On May 5, 10:09*am, VOR-DME wrote:
I was simply surprised that the proposed answer to a not very specific
route question was that the "only" viable route involved a VOR and an
airway, when the OP had not said anything about the type of flight or
their preferences. This is simply not true, and as such could not be
considered good advice. I should not have been surprised, because the
response came from a non-pilot, so by definition one who is not used to
flying.

Also, if your training was like mine, in VFR training, I wasn't
trained how to set up my Navs for airway navigation. Yes, I was
trained on tracking a radial TO a VFR during my VFR training but
that's it. The purpose of that was to help me get to a point on the
sectional to locate myself should I get lost.

To figure out where I was in relationship to a VOR, my instructor
showed me how to use the FROM flag. Between the FROM flag and DME, I
was able to figure out where I was in relationship to the VOR.

I think your response was spot on with using GPS. This is the wave of
the future for VFR navigation and in my neck of the country, it's the
preferred method for IFR. Almost without exception, when I filed
airways, I got a "would you like direct" question from ATC. The one
time I wasn't equipped for /G (My GPS antenna become uncoupled) ATC
offered me a 168 mile vector which I graciously accepted as airways
put me out 50 miles off my direct routing.

I did not learn how to track airways until I started my IFR training

Most importantly, there is nothing unsafe about OROCA or MORA
navigation providing all tools are used in flight planning as Mx
implies. This applies to my flatlander flying, I can't say anything
about mountain flying as that I would stay on airways for IFR ops.