Interesting "self-serve" IFR Clearance

[gsxrpilot]

The wife and I are enjoying the cool weather in Portland, Maine for a few weeks. And so yesterday I flew from KBXM (Brunswick, ME) to KSWF (NY, NY) to pick up a friend so she could spend the weekend with us in Maine. It was solid IFR over the whole area and I got an ILS in Actual to 500 ft. into KSWF.  I immediately whipped out the iPad and filed IFR for the return trip departing 30 minutes later.  Because I was in a hurry, I just filed Direct and figured they'd give me a much more complicated route.

A little while later with the prop turning, the ATIS collected, I called SWF Ground to pick up my clearance. The controller said there's no way they'd give me direct and to give him a couple of VOR's on the route.  Looking on ForeFlight I said, "how about PWL CTR GDM Direct?" He immediately came back with "Cleared to Brunswick via Pawling Chester Gardner Direct, Climb and maintain 4000 expect 7000 10 minutes after, Squawk 6674."

There was no hesitation, no "let me put that in for you and see if it's accepted." I chose the VOR's and was immediately cleared to go there.  I was very surprised and wasn't really even ready to copy. But I read it back and was cleared to go. Good thing it takes all of 5 seconds to enter routing into the Avidyne.

On takeoff the tower gave me Runway Heading to 4000, contact Approach.  Approach came on and immediately gave me Direct Gardner, Climb 7000. And with that we were on our way.

I've just never had a controller let me chose my own clearance while on the radio.

[Hank]

Cool!

The more I read about NY Approach, the madder I get about ATL Approach . . . . . . 

[Browncbr1]

Seems I'm always getting controllers who want to give me direct, even though I am filed equipment bravo.    I have to remind them I'm bravo...   they also will clear me direct to a VOR on my files plan that is the next way point and sometimes over a hundred nm away.   Last week, I had to insist twice that I couldn't go direct over the mountain both due to buildup and I am equipment Bravo, then he finally said, ok, you're choice...  

[Bolter]

27 minutes ago, Browncbr1 said:

Seems I'm always getting controllers who want to give me direct, even though I am filed equipment bravo.    I have to remind them I'm bravo...   they also will clear me direct to a VOR on my files plan that is the next way point and sometimes over a hundred nm away.   Last week, I had to insist twice that I couldn't go direct over the mountain both due to buildup and I am equipment Bravo, then he finally said, ok, you're choice...  

If you are flight following with VFR, you can use any device as "reference" to follow a direct.  This can be your ipad or a Garmin 396.  

What if you are IFR in VFR conditions?  Can you accept the GPS direct with non-certified devices in that case?  I believe you cannot.

-dan

[peevee]

16 minutes ago, Dan at FUL said:

If you are flight following with VFR, you can use any device as "reference" to follow a direct.  This can be your ipad or a Garmin 396.  

What if you are IFR in VFR conditions?  Can you accept the GPS direct with non-certified devices in that case?  I believe you cannot.

-dan

I have read it both ways, but am in the no camp.

you can ask for a vector to your destination and if that vector happens to be really good because you're using a VFR gps... well no one is the wiser.

[Browncbr1]

27 minutes ago, Dan at FUL said:

If you are flight following with VFR, you can use any device as "reference" to follow a direct.  This can be your ipad or a Garmin 396.  

What if you are IFR in VFR conditions?  Can you accept the GPS direct with non-certified devices in that case?  I believe you cannot.

-dan

IFR in and out of imc.   Nope

[gsengle]

Yes you can. It's just ded reckoning in a radar environment. Ask any controller. Do it in imc do it in vmc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[peevee]

Just now, gsengle said:

Yes you can. It's just ded reckoning in a radar environment. Ask any controller. Do it in imc do it in vmc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

it's dead reckoning using an unapproved gps as your sole means of navigation, so not really dead reckoning IMO. If that GPS fails do you know where you are well enough to navigate by true dead reckoning or pilotage?

