them where ever they wanted. Center controllers are used to this as NWA DC-9s are not capable.
I think you're onto it. I suspect the controller assumed a brand new jet like the Eclipse would have RNAV, but due to issues with their avionics suite most are VOR-only at this point.
-
unless the fix was along an airway or radial the EA50 was on then there is no way he could have known where that fix was. so maybe the controller thought he was on an airway???
-
Yes just look at your charts ! its as easy as that (No ESP needed) :-D
OK, so if you're like the guy in the clip on the CLARR2 approach (http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0807/00662CLARR.PDF) at the "J" in JOTNU, and the controller tells you to proceed direct CLARR, pray tell the exact heading you will follow (No ESP or guessing allowed).
The controller shows (and around 21:00, admits) his ignorance when he says even a Cirrus (with dual GPS) could proceed to a fix, and tells the pilot to put the fix in his "database". He doesn't have one, that's the problem. But in the controller's defense, it's pretty ridiculous in 2008 to have jets flying into Class B airspace without RNAV.
-
Yes just look at your charts ! its as easy as that (No ESP needed) :-D
OK, so if you're like the guy in the clip on the CLARR2 approach (http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0807/00662CLARR.PDF) at the "J" in JOTNU, and the controller tells you to proceed direct CLARR, pray tell the exact heading you will follow (No ESP or guessing allowed).
The controller shows (and around 21:00, admits) his ignorance when he says even a Cirrus (with dual GPS) could proceed to a fix, and tells the pilot to put the fix in his "database". He doesn't have one, that's the problem. But in the controller's defense, it's pretty ridiculous in 2008 to have jets flying into Class B airspace without RNAV.
Why would it be ridiculous? There are American MD80s that are /I that fly in and out of Class B airspace on a daily basis! Any plane should be able to transition Class A through G airspace with or without RNAV, as long as they know how to operate their plane and instruments. You don't have to be RNAV to get in or out of Class B. Case in point, those Amflight and Pac Valley C208s that come in all the time. I can guarantee that none of those are RNAV.
BL.
-
Why would it be ridiculous? There are American MD80s that are /I that fly in and out of Class B airspace on a daily basis! Any plane should be able to transition Class A through G airspace with or without RNAV, as long as they know how to operate their plane and instruments. You don't have to be RNAV to get in or out of Class B. Case in point, those Amflight and Pac Valley C208s that come in all the time. I can guarantee that none of those are RNAV.
I don't mean as a regulatory requirement, I mean (1) as just a reasonable expectation, and (2) as a practical matter for transitioning from the flight levels through busy corridors at high speeds.
Re: (1), I would say - show me an Eclipse owner who isn't bummed about carrying a Garmin 496 around in their VLJ, and I'll concede the point :-D
Re: (2) I would argue the Caravans are a different matter I think, since they're low & slow. I'm not a controller but when I've flown low & slow planes into busy airports, it seems like the controllers have a separate game plan on how to handle me. Kinda like when an 80-year old crosses the street - nobody honks their horn to tell the guy to speed up. :wink:
As for the MD80s, all the AA flights I found in a brief search on Flightaware were /Q. Can you cite a specific example? But taking your word for it, /I is basic RNAV, so they have more than the guy in the clip. But if they just have VOR/DME I guess they would be in the same boat, unable to go direct CLARR. Those AA MD80s really don't have the capability to go direct to an intersection?
OK, so maybe "ridiculous" is a bit harsh...I'll rephrase - I think it's uncool 8-)
-
Re: (2) I would argue the Caravans are a different matter I think, since they're low & slow. I'm not a controller but when I've flown low & slow planes into busy airports, it seems like the controllers have a separate game plan on how to handle me. Kinda like when an 80-year old crosses the street - nobody honks their horn to tell the guy to speed up.
They generally add more separation between caravans and those following them because of them being slow/go. Also, the CRESO3 arrival is still in use for those slow birds coming from the south, and it is only used for those Slow/go
Another set of routes that they use is the El Cortez 1 VFR transition going over the old Showboat hotel location, above Fremont Street and in to VGT, the Rocks transition that goes up the west side of Vegas over Redrock Canyon, the 3 Fingers lakes and into VGT (that one pretty much stays outside of Class B), and the Henderson routing (fly over HND airport, direct the numbers for 25L/R, depart the numbers heading 010 or 290 if traffic permits at 5000ft (IFR) or 4500ft (VFR)), which goes straight through the Bravo.
As far as an example, I remember hearing it on Delivery when I was there 3 weeks ago. The pilot called in looking for clearance and specifically said that they were /I today.
I agree on the Eclipse.
BL.
-
Oh how spoiled we have become with GPS these days! OK- gonna sound like a crusty old one here- but way back when in Air Force Pilot training we did have to do this. It was call fix to fix. It was a real joy in the T-37.
Were you allowed to do this while flying IFR?
Sure enough. ATC would not tell us to do it- we would request it. It was part of the syllabus of training, so on your cross countries you would request it. Quite often if not always we would get clearance to do it.
-
I'm not sure if anybody said this or not but it is very possible to go direct to an intersection without rnav, or dme. I have to go in the direction of the controller, the pilot obviously never learned to read sids and stars.
-
I'm not sure if anybody said this or not but it is very possible to go direct to an intersection without rnav, or dme. I have to go in the direction of the controller, the pilot obviously never learned to read sids and stars.
and how would you get to said intersection? Most intersections (not including RNAV) are referenced in relation to a given VOR. For example, on the CLARR2 arrival, you could only get to CLARR if you were1) RNAV capable, or 2) have DME. CLARR is on the LAS R-211, 35DME, and you wouldn't be able to get to it without figuring out how far away you are from LAS.
If the controller had told him what someone else had posted, like "fly heading 360, on that heading join the Las Vegas 211 Radial inbound", you would be able to get to CLARR. But other than that, without DME at the least, you can't go direct to any intersection (and for the most, not even with DME).
BL.
-
Heres how you do it.
You draw a line on the Jepp chart from where you are, direct to the fix. Using the scale ruler, you plot dme distances all along the route, then you fly a basic DME arc to the fix. Except the arc is in a straight line.
if its legal for approaches, its legal for enroute.
No DME ? The you have to do the same thing by triangulating 2 VOR radials. Very tough to do while PIC.
-
I don't know of any sane person that would navigate this way. Completely unrealistic.
While an interesting idea and way to navigate, it sounds like an overly complex form of dead reckoning.