Don Brown and lat-long

(Snowbird) wrote in
om:

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in
message
link.net.
..

The problem with navaid radial/distance is that it relies
on the navaid location being known to the flight data
processing computer. If the computer doesn't recognize
the base fix it won't process it.

Steve,

How does the flight data processing computer handle direct
VOR routing between VORs it doesn't recognize? Does it
barf on that too, or is this barfing specific to VOR
radial-distance?

If it doesn't recognize the VOR, it would have to barf on both.

--
Regards,

Stan

I've never had a problem filing direct to any distant H-class VOR.
Could it be true that L-class and TVORs are the only ones
which are recognized only locally?
---JRC---

"Stan Gosnell" wrote in message =
...
=20
If it doesn't recognize the VOR, it would have to barf on both. =20
=20
--=20
Regards,
=20
Stan

First, I'm just passing along advice that I got from a Baron-operating
controller on the west coast. I have to assume that he knows the system
better than I do. Second, we are talking about filing direct, not via
airways. His argument, which I am not in a position to refute, is that every
host computer in the National Airspace System can find a lat-long, while
that is not true of every radial-distance.

Bob Gardner

"Snowbird" wrote in message
m...
"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
news:oAHab.386624$Oz4.170720@rwcrnsc54...
I did not intend that pilots file lat-longs exclusively

*puzzled* did I say or imply that you did?

just when they need
something far enough away from the departure airport that a
radial-distance
might not be in the local host computer.

Perhaps I did not explain clearly enough what I don't understand
about your advice. (I assume you mean "VOR" or "radial distance
from VOR" above. I also assume that by "local host computer"
you mean the ARTCC host computer.)

I don't understand the necessity of filing a lat-long in
any circumstance.

People file and fly Victor airway or direct VOR routing where
many of the waypoints are not in the host computer of the
originating ATC facility. For that matter, people file to
airports which aren't in the originating ATC facilities
host computer all the time.

How could this work, if (as you imply) a routing which contains
waypoints not in the ATC host computer is a problem?

It seems to me that it's a problem only if the destination,
and the distant VOR from which the radial-distance is measured,
are the ONLY waypoints in the flightplan.

In that case, I suggest that the solution is not to tell people
"go ahead and file lat longs". The problem is to tell people
"file enough waypoints to define your route locally".

If I'm wrong, and the host computer will indeed barf on an
IFR routing which contains a VOR radial-distance to a VOR
not in the database, I wait to be corrected. But in that
case, I don't understand how filing an IFR routing which
includes direct-VOR-VOR segments that the local host doesn't
know about works, either.

IOW, I don't understand what problem requires lat-longs to
solve it. And yes, we've flown trips where the VOR radial-
distance we chose turned out to be just outside one center's
airspace and we were requested to give them a VOR or VOR
radial-distance w/in their airspace which defined our route,
so I understand the problem of ATC host computers which store
fewer waypoints than my obsolete Palm VIIx. I just don't see
how filing a lat-long would solve any problem.

Perhaps I'm just dense.

Cheers,
Sydney

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
news:Rg0bb.393287$cF.121073@rwcrnsc53...
First, I'm just passing along advice that I got from a Baron-operating
controller on the west coast. I have to assume that he knows the system
better than I do. Second, we are talking about filing direct, not via
airways. His argument, which I am not in a position to refute, is that
every
host computer in the National Airspace System can find a lat-long, while
that is not true of every radial-distance.


He's correct about that. Lat/longs always work for flight data purposes.
However, this really is a deep subject. When I get out of the throws of
this work week (which I'm right in the middle of) I'll try to post some of
my opinions and observations on this subject. I tend to be with you in the
lat/long camp myself, but with a host of preconditions which I will
hopefully be able to share in this thread in a couple of days.


Chip, ZTL

It just occurred to me that when I list a Radial/Distance point in
DUATS as part of a route, DUATS converts it to Lat/Lon. Maybe that's a hint
that Lat/Lon is preferred.

I filed to a lat/long once. They accepted my flight plan, but when the
controller gave me my clearance, he did not know how to call out my
waypoint. This, as well as some other reasons (the way ATC writes the
lat/long is NOT easy to read), are why ATC is not big on lat/longs. I
have had better luck with VOR/DME's.

"Casey Wilson" wrote in message . ..
It just occurred to me that when I list a Radial/Distance point in
DUATS as part of a route, DUATS converts it to Lat/Lon. Maybe that's a hint
that Lat/Lon is preferred.

(Doug) wrote in
om:

I filed to a lat/long once. They accepted my flight plan,
but when the controller gave me my clearance, he did not
know how to call out my waypoint.

You had an inexperienced guy on clearance delivery. That's
where they seem to start out. Controllers who have some
experience seem to have no problems with lat/lon. ZHU certainly
has no problems with it, & HOU approach mostly knows about them,
but you still get a new guy once in awhile.

--
Regards,

Stan

"Doug" wrote in message
om...

I filed to a lat/long once. They accepted my flight plan, but when the
controller gave me my clearance, he did not know how to call out my
waypoint. This, as well as some other reasons (the way ATC writes the
lat/long is NOT easy to read), are why ATC is not big on lat/longs. I
have had better luck with VOR/DME's.


How hard is it to say "cleared as filed"?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...


How hard is it to say "cleared as filed"?


I don't think most of the pilots here will know, but it sure sounds like a
great seminar title for the next NATCA convention.

"Casey Wilson" wrote in message . ..
It just occurred to me that when I list a Radial/Distance point in
DUATS as part of a route, DUATS converts it to Lat/Lon. Maybe that's a hint
that Lat/Lon is preferred.

Hmmmm...we use DUATS to file all the time, and have never observed
this. Can you give more details? Were you using duats on the web
or through a different program? What format did you use to enter
the VOR radial/distance?

Thanks!
Sydney

PS what the people who wrote DUATS prefer, and what ATC prefers,
are not necessarily the same thing. you might *think* the former
would talk to the latter -- but don't count on it