[gsengle]

it's dead reckoning using an unapproved gps as your sole means of navigation, so not really dead reckoning IMO. If that GPS fails do you know where you are well enough to navigate by true dead reckoning or pilotage?

This has been well settled. I'm not making this up. They don't care how you get direct from point a to b, it can also be a long radar vector. You can go direct with two vors or vor dme if you work at it... the point is if you're in radar coverage it just doesn't matter...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hank]

I used to fly direct with two VORs and a highlighted pencil line on my sectional. As a VFR pilot, though, I didn't have much use for them VOR radios . . . . Made it over 300 nm each way, then bought a Mooney. Much better! 

[peevee]

18 minutes ago, gsengle said:

 

This has been well settled. I'm not making this up. They don't care how you get direct from point a to b, it can also be a long radar vector. You can go direct with two vors or vor dme if you work at it... the point is if you're in radar coverage it just doesn't matter...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Source?

[gsengle]

Source?

You're allowed to use a non IFR gps for "situational awareness". You're also allowed to do whatever you can do without the gps with installed equipment, aka ded reckoning, being vectored, using two VORs or VOR/DME to do poor mans RNAV manually. So since you could have gotten from point A to point B without the GPS, no one cares that you straightened up the line with a non approved GPS.

You can google the topic it's been much debated over the years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[peevee]

That's not a source, that's you saying that's how it is, trust me. 

 

[toto]

Back in the 90's selective availability days, I had a first-gen panel-mount GPS, and would routinely file airways with a /A equipment suffix and a "VFR GPS on board" note in the remarks section. When airborne and in radar coverage, I would request a radar vector direct destination, and would frequently get it. 

It always struck me as funny that I could get a 250-mile vector or whatever, but it survived center handoffs with no questions asked.

(This has nothing to do with the question about legal source for dead reckoning position information, just sharing fwiw.)

When doing the radar vector thing, I always had two VORs and a DME tuned at all times.

 

[gsengle]

That's not a source, that's you saying that's how it is, trust me. 
 

Ok show me a source that says you can't go direct without an IFR gps?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[toto]

Definitely not limited to GPS. There are a number of technologies recognized as capable of providing an rnav source. See AC 90-100A. 

I've got an IFR Loran receiver sitting in a box somewhere if anyone wants it

 

AC_90-100A_CHG_2.pdf

[Bob - S50]

1 hour ago, gsengle said:

 

Ok show me a source that says you can't go direct without an IFR gps?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

VFR, sure, no problem.  IFR no.

FAR 91.205.(d).(2) requires you to have navigation equipment suitable for the route of flight

AIM 5-1-8.c deals with Direct Flights.  That is, those that are not along airways.

c.1 talks about route description including: "Fixes selected to define the route must be those over which the position of the aircraft can be accurately determined." (bold is my emphasis).  Maybe just my opinion, but dead reckoning while IMC is not accurate because you can't see landmarks and you don't know the winds.

c.3.(c) says: "Operation off established airways below 18,000 feet MSL − Use aids not more than 80 NM apart. These aids are depicted on enroute low altitude charts."  So if both your airports have a VOR on the field and they are less than 80 NM apart, then yes, you can go direct.

With that said, once you file a flightplan and get airborne, nothing says you can't ask for a vector direct to your destination, and nothing prevents ATC from giving it to you in a radar environment.  We used to do that all the time in the DC9.  Level at our cruise altitude over eastern North Dakota and ask for a vector direct to our destination in Montana.  Often ATC will give you "fly heading XXX, direct YYY VOR when suitable for navigation."

[carusoam]

Somebody asked for references...

And... You guys really delivered on references!

 

--------

I guess 'they' may start to care when you say 'lost my GPS, now I'm unable'

My portable GPS experience is pretty crummy.  

From signal noise blocking the GPS, to antenna in the cabin getting blocked, to the device running out of power.

My favorite failure is my iPad internal GPS.  Putting it low in the cabin to avoid sun related heat, puts it out of view satellites at the same time... favorite probably isn't the right word.

