Being asked to "verify direct XXX"

wrote:
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 09:02:18 -0400, Dave Butler wrote:


wrote:

On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 14:21:18 GMT, Judah wrote:



There was a discussion that I was involved in some time ago (maybe almost a
year ago) that defined how one could even navigate direct to an
intersection off-airway with 2 VORs (or, more complexibly by flipping 1
VOR).



I don't believe this is possible.

The best you can do is narrow the course down to the choice of several
hedings, but not just one.

I'm not following how it's not possible to calculate the heading unambiguously.
Two VORs give you two lines-of-position. You are where the LOPs intersect. If
your location is known unambiguously, and the location of the target
intersection is known unambiguously, there is one and only one direct route.


True. I was referring to a method that does not require a chart - use
of VOR's only.

At risk of being annoyingly persistent: what is that method that does not
require a chart and narrows the course down to a choice of several headings?

Dave

"Chip Jones" wrote in message
ink.net...

LOL, is not.... :-P


It isn't? My memory must be failing then, I would have sworn Bob Gardner
asked if I'd be at the NATCA meeting in May.

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

"Chip Jones" wrote in message
ink.net...

LOL, is not.... :-P


It isn't? My memory must be failing then, I would have sworn Bob Gardner
asked if I'd be at the NATCA meeting in May.



He did...

Chip, ZTL

"Chip Jones" wrote in message
link.net...

He did...


Yeah, I was pretty sure he had.

wrote:
Now if he fails everyone for using a non-TSO'd stopwatch to navigate
with, he will get the consistency award.

Dear Mr. Casio -
I am taking my IFR checkride in two weeks. Can you please
provide a certified TSO certificate for my G-Shock watch.

Thanks, dude.
Gerald Sylvester