Navigation strategy on a short flight

From Phoenix to Casa Grande in a Cessna 152 in my sim:

The aircraft contains only a single VOR, without DME, and an ADF.

There are a couple of VORs nearby, including PXR at Sky Harbor, and Stanfield
about 8 miles southwest of Casa Grande (connected by V105/J92). There's also a
NDB at Chandler, about 19 miles north.

What is the most elegant way to navigate from KPHX to KCGZ?

I thought it would be good form to follow V105, so after a west departure from
Phoenix, I flew east to join the PXR 163 radial. It was hard to judge my
distance from the VOR, though, as the desert looks pretty monotonous, and
there are numerous small airfields in the area. After flying for a while, I
decided to tune the CHD NDB and try to figure out an intersection that would
place me over the field. Constant adjustment of the ADF card for this purpose
was awkward, though, and did not improve my confidence that I was going the
right way. The 152 is very pokey and I always have the impression that I've
gone further than I actually have.

Finally I got nervous and turned east to pick up the PXR148 radial. I had
flight following and Center knew my destination, and ATC asked me what I was
doing after I made the turn, since apparently I had been headed straight
towards the airport. I explained and when ATC told me where to look for the
airport, I turned that way, and after a minute or two I spotted hangars at
Casa Grande.

This does not seem very elegant to me. What is the best way to navigate this
route under these conditions?

Exclude pilotage, since this was an exercise in navigation by instruments
despite being VFR in VMC. (If I had been using pilotage, I would have simply
followed Interstate 10, which practically leads to the ramp, but I
deliberately avoided looking for the highway.)

I conducted the flight mostly at 3500 feet, although I suppose that's not very
important here.

In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

Exclude pilotage

You should really put this at the top of your message next time, instead
of after 7 paragraphs of less relevant detail. Given that the two
airports are less than 32nm apart, that there are numerous landmarks
along the way, and that even dead reckoning will do a fine job of
depositing you close enough to your destination, I'm sure that everyone
wading through your seven previous paragraphs was repeatedly thinking,
"LOOK OUT THE WINDOW!" There can be merit in rejecting the obvious
solution, but if you're going to do it, you should do it right at the
start.

Some more concrete advice: pilotage really does work, very well. If you
want to practice other techniques, a stopwatch and a look at your
airspeed indicator will help you avoid that odd problem of always having
the impression that you've gone further than you actually have. Finally,
although there are indeed a lot of small airfields in the area, a quick
glance at the sectional reveals that virtually all of them have runways
pointed in different directions, so a quick way to figure out which one
you're looking at would be to read the gigantic numbers painted on the
threshold and compare with what's on the chart.

Oh, and one more thing: VFR-worthy GPS units are really cheap, and help
with this sort of problem immensely. An imaginary VFR-worthy GPS is
probably *really* cheap, and these days is probably more realistic than
going without one.

If any of this wasn't already blindingly obvious to you, then I suggest
your vast experience with aircraft simulation may have taught you less
about flying than you think it has.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

On Jun 26, 5:39*pm, Mike Ash wrote:
In article ,

*Mxsmanic wrote:
Exclude pilotage

You should really put this at the top of your message next time, instead
of after 7 paragraphs of less relevant detail. Given that the two
airports are less than 32nm apart, that there are numerous landmarks
along the way, and that even dead reckoning will do a fine job of
depositing you close enough to your destination, I'm sure that everyone
wading through your seven previous paragraphs was repeatedly thinking,
"LOOK OUT THE WINDOW!" There can be merit in rejecting the obvious
solution, but if you're going to do it, you should do it right at the
start.

Some more concrete advice: pilotage really does work, very well. If you
want to practice other techniques, a stopwatch and a look at your
airspeed indicator will help you avoid that odd problem of always having
the impression that you've gone further than you actually have. Finally,
although there are indeed a lot of small airfields in the area, a quick
glance at the sectional reveals that virtually all of them have runways
pointed in different directions, so a quick way to figure out which one
you're looking at would be to read the gigantic numbers painted on the
threshold and compare with what's on the chart.

Oh, and one more thing: VFR-worthy GPS units are really cheap, and help
with this sort of problem immensely. An imaginary VFR-worthy GPS is
probably *really* cheap, and these days is probably more realistic than
going without one.

If any of this wasn't already blindingly obvious to you, then I suggest
your vast experience with aircraft simulation may have taught you less
about flying than you think it has.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

Mike, the reality is, any student who is past solo who gets lost (let
me define that -- does not know where he is) on a 30 some ,mile flight
should not have been signed off by his instructor.

Any pilot holding an instrument rating even with a minimal panel who
does not know where he is should be required to undergo retraining. In
the real world I'd like ATC to let the FAA know when pilots screw up,
because a survivable screw up now may not be survivable the next time.
In the real world we are required to have some 'book learning', in the
sim one all one needs is a computer and the software.

On 6/28/2010 6:27 AM, a wrote:
In
the real world I'd like ATC to let the FAA know when pilots screw up,
because a survivable screw up now may not be survivable the next time.

All you will do there is cause much higher accident/fatality rates as
you will encourage anyone that needs help to *not* ask for it.

On Jun 27, 4:59*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
From Phoenix to Casa Grande in a Cessna 152 in my sim:

The aircraft contains only a single VOR, without DME, and an ADF.

There are a couple of VORs nearby, including PXR at Sky Harbor, and Stanfield
about 8 miles southwest of Casa Grande (connected by V105/J92). There's also a
NDB at Chandler, about 19 miles north.

