Planning a fictitious XC...chime in

NJP_MAN said:
Direct offers the same heading the entire first leg, which makes planning the old fashioned way so easy.
Click to expand...
About the only thing that's going to be the same the whole way is True Course...variation ranges from 1-3 degrees. Wind will probably change along the way, too.
Dana said:
My friends flying more modern airplanes would almost certainly fly direct.
Click to expand...
Some people follow the magenta line, some people follow the pink highlighter line. Either one goes direct. ;)
 
If I'd have handed that first flight plan to my initial CFI, he would have joked... "Airplanes were made to GO somewhere, and you're flying all over the place to get there?" :)
 
MauleSkinner said:
About the only thing that's going to be the same the whole way is True Course...variation ranges from 1-3 degrees. Wind will probably change along the way, too.
Click to expand...

I can't imagine large heading changes in that short of a distance if going direct. Unless you're flying through some kind of weather system which probably wouldn't be idea for a first solo xc. He should be able to pointhe the plane in at the initial heading andown then fly the rest of the trip looking out the window. With option #1 just planning the flight will take forever and that's really what I was trying to convey.
 
MauleSkinner said:
About the only thing that's going to be the same the whole way is True Course...variation ranges from 1-3 degrees.
Click to expand...

And averaging it to 2° would mean a +/- 1° error, why should anyone be concerned about that?
 
MauleSkinner said:
1 degree error would be two miles off course at the destination...probably miss the airport! ;)
Click to expand...

That's why you're supposed to have checkpoints! Heheh. :)

Looking at the original XC I saw it was a little over 100 miles and thought, "Should be able to do that without any navaids, really."

Compass/DG, and a watch, and a few landmarks, you should be able to find an airport sized object without too big a "miss" on a route that short.

It's not navigating the Pacific Ocean with a sextant, that route.

Add a couple VOR cross bearings on the direct route, and piece o' cake, as someone else suggested.
 
denverpilot said:
That's why you're supposed to have checkpoints! Heheh. :)

Looking at the original XC I saw it was a little over 100 miles and thought, "Should be able to do that without any navaids, really."

Compass/DG, and a watch, and a few landmarks, you should be able to find an airport sized object without too big a "miss" on a route that short.

It's not navigating the Pacific Ocean with a sextant, that route.

Add a couple VOR cross bearings on the direct route, and piece o' cake, as someone else suggested.
Click to expand...
DR is terribly under-rated as a form of precision navigation. I've done a couple of "less than one degree error" DR flights, oddly enough without proper planning.

That said, errors can add up pretty quickly. But a single checkpoint can allow very accurate correction of those errors as well.
 
I'm a low hour guy, but my general thought process would be to fly a straight line unless it made sense to do something else:

Chart1A.jpg


From a bird's point of view, that straight route would look like this in Google Earth:
GE1.jpg


Note that the 10 (yellow) and adjacent railroad tracks (blue) that curve off to the left and then off to the right of the flight path should give you lots of situational awareness:

GE2.jpg


You could serpentine along the road instead of flying straight. Maybe that's even better for not getting lost, but I figure you may as well fly straight since you can. Plus, it's often easier to find things that are off to the side then right below you. You just need to identify some suitable checkpoints to reliably keep track of where you are along the way.

You've got lots of airports along the way:

GE3.jpg


But airports are often hard to find from the air all by themselves, so you should probably include some other guide posts too, stuff like lakes, hairpin turns, crossings, etc.

Don't forget that you can see things from the air from many angles. It's nice therefore if you can identify two things you can line up (e.g. Hawley and the RR curve, or a distant place and a road radiating toward you from that point) so that your mental announcement of checkpoint arrival is closer to what you planned and more precise.

Here are some possible checkpoints for a navigation log. They aren't too far from one another, but you can eliminate some or add more per your CFI's requirements, and you may well develop some better ones:

Checkpoints.jpg


My CFI taught me to think of being abeam "Abm" of something, but I prefer to remind myself of which side I'm on so I use "Lft of X" or "Rt of X" instead of just "Abm X".

Side by side, the straight flight path and checkpoints in Google Earth look like this:

Chart_and_GE_Combined.jpg


Or from way high up, like this:
GE4.jpg


My proposed checkpoints 6, 7 and 8 may need a little work because the airports and related towns are so far off to the right side, and you'd have a lower flatter perspective than in this Google Earth view, but with checkpoint 9 (Gull Lake) being so prominent, and just in advance of the destination, they're probably not too critical.

