GPS Direct?

Depends where you are. In the Northeast Corridor, it's going to be the preferred/TEC routes no matter what you file. Much the same in SoCal, I believe. OTOH, in Iowa, you can probably get direct most any time. Checking the routes actually issued on Foreflight, etc., is the best way to find out what really works in your area.
 
Go to flight plan . com and punch in any 2 airports. It will list the last few pilot planned routes between fields as well as the last few ATC approved routes.
Like Ron says, some areas the controllers want you on airways. I have found in some areas they may want you on an airway at one altitude while at a different altitude they will approve direct. I believe it is also preferred to include at least one waypoint for each center even when going direct.
 
With a newly minted IR, I was told by my examiner to always file direct and always know where you are in relation to the ground based navaids (at this point, VORs and NDBs still exist in the midwest!).

I've filed direct across Ohio and VA fine... I've filed direct OH over Chicago without much luck. Either time, if I'd have filed what looks like a good VOR to VOR / victor airway route I would have spent more time in the air.

I say always file direct and then accept what you get, then when you get near a navaid as for direct to the next one to shave some time. Example is around ORD - they'll route you to KELSI if you come from the southeast.. You can ask for d-JOT then north and I've gotten it 100% (2/2 :)). Saves a few miles.

good luck,
Mike
 
N312RB said:
Are there any controllers here? The vast majority of flight instructors and pilots around my home airport say to file GPS direct all the time. I was taught to use Victor airways as much as possible. What gives?

Case in point: http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N38565/history/20130408/0145Z/KIIB/KSYI
but really any flight by that aircraft
Click to expand...

I'm a controller. Direct routing requires radar monitoring. Based on what those instructors and pilots around your home airport are saying it appears radar monitoring is available in your area. So take your pick; file airways if that's the way you want to go or file direct if that's what you want.
 
Okay, as far as radar monitoring is required... is there a place that shows what radar is available?

We have KALO which is as close to a TRSA as can be without being called one... but past that?

Take for example, KALO (Waterloo) to KSYI (Tennessee). How can I be guaranteed that there is radar the whole way?

Am I overthinking this or letting my schooling (theoretical answers) get in the way of reality?
 
N312RB said:
Okay, as far as radar monitoring is required... is there a place that shows what radar is available?

We have KALO which is as close to a TRSA as can be without being called one... but past that?

Take for example, KALO (Waterloo) to KSYI (Tennessee). How can I be guaranteed that there is radar the whole way?

Am I overthinking this or letting my schooling (theoretical answers) get in the way of reality?
Click to expand...

There's no way to know you'll have radar monitoring all the way. But you don't have to be concerned about that, the requirement is imposed on ATC not the pilot.
 
One last question, then I will let sleeping dogs lie...

As a controller, which do you prefer?
 
mikegreen said:
With a newly minted IR, I was told by my examiner to always file direct and always know where you are in relation to the ground based navaids (at this point, VORs and NDBs still exist in the midwest!).
Click to expand...
You can file anything you want, but unless you like sitting in the plane and replanning after you get your clearance, it's a good idea to know what routing you are likely to get, and at least have it planned even if you file direct on hopes of getting what you want rather than what they normally issue.
 
N312RB said:
As a controller, which do you prefer?
Click to expand...
The controllers don't get to choose what route you will get initially -- the computer does that for them. In Steven's part of the country, direct is pretty easy. Where I live, it's near impossible due to the heavy flows of jet traffic in and out of the relatively closely spaced major airports (MHT, BOS, PVD BDL, HPN, EWR, JFK, LGA, PHL, BWI, DCA, IAD). Those flows are predetermined, and everything else has to fit around them. Hence, the TEC route system we have in the Northeast. If you're flying through that corridor, you can file anything you want, but unless it's about 0300 local and there's nobody but the freight dogs flying, you will get the TEC route below 9000, or the Preferred route at/above 9000.
 
Ron Levy said:
Depends where you are. In the Northeast Corridor, it's going to be the preferred/TEC routes no matter what you file. Much the same in SoCal, I believe. OTOH, in Iowa, you can probably get direct most any time. Checking the routes actually issued on Foreflight, etc., is the best way to find out what really works in your area.
Click to expand...
Yes.

From central NC, when I fly to KHPN, which passes by DC, Phillie and NYC, I know I can go direct to a point around the DC airspace but from Phillie on, I will get a series of airways that circumvent all the busy areas. I also know I will be cleared for more direct routing as traffic allows. I can more or less file what I know I will get in the clearance but I know it won't be what I actually fly.

