![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
You can calculate your position by triangulating from two
VOR stations. How many pilots do this? [...] 17,328, as of March 31. Just kidding. The intersections of two VORs are used for position in several ways... one of them is finding ones position when lost. It's not much of a "calculation" - it involves trying to draw two lines on the chart that's half folded in your lap while flying an airplane, usually as the ceiling is dropping, it's getting dark, and you have to go to the bathroom really badly. A little turbulence doesn't help either. Once you find where those lines intersect, you look down and see if you can recognize anything that resembles what's on the map at that intersection point. The number of pilots who have done this is pretty close to the number of pilots that have ever gotten lost in visual conditions. This is probably pretty close to the number of pilots. A more common use of this triangulating technique is when flying directly towards or away from one of the VORs; one can use the other VOR to monitor one's position along the intended flight path. This is one of the techniques used on an instrument approach to determine when one is past a certain point (and thus able to descend further without hitting anything). Every IFR(*) pilot has done this. However on an instrument approach the intersections are predetermined on paper, and one merely needs to know "is it soup yet?". You set the other VOR to the desired intersecting radial, and wait for the needle to center. The same is true when flying cross country under IFR. Very often one is flying directly towards or away from a VOR, and intersections are used to keep track of one's progress. Outside of a radar environment, they are also used to report one's position to ATC, so they know when to let other airplanes use the airspace you were just in. Sometimes one flies to an intersection and then changes course to fly towards (or away from) the other station. The technique is similar to that on an approach - set the other VOR to the desired intersecting radial, and when the needle centers, you're there. RNAV (which can be based on VOR, DME, and/or GPS) has made it unnecessary to actually fly directly to or from VORs - the computer inside continuously calculates one's position based on whatever navigation signals are being used. However air traffic control will often require a pilot to fly the airway to keep things simple enough to keep track of on the ground. It's easier (and safer) even in a mostly empty parking lot to drive the lanes rather than cut across the parking rows, especially if other people are also driving around. When I fly VFR cross country (which means I can decide my route on my own, without any input from ATC), I like to fly in a straight line, low, and using pilotage (using landmarks) for navigation, so I don't pay much attention to VORs. The practicality of a straight line course depends on factors such as restricted airspace, terrain, and altitude. Slight bends in the route don't add much to the flight, especially if they are planned for (so the angular deviation is small). Note that a "straight line" curves because the earth is round, and in most cases the compass heading will be changing as you fly. This is an issue only over long flights (say, several hundred miles). You can actually see this by opening up a sectional (the VFR charts pilots use) and drawing a straight line East to West across the entire length of the map. Compare that line with the lines of longitude. Flying IFR cross country, especially at the lower altitudes, I file and fly the airways (which are generally to or from VORs) because the minimum altitudes have been set out for me on the charts. Off the airways, I'd have to fly higher to ensure terrain clearance, and that might not be practical due to icing, or I might want certain altitudes for other reasons (it's pretty to fly in and out of cloud). I monitor my progress by tuning the other VOR to the intersections on the charts, and watching the needle indicate their passage. At least until we got the GPS. Now I watch the purple line, and back it up with VOR navigation. Hope this helps. ![]() (*) IFR: instrument flight rules - the set of rules one flies by to avoid bending aluminum when flying in IMC IMC: instrument meteorological conditions - weather conditions that requires one to depend on instruments to keep the dirty side down, and requires one to depend on air traffic controllers to keep aluminum away from you. VFR: Visual flight rules - the set of rules used in VMC. Under VFR, the pilot is responsible for avoiding hitting other airplanes. He or she does so by looking out the window. And taking evasive action when necessary. VMC: Visual meteorological conditions - weather good enough to "see and avoid" hitting aluminum, fiberglass, and granite. Jose -- Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Introduction to a newbie | Shane O | Aerobatics | 9 | December 31st 04 07:13 AM |
| A question only a newbie would ask | Peter Duniho | Piloting | 68 | August 19th 04 12:54 AM |
| Newbie questions Rail / Ejector launchers | AL | Military Aviation | 19 | November 14th 03 08:47 PM |
| Newbie question | Bill Gribble | Soaring | 6 | November 6th 03 08:57 PM |
| Basic Stupid Newbie Questions... | John Penta | Military Aviation | 5 | September 19th 03 06:23 PM |