Search results

Fair point about MON, I hadn't considered that.

Adjust your path of flight to include a fix which is on a known radial in relation a VOR. I do this from time to time since I have a single nav radio and an IFR GPS.

To the OP (Rob), you're going to want to get comfortable with the sectional chart legend. Every single symbol and airspace depiction is called out there. Even if you're not familiar with what a TRSA is, it would've given you the name which you could then research. Deep dives on sectionals are...

Same thing at Reading, PA...the little Delta that thought it could, but actually shouldn't, doesn't, and never did.

I did it for a meeting with FSI a few years back. It was no hassle whatsoever, and didn't cost all that much in the scheme of things. Was your experience different?

I use a sim at home to maintain proficiency. For legal currency, it wasn't so hard to stay legally current while flying a lot for work as the approaches more or less took care of themselves. With work travel reduced, though, I found myself needing to get some approaches logged. I picked a day...

I've flown the T-6 and T-38 sims that you're likely referring to. It's less about the equipment and more about what you're doing with it. The sim by itself isn't necessarily exciting. I had never flown the T-38, so there was a decent amount to learn, but the T-6 was very familiar from other sim...

N90 routinely issues VFR altitude constraints to VFR aircraft in Class E avoid downstream traffic conflicts with heavy arrival flows that are known to be descending through the altitude of the VFR aircraft. Case in point, departing the N07/CDW/MMU area towards CMK, then continuing east bound...

Pffft, this is nothing. You should come over to the VFR cruising altitude thread. :)

That's pretty darned clear. The controller is stating his/her believe that 3000ft isn't a VFR altitude. They're not saying, "3000 isn't going to work because of traffic." If we were to point out the reg and the controller said, "I meant 3000 is no good, I have a conflict coming up in a...

Your post assumes that the controller has their own reason for wanting you at a specific altitude, despite the current altitude being legal. In fact, what appears to be happening is that the controller is suggesting another altitude because they believe the current one is NOT valid/legal. Those...

I got into a Lancair 360 when I had ~220 hours total time. It was a non-issue. Not all hours are created equal, and granted, aptitude levels vary from person to person, but I think it's a mistake to rule someone out of a Lancair based on having 500TT. If an experimental is an option, a IV-P can...

"If you don't like the altitude assignment, don't get flight following." PRECISELY the takeaway we're trying to avoid. Regardless of AGL, 3000ft MSL, in ~99.9999% of the country is a valid VFR cruising altitude. So is 2931, and so is 1453. The point is that the controller likely wasn't aware...

Yes, but we're WELL into 'very unlikely' territory (an unplanned missed and the controller forgot that there are two approaches for that rwy). Also 'go south' isn't as dramatic as it sounds. If you feel it helps, you can state the approach name on the missed and the fix you're turning to. That...

I cannot wait to see popcorn futures if the Newark area of N90 moves to PHL.

My point is that it's theoretically possible that a controller might not recall that the airport has multiple RNAV approaches to the same runway. Hence, it's theoretically possible that they would issue a clearance which permits one of multiple approaches to be conducted when it wasn't the...

I should've addressed that as it did cross my mind at the time, however the post was already pretty darned long :) My assumptions were that the chances of going missed are slim outside of a training environment, AND there would be time resolve any misunderstanding the moment the controller...

That's one way to do it, and is fairly efficient, granted. I used Machado's Instrument Survival Manual, with references to IFH, IPH, AIM and FARs from time to time, coupled with a crap load of simulator time prior to rocking up for my formal instrument training. "correction time" was...

I forgot to mention, YES, they absolutely can be fun. I'll use a GA mission generator (pays virtual $ to conduct charter-style operations) which takes me to fields I would've never visited, with a wide variety of payloads. Add real-time WX and realistic ATC to the mix and it's pretty immersive...

It sure COULD make a difference. The controller might have a similar interaction with someone else, who then cancels flight following in a panic, who then has a midair. Likely? No. POSSIBLE? Yes.