On the other hand, I flew from central NC to Phoenix and back with stops in Houston and Dallas among other places. I don't think I was cleared for a single airway the entire flight except perhaps for a leg out west where I filed for an airway was direct more or less. The only deviations from direct were required for restricted airspace or hot MOAs.

File direct until you know something different. Then try anticipate your clearance in your filing to reduce your ground study time.
 
N312RB said:
One last question, then I will let sleeping dogs lie...

As a controller, which do you prefer?
Click to expand...

I prefer pilots file what they want and fly what they file. If the route needs to be amended due to radar coverage, SUA, LoA, preferential route applies, etc., I'll take care of that. Some pilots harbor the misconception that a direct route cannot be issued off the ground; they file airways and then request a direct route immediately after departure. It's not true, any route that can be issued immediately after departure could have been issued on the ground. But for a variety of reasons I may not be able to honor your request after departure.
 
Ron Levy said:
The controllers don't get to choose what route you will get initially -- the computer does that for them.
Click to expand...

Controllers can choose routes. The computer applies specified routes in certain situations but can be overridden by the controller.
 
roncachamp said:
Controllers can choose routes. The computer applies specified routes in certain situations but can be overridden by the controller.
Click to expand...
...once the plane is airborne. Doesn't happen when you get your clearance initially unless you negotiate it with the controller, and that doesn't happen around here.
 
Ron Levy said:
...once the plane is airborne.
Click to expand...

Or on the ground.

Doesn't happen when you get your clearance initially unless you negotiate it with the controller, and that doesn't happen around here.
Click to expand...

What happens around there is one thing, what controllers can do is another thing.

It could happen without your knowledge. If the computer assigned a new route and the controller determined the filed route was acceptable he could override the computer and issue the route "as filed."
 
. Checking the routes actually issued on Foreflight, etc.,

~~~~ how do you do that?
 
Jeanie said:
. Checking the routes actually issued on Foreflight, etc.,

~~~~ how do you do that?
Click to expand...

I haven't used Foreflight, so I don't know if that's possible, but maybe he meant fltplan.com.
 
Jeanie said:
. Checking the routes actually issued on Foreflight, etc.,

~~~~ how do you do that?
Click to expand...
Foreflight has a Routes option, kind of like Fltplan, and it will show you recently approved (or user submitted) ATC routes for you to pick from.
 
EdFred said:
I haven't used Foreflight, so I don't know if that's possible, but maybe he meant fltplan.com.
Click to expand...
I have, and it is, so I think he meant what he wrote. It will give you its own self-generated airway routing (like DUATS does), plus any preferred/TEC routes, plus any routes recently issued by ATC. It also gives you the altitudes issued on those routes. Pretty slick, that Foreflight.
 
I have tried to file routings that I prefer, and they're always overridden by the computer. The first few times that happened, it taught me how to remain flexible in the cockpit and replan quickly.

Now, I just flie "direct", knowing I won't get that, but instead whatever the computer wants to give me that day. Usually, what FltPlan texts me as the "expected routing" is what I end up with, so it's not a complete surprise when I call CD...but that's not always what I get, so sometimes I am surprised.

I figure it keeps me on my toes. Certainly has made me more comfortable accepting amended clearances enroute.

I've also generally learned when along my commonly-flown routes I might have some success in getting a simplified routing. So I'll fly the departure clearance for a while, then after I get handed off a few times and things get quiet, I'll make a request.

YMMV.
 
One other thing to be aware, especially in the West, is that filing direct usually has higher MEA than following the airways...
 
I recommend a flight plan that includes some conventional fixes that will define your route into distinct departure, enroute, and arrival segments. This is a good way to organize the tasks required during each phase and to readily transition to an alternate NAV scheme in the highly unlikely your GPS unit(s) fail. It's a good practice to practice both GPS and VOR navigation if for nothing else than to stay current, and if you compare many routes (Airways vs. Great Circle/GPS) you'll notice that the differences between them in time and total miles really are not that significant.
 
I file airways off flt plan.com and then ask for direct as much as I can.

Here's my reasoning...

I use fuel requirements off flt plan.com to determine how much gas to bring. If I plan to have gas for the airway and then get direct then I'm in good shape. If I plan on direct and then get airways I could be in a spot.

To my eye filing direct is lazy and poor form. I do do it from time to time however. Always out west where its a possibility and always with extra fuel onboard. I heard a story of a guy who filed direct from HPN to PBI. That's absurd. ATC is never going to consider that and the route wasn't even legal for him. He has no HF radio and it goes through a ton of warning areas.

There are few reasons to suggest its proper to simply bias to filing direct everywhere you go.
 
Captain said:
I file airways off flt plan.com and then ask for direct as much as I can.

Here's my reasoning...

I use fuel requirements off flt plan.com to determine how much gas to bring. If I plan to have gas for the airway and then get direct then I'm in good shape. If I plan on direct and then get airways I could be in a spot.

To my eye filing direct is lazy and poor form. I do do it from time to time however. Always out west where its a possibility and always with extra fuel onboard. I heard a story of a guy who filed direct from HPN to PBI. That's absurd. ATC is never going to consider that and the route wasn't even legal for him. He has no HF radio and it goes through a ton of warning areas.

There are few reasons to suggest its proper to simply bias to filing direct everywhere you go.
Click to expand...

I file basically direct almost everywhere I go in the midwest but follow airways in the mountains and out east. I also pay attention to what other airplanes seem to get assigned (or file) on some of my trips and often include the relevant portions of such routes in my filings. But I've also encountered many situations where I filed on airways only to get a completely different routing that might even be only partially on airways and more often that not the new route is longer than the airway route I filed. So filing airways is no guarantee you won't need more gas and even if the route is unchanged, fuel requirements are affected by the often grossly inaccurate winds aloft forecasts and/or the need to fly different altitudes than planned. Finally, I have found that airway routings sometimes result in having to make a significant dog-leg when departure sends you well off the filed route initially then has you "resume own navigation" on the nearest filed leg.

Bottom line, I really don't think filing direct is "lazy" nor inappropriate in many parts of the country.
 
I did use the word 'lazy'. But I said I do it too...out west. There are situations its okay. But filing airways gives me a worst case baseline that I can fuel plan for. Getting direct after is fine..gives me more gas.
 
Captain said:
I did use the word 'lazy'. But I said I do it too...out west. There are situations its okay. But filing airways gives me a worst case baseline that I can fuel plan for. Getting direct after is fine..gives me more gas.
Click to expand...
As iGismo said,
But I've also encountered many situations where I filed on airways only to get a completely different routing that might even be only partially on airways and more often that not the new route is longer than the airway route I filed. So filing airways is no guarantee you won't need more gas...
Click to expand...
That's been my experience, too. My initial strategy when filing was to use the routing that fltplan.com said was recently assigned for my origin/destination. Typically, I'd get notified that my expected routing matched my filed routing. However, at least twice that I recall the route I actually got from CD was different--and longer--than what I filed.

So: Literally, YMMV.

Since filing airways doesn't guarantee me "worst-case" distance, that's not a benefit.

Why waste time trying to guess what the computer's going to spit out? I don't anymore, and I don't think it's lazy. The FAA has trained me to file this way through experience.
 
It is true the actual may be longer than the filed. But by filing an airway instead of direct it at least gets me in the ballpark. I always check the actual route distance in the box against the airway distance on the fltplan.com nav log. Now I know the exact extra mileage I need to plan to be able to fly.

I guess I also think in the back of my mind it's better to have an airway route to fall back on in case of comm failure.
 
My preflight planning is what gets me in the ballpark on mileage. When I get what I get from CD or enroute amendments, my GPS tells me exactly what the mileage will be. I always plan to carry plenty of fuel, but I can also request my own amendments if the routing doesn't work for my fuel load.

In the back of my seat I've got a handheld radio to fall back on in case of comm failure.

To each his own.
 
Last edited:
I fly an airplane with a longer range than I have. Fuel planning is never an issue. Staying west of PA, I've never NOT gotten direct. Direct to Florida from Michigan? Don't mind if I do!
 
My typical trip is something like KOLM to KPUW. I typically file KOLM WHYTE YKM PSC RENGO PUW KPUW. V airways. Three of the four planes in the club are non /G. And if I filed KOLM -> KPUW it would run me right over the north slope of Mt. Rainier, too close for comfort except on (perhaps) a nice day. Plus right through an R area shortly after departure that might be hot, so I'd still wind up be vectored around it. I might try it sometime and see what happens, but the V airways going south of the mountain aren't really that much longer and have always worked well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top