Being a belt and suspenders kind of guy. I use my IFR GPS to navigate VOR to VOR... not very direct, but pretty close...

One of us scores some extra points for having some insider knowledge...

Best regards,

-a-

 

[NotarPilot]

On 7/15/2017 at 3:37 PM, gsxrpilot said:

The wife and I are enjoying the cool weather in Portland, Maine for a few weeks. And so yesterday I flew from KBXM (Brunswick, ME) to KSWF (NY, NY) to pick up a friend so she could spend the weekend with us in Maine. It was solid IFR over the whole area and I got an ILS in Actual to 500 ft. into KSWF.  I immediately whipped out the iPad and filed IFR for the return trip departing 30 minutes later.  Because I was in a hurry, I just filed Direct and figured they'd give me a much more complicated route.

A little while later with the prop turning, the ATIS collected, I called SWF Ground to pick up my clearance. The controller said there's no way they'd give me direct and to give him a couple of VOR's on the route.  Looking on ForeFlight I said, "how about PWL CTR GDM Direct?" He immediately came back with "Cleared to Brunswick via Pawling Chester Gardner Direct, Climb and maintain 4000 expect 7000 10 minutes after, Squawk 6674."

There was no hesitation, no "let me put that in for you and see if it's accepted." I chose the VOR's and was immediately cleared to go there.  I was very surprised and wasn't really even ready to copy. But I read it back and was cleared to go. Good thing it takes all of 5 seconds to enter routing into the Avidyne.

On takeoff the tower gave me Runway Heading to 4000, contact Approach.  Approach came on and immediately gave me Direct Gardner, Climb 7000. And with that we were on our way.

I've just never had a controller let me chose my own clearance while on the radio.

That's an interesting story Paul. I think if I was in a hurry I'd have done the same thing and just filed direct to get it in the system figuring they'd spit something back out with some VORs making a defined route they'd want me to take.  

[LANCECASPER]

15 hours ago, Browncbr1 said:

Seems I'm always getting controllers who want to give me direct, even though I am filed equipment bravo.    I have to remind them I'm bravo...   they also will clear me direct to a VOR on my files plan that is the next way point and sometimes over a hundred nm away.   Last week, I had to insist twice that I couldn't go direct over the mountain both due to buildup and I am equipment Bravo, then he finally said, ok, you're choice...  

They love it when you can go direct and free up the airways - makes separation a lot easier for them.

[peevee]

6 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

They love it when you can go direct and free up the airways - makes separation a lot easier for them.

Not really. In some cases maybe but not all.

[LANCECASPER]

Just now, peevee said:

Not really. In some cases maybe but not all.

That's strange, an air traffic controller told me that two days ago

[HRM]

Controllers, controllers, controllers and the never-ending love-hate relationship we have with them.

The Houston Bravo is one of the best, especially if VFR and willing to use the I-10 corridor to traverse the behemoth.

Lately, if you are not using the corridor and plan a low fly-around they vector the death out of you if you don't have ADS-B. So much for the 2020 deadline.

One time coming back from Austin to Beaumont I decided to take the scenic northern route via Conroe, skirting the Bravo. The controllers kept asking me if I wanted in and I kept saying "No, I'm fine." Sometimes you just want to fly free...

[LANCECASPER]

That's strange bcause one is telling you that right now. But I'm sure you know more about it than I do

 

I certainly never claimed that - just that the one I talked to Saturday (at an FAA class I took) said controllers much prefer to get people off of the airways since it makes for better separation. But if you prefer to stack people up on the 1950's airways and cause people to burn more fuel than letting them go direct more power to you.

 

By the way is there anyone on mooneyspace you haven't argued with yet . . Lol?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LANCECASPER]

There are very few to no absolutes in atc. Sometimes it is better to be off airway, sometimes it's better to use longitudinal separation. Every situation is different. Sometimes it's a short cut in lieu of a vector.

Thanks for the clarification


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk