Are sectional paths correct across "long" distances?

"Kyler Laird" wrote in message
...
It's personal until you cut across restricted airspace by that much.
Then it gets *really* personal.

Huh? The error should be with respect to whether you're really flying the
shortest path between two points. It should not have anything to do with
how you navigate, nor should it affect your spatial orientation, your
knowledge of where you are at any given time.

Even if it did affect your navigation (and it shouldn't), I sure hope you're
not depending on dead reckoning to keep you out of restricted airspace.

Can you tell me how many nautical miles separate the two lines, at the
point of widest divergence?

-102.934677557 40.1266731277 5.99724483075
6nm

I'm not sure why vince asked that question. The point of widest divergence
isn't something anyone should care about. What's important is how much
extra *length* is added to the trip, as Jose asks.

I have discarded routes because the straight paths clipped some
restricted airspace by only a mile or two. I expect any tool that I
use to be accurate enough to tell me whether or not that's going to
happen.

If you fly the route plotted, then the route plotted is the one you fly.
Simple, no?

Regardless of whether you fly a true great circle route, a collection of
great circle intervals, or a straight line on a sectional, you need
something else to keep you on the route you've chosen. It's *that* which
will affect whether you fly through restricted airspace, not the method of
chosing the route (assuming you've chosen the route to avoid restricted
airspace, of course).

Pete