Author Topic: Flying direct without GPS.....?  (Read 23740 times)

Offline Immelman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Flying direct without GPS.....?
« on: October 16, 2013, 09:19:01 PM »
I am currently training for my IFR rating. The aircraft I fly has a GPS however, the database is expired and for whatever reason the flight school doesn't upgrade it. Since the GPS database is expired I have been filing /A on my IFR flight plans. On my past two flights ATC has asked me to fly direct to the final approach fix of an ILS approach. The only practical way for me to do this was to "cheat" and use the GPS. I am curious why ATC gives me a direct clearance without the knowledge that I have a GPS. Also, what would be the correct way to handle a direct clearance without having to "cheat" and use the GPS. Should I ask for vectors?



Offline klkm

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 57
Re: Flying direct without GPS.....?
« Reply #1 on: October 17, 2013, 09:45:23 AM »
Just let them know you don't have GPS and require vectors.  They most likely didn't look at your equipment suffix.

Offline spades

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Re: Flying direct without GPS.....?
« Reply #2 on: October 17, 2013, 11:59:14 AM »
If you cannot accept a clearance then it is up to you to inform them.

As the above guy said, sometimes equipment suffixes are overlooked.  You can request vectors but more than likely that will be denied.  We can only vector if the approach is depicted on our scopes.  The overwhelming majority of them are not.

Offline Brad G.

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 236
Re: Flying direct without GPS.....?
« Reply #3 on: October 17, 2013, 02:57:07 PM »
We can only vector if the approach is depicted on our scopes.
Is that a procedural requirement or more of just an operational limitation?

What if instead you gave a vector such as "fly heading 240, intercept runway 27 (localizer/final approach course)" ? You aren't vectoring onto an approach - just pretending that the 27 LOC is just any other directional navaid. Then once established (or you observe the pilot begin a turn to the right to intercept), you issue the usual PTAC sans the T. Is that not possible/allowed?
« Last Edit: October 17, 2013, 02:58:44 PM by swa4678 »

Offline spades

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Re: Flying direct without GPS.....?
« Reply #4 on: October 18, 2013, 08:05:45 PM »
We can only vector if the approach is depicted on our scopes.
Is that a procedural requirement or more of just an operational limitation?

What if instead you gave a vector such as "fly heading 240, intercept runway 27 (localizer/final approach course)" ? You aren't vectoring onto an approach - just pretending that the 27 LOC is just any other directional navaid. Then once established (or you observe the pilot begin a turn to the right to intercept), you issue the usual PTAC sans the T. Is that not possible/allowed?

No, we cannot do it.  It has to be depicted.

Offline Plane Whisperer

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Flying direct without GPS.....?
« Reply #5 on: November 18, 2013, 12:01:57 AM »
Quote
What if instead you gave a vector such as "fly heading 240, intercept runway 27 (localizer/final approach course)" ? You aren't vectoring onto an approach - just pretending that the 27 LOC is just any other directional navaid. Then once established (or you observe the pilot begin a turn to the right to intercept), you issue the usual PTAC sans the T. Is that not possible/allowed?

Here's part of the relevant section from the 7110.65, which dictates our operating rules:

The following provisions are required before an aircraft may be vectored to the final approach course:

1. The approach gate and a line (solid or broken), depicting the final approach course starting at or passing through the approach gate and extending away from the airport, be displayed on the radar scope.


Although regarding your specific question, in our facility, every localizer course is depicted anyway. We use your example on a daily basis, vectoring to intercept. It's a good way to get people lined up for approach before you're ready to clear them.

Back to the OP... if the FAF was defined by non-GPS methods (e.g. intersecting radials, an NDB), they may have expected you to find it that way. But more likely they just didn't realize you were appropriately equipped. With all that said, you can't be cleared to initiate an instrument approach from a FAF anyway, so I'm assuming it was to line you up for a straight-in visual.