Anyway, just some thoughts.

Joe
 
Last edited:
What about weather? When planning a cross country, I'm guessing the day of the flight you might need to either reroute some, but also during the flight may run into weather that you need to go around.

I'm guessing that could involve (specially for use newcomers) some fancy calculating, while flying?

Do CFIs usually wait until clear days, or figure this is all part of it, when the weather is slight, not dangerous but requiring some changes in th plan?
 
LongRoadBob said:
What about weather? When planning a cross country, I'm guessing the day of the flight you might need to either reroute some, but also during the flight may run into weather that you need to go around.

I'm guessing that could involve (specially for use newcomers) some fancy calculating, while flying?

Do CFIs usually wait until clear days, or figure this is all part of it, when the weather is slight, not dangerous but requiring some changes in th plan?
Click to expand...

Not only will the CFI go over weather with the student, it's mandatory.

That said, stuff changes. I literally got weathered out of my home airport on my solo long XC by a thunderstorm that was isolated but far too big to go around. I landed and called the CFI from an airport 50 miles away saying I was on the ground, airplane was safe, and a mutual friend of ours had offered to let me crash on his couch.

CFI handled letting the rental place know, said they had all been watching this oddball storm pop up along my route, and were concerned about it, and that the decision to land was the correct one.

Called him in the morning to go over the plan to finish the XC the next morning, continued the flight, and had the airplane back only 1/2 hour late for the next person on the schedule. Rental place had explained what happened and the student and CFI that were scheduled were more than gracious about it.

The route of flight was only GXY to EIK that was left. The entire rest of the XC was done.

Adding to the problem was the lateness of the hour, which made circumnavigating the thunderstorm before dark, problematic. No night privileges at that time, of course. Probably still be legally "day" but I wasn't comfortable with it, and couldn't really see how far back that storm went, or whether there was another one right behind it.

Keep in mind this is in the day when radar weather was available at airports, but only on the terminal inside and you waited for it to come down over a 56K modem on a noisy phone line. No iPad or mobile data to land and take a peek at the radar picture.

The "calculating" wasn't a problem, by that stage, and shouldn't be. Figuring out how to go around it wasn't the problem, it was the time needed to do so.

Which has also led to the joke from him over the years that I'm the guy who can literally find the only cloud in the sky for hundreds of miles, and it'll be right in my way.

Thankfully this hasn't been that true overall, but I've landed just to look at a weather chart or radar loop (versus calling up Flight Service or Flightwatch back then, which also worked, but you couldn't see it for yourself) more than a few times in the logbook, back in those days, after I had the Private rating and was buzzing around the prairie. That was just how you updated your weather picture in your head if something wasn't looking right. You didn't have many other options.

I remember when I saw my first laptop with charting software on it and a very expensive XM weather receiver hooked to it and just had to have one. That company was the one that eventually went full-retard and sued everyone saying they created the magenta line.

After running that stuff on a regular laptop for a while, I bought some crazy semi-tablet thing the size of a dump truck and dragged that around with the borrowed XM receiver from a friend. Thing had like a half hour worth of battery and had to be plugged into ship's power to actually use it for an XC, but it was pretty cool compared to landing to look at a weather chart!
 
OK, I'm a little late to the party. But, looking at the good feedback you've received, 3 thoughts come to mind.

1. I REALLY applaud the fact that you are thinking about flight planning early on, while you are still pre-solo. Your enthusiasm for learning to fly shows, and that is always something wonderful to see in a student pilot. Keep it up!
2. I think that Option 1 looks like a drunkard's stagger primarily because of the return (northern) portion. The planned route down to Brainerd, has some merit - multiple AP waypoints, a road / track to follow, etc. It would probably be fun to fly that route in many ways.
3. Why not think about blending the best elements of the two options, in terms of experience to be gained, and efficiency? Take the 'IFR' / 'IFRR' route down to Brainerd, then return by the direct route.
 
Last edited:
Some very good insights guys. Much appreciated. I will fly this route multiple times after my PPL, that's for sure. Big fan of the gull lake resturant . @LongRoadBob brings up a great point about weather and that can pretty rapidly change around here. Just yesterday, I drove little over 100 miles to a nearby airport and observed the region got from LIFR at KFAR to STC 6000 on my way and MVFR at KBJI, and then clear up after 30 mins!!