What is the most elegant way to navigate from KPHX to KCGZ?

I thought it would be good form to follow V105, so after a west departure from
Phoenix, I flew east to join the PXR 163 radial. It was hard to judge my
distance from the VOR, though, as the desert looks pretty monotonous, and
there are numerous small airfields in the area. After flying for a while, I
decided to tune the CHD NDB and try to figure out an intersection that would
place me over the field. Constant adjustment of the ADF card for this purpose
was awkward, though, and did not improve my confidence that I was going the
right way. The 152 is very pokey and I always have the impression that I've
gone further than I actually have.

Finally I got nervous and turned east to pick up the PXR148 radial. I had
flight following and Center knew my destination, and ATC asked me what I was
doing after I made the turn, since apparently I had been headed straight
towards the airport. I explained and when ATC told me where to look for the
airport, I turned that way, and after a minute or two I spotted hangars at
Casa Grande.

This does not seem very elegant to me. What is the best way to navigate this
route under these conditions?


Use your compass / DI and allow for the drift expected from winds at
your altitude.

Cheers

In article ,
"Stephen!" wrote:

WARNING!! These pictures are *NOT* recommended viewing for those who pee
their pants when they think of flying across open water in a single
engine aircraft!

http://imagesdesavions.com/xcntry/nmi/index.html

Impressive! What kind of safety equipment do you have on board for that?
That does seem scary to me, but it's comforting to think that at least
the water is probably decently warm.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

Mike Ash wrote:
In article ,
"Stephen!" wrote:

WARNING!! These pictures are *NOT* recommended viewing for those who pee
their pants when they think of flying across open water in a single
engine aircraft!

http://imagesdesavions.com/xcntry/nmi/index.html

Impressive! What kind of safety equipment do you have on board for that?
That does seem scary to me, but it's comforting to think that at least
the water is probably decently warm.


I think you do well to be scared.
A flight over water means that the worst moment is half way.
It is then that given the option, you should be high enough
to glide ashore. A flight required to stay low for a
57 mile trip had better have at least a lifejacket and an
ELT or some such.

Brian W

On Jun 30, 4:56*am, brian whatcott wrote:

I think you do well to be scared.
A flight over water means that the worst moment is half way.
It is then that given the option, you should be high enough
to glide ashore. * *A flight required to stay low for a
57 mile trip had better have at least a lifejacket and an
ELT or some such.

I don't know about scared but I certainly know about being prepared
when over water.
Then the only 'where I was' was the Flight Plan and radio and
floatation gear an inflatable life vest.
Accompanied by automatic rough as I got further from land.
Briefing friends/pax before any cross Cook Strait flight always
brought it home to me the picture the media has of anything smaller
than a B747 being a 'small' and therefore inherently dangerous
machine to 'brave the elements in'

In article ,
"Stephen!" wrote:

Mike Ash wrote in news:mike-6301E3.00192329062010@62-
183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi:

http://imagesdesavions.com/xcntry/nmi/index.html

Impressive! What kind of safety equipment do you have on board for that?
That does seem scary to me, but it's comforting to think that at least
the water is probably decently warm.

Every flight more than gliding distance from the shoreline had me
carrying a four-man raft with full provisions and wearing an inflatable
life vest. I also never fly without a hand-held radio and cell phone. The
cell phone wouldn't have done much good 50 miles off shore but the raft,
vest, and radio woulda been handy.

Excellent. I'm sure that helps give some peace of mind, although I'd
definitely want to avoid using that equipment if possible....

This was in the days long before SPOT tracking but if I were flying
around there now, I'd likely have one.

I fly with a SPOT. I mostly use it for the tracking mode so friends and
family can know what I'm up to while I'm in the air, but its use for
emergency signaling helps give me peace of mind. It's definitely a neat
piece of technology.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

"Stephen!" wrote in message
...
"Flaps_50!" wrote in news:936e4ca2-5f71-402d-ab98-
:

Use your compass / DI and allow for the drift expected from winds at
your altitude.


Now do it at 1500' MSL from PGSN to PGUM *without* a GPS and you've got
the return leg of one of my student solo cross "country" flights. 57 nm
between visual checkpoints across open water. At 1500' I was below both
the VOR and the RADAR on Guam. All I had to keep me company was my Mag
Compass, DG, and the COM radio until I got near Rota. The VOR was
flagged most the way back.

An unexpected/unpredicted cloud base moved in and I had the choice of
staying below or trying to get above them. Stopping in Saipan was *not*
an option. I wasn't even allowed to make the standard stop for log book
signing. Touch-and-go only due to Customs and Immigration regulations.
Still proud of my ded-reckoning on that one. When Rota finally came into
view, it was only 2° off my port bow.

Here are some snapshots of a time when the weather was better and I was
able to make the flight by visual checkpoints the entire way (I saw Rota
from 57 miles away):

WARNING!! These pictures are *NOT* recommended viewing for those who pee
their pants when they think of flying across open water in a single
engine aircraft!

http://imagesdesavions.com/xcntry/nmi/index.html

--
RCOS #7
IBA# 11465
http://imagesdesavions.com

It looks a lot like the Bahamas, only more grass and greener trees--perhaps
the soil is better.

BTW, I understand that it was always quite common for dual students to be
less than one mile off course when arriving at Bimini from Opa Locka. That
was about 60nm and KOPF did have a reasonably well maintained compass rose
back when I was familiar there--and I, too, did arrive very nearly on
course. Then again, the compass variation is small here on the east coast,
so we do have it pretty easy.

Peter