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 
I thought all fictitious cross country plans included multiple states and 1500nm :)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
WannFly said:
Some very good insights guys. Much appreciated. I will fly this route multiple times after my PPL, that's for sure. Big fan of the gull lake resturant . @LongRoadBob brings up a great point about weather and that can pretty rapidly change around here. Just yesterday, I drove little over 100 miles to a nearby airport and observed the region got from LIFR at KFAR to STC 6000 on my way and MVFR at KBJI, and then clear up after 30 mins!!

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
More than just weather, **** happens on student cross countries.

On mine, I planned each leg with a different navigation method. The second leg was VOR/DME, but I rather quickly discovered the DME didn't work more than 5 miles from the station, so I had to replan it in the air.
 
MAKG1 said:
The second leg was VOR/DME, but I rather quickly discovered the DME didn't work more than 5 miles from the station, so I had to replan it in the air.
Click to expand...

In what way did lack of DME affect your plan?
 
I would go via DTL.

VOR navigation practice
Not much longer than direct
Many available emergency options.
 
You guys have so far been pretty nice to students like me, with our questions with (in a lot of cases) obvious answers. I don't mean WannFly's but my own in some cases. I'm very appreciative for the kindness shown for my ignorance. Also hope it continues until I am a little less ignorant.

I am learning navigation now in ground school, working on wind triangles and think I'm getting it okay, but while doing it I reflected on WannFly's questions here.

I notice that he, and test questions from my textbook, and I (naturally) do my calculations from the center of the airport, point A to Point B. This may be insignificant, but I realized that on takeoff and turnout I am offset from the center of the airport as a departure point. Not my all that much but still.

Thinking it may or not be dumb to double back and overfly the center of the airport to pick up my track, I'm wondering if anyone starts the plan from a checkpoint or feature near the airport that you will naturally be flying over and recognize, etc to start your first heading? This wouldn't work for test questions as they seem to always be from the center of the airfield. But in actual planning. Or is this just overthinking and overkill?
 
LongRoadBob said:
You guys have so far been pretty nice to students like me, with our questions with (in a lot of cases) obvious answers. I don't mean WannFly's but my own in some cases. I'm very appreciative for the kindness shown for my ignorance. Also hope it continues until I am a little less ignorant.

I am learning navigation now in ground school, working on wind triangles and think I'm getting it okay, but while doing it I reflected on WannFly's questions here.

I notice that he, and test questions from my textbook, and I (naturally) do my calculations from the center of the airport, point A to Point B. This may be insignificant, but I realized that on takeoff and turnout I am offset from the center of the airport as a departure point. Not my all that much but still.

Thinking it may or not be dumb to double back and overfly the center of the airport to pick up my track, I'm wondering if anyone starts the plan from a checkpoint or feature near the airport that you will naturally be flying over and recognize, etc to start your first heading? This wouldn't work for test questions as they seem to always be from the center of the airfield. But in actual planning. Or is this just overthinking and overkill?
Click to expand...

Typically you'll want to pick out a waypoint 5 - 10 miles out from your airport - depending on initial altitude and climb performance - to navigate to and then turn on course. In the OP's example you could use Morehead airport JKJ, Hawley airport 04Y, the railroad junction at Glydon, etc, etc
 
LongRoadBob said:
You guys have so far been pretty nice to students like me, with our questions with (in a lot of cases) obvious answers. I don't mean WannFly's but my own in some cases. I'm very appreciative for the kindness shown for my ignorance. Also hope it continues until I am a little less ignorant.

I am learning navigation now in ground school, working on wind triangles and think I'm getting it okay, but while doing it I reflected on WannFly's questions here.

I notice that he, and test questions from my textbook, and I (naturally) do my calculations from the center of the airport, point A to Point B. This may be insignificant, but I realized that on takeoff and turnout I am offset from the center of the airport as a departure point. Not my all that much but still.

Thinking it may or not be dumb to double back and overfly the center of the airport to pick up my track, I'm wondering if anyone starts the plan from a checkpoint or feature near the airport that you will naturally be flying over and recognize, etc to start your first heading? This wouldn't work for test questions as they seem to always be from the center of the airfield. But in actual planning. Or is this just overthinking and overkill?
Click to expand...
First, the general rule here seems to be that a sincere question asked by someone who wants to learn will always get multiple positive and helpful responses. It doesn't matter if you are trying to find a discovery flight to decide if you want to start flight training or if you are an ATP asking about a 747 type rating, if you ask a sincere question and want to learn, you will get friendly help.

Second, you are definitely overthinking it, and that's normal. As they say in the military, "No plan survives contact with the enemy." Your departure may involve anything from a turn to avoid a cloud or flock of birds to radar vectors for traffic. You will also be busy getting the plane configured for climb and planning your level-off. The winds will change as you climb and will almost certainly not be exactly as the winds aloft forecast promised. You could pick a checkpoint close to the airport to get yourself lined up, and if there is a good one you should do that. But it sometimes works out better to just get turned on course and be watching for your first checkpoint 20 miles or more away. The key is to be familiar with your route by studying the chart so that you can identify where you are at any point along the way, including from a couple miles off of your planned flight path due to a complicated departure.
 
LongRoadBob said:
You guys have so far been pretty nice to students like me, with our questions with (in a lot of cases) obvious answers. I don't mean WannFly's but my own in some cases. I'm very appreciative for the kindness shown for my ignorance. Also hope it continues until I am a little less ignorant.

I am learning navigation now in ground school, working on wind triangles and think I'm getting it okay, but while doing it I reflected on WannFly's questions here.

I notice that he, and test questions from my textbook, and I (naturally) do my calculations from the center of the airport, point A to Point B. This may be insignificant, but I realized that on takeoff and turnout I am offset from the center of the airport as a departure point. Not my all that much but still.

Thinking it may or not be dumb to double back and overfly the center of the airport to pick up my track, I'm wondering if anyone starts the plan from a checkpoint or feature near the airport that you will naturally be flying over and recognize, etc to start your first heading? This wouldn't work for test questions as they seem to always be from the center of the airfield. But in actual planning. Or is this just overthinking and overkill?
Click to expand...

It's somewhat overkill, but I'll do that if I'm attempting a precision dead reckoning leg.

A simple technique is to ask for a left 270 departure instead of a right crosswind, for example.

The offset is around a mile, maybe two. Not terribly significant, but it's magic to fly 30 minutes holding a heading precisely and have your destination pop out in your face. I had to do this to become a CAP mission pilot, and my "destination" was a dirt road intersection with a small water tower, in the middle of nowhere.
 
LongRoadBob said:
You guys have so far been pretty nice to students like me, with our questions with (in a lot of cases) obvious answers. I don't mean WannFly's but my own in some cases. I'm very appreciative for the kindness shown for my ignorance. Also hope it continues until I am a little less ignorant.
Click to expand...

My University training was in economics where the reasonable man standard was quite important

I think here reasonable questions are treated as such while the others.... Not so much.
Ymmv
 
MAKG1 said:
It's somewhat overkill, but I'll do that if I'm attempting a precision dead reckoning leg.

A simple technique is to ask for a left 270 departure instead of a right crosswind, for example.

The offset is around a mile, maybe two. Not terribly significant, but it's magic to fly 30 minutes holding a heading precisely and have your destination pop out in your face. I had to do this to become a CAP mission pilot, and my "destination" was a dirt road intersection with a small water tower, in the middle of nowhere.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I imagine It is pretty cool. My only similar experience is orienteering, when I find the marker in the forest exactly dead ahead where it should be. I imagine it's even ten times more of a thrill in navigation.

But overkill or not, I'm pretty certain I'm going to have a good deal experience not hitting the mark, and learning the techniques for getting back on track after conditions aren't totally matching the reports.
 
In the beginning it was really satisfying to get to a new place at the time I expected using reckoning, nav radios, and timer. Nowadays I've always got the magenta lines going.

(Probably a reminder to self to not always use the GPS)
 
Ravioli said:
In the beginning it was really satisfying to get to a new place at the time I expected using reckoning, nav radios, and timer. Nowadays I've always got the magenta lines going.

(Probably a reminder to self to not always use the GPS)
Click to expand...
That's why I am doing a cross country in the Cub this summer that will take about 2 days to complete only using the sectional, wristwatch (which is mechanical of course, and maybe I should use my great grandpa's old pocket watch instead just to keep the theme), and the crummy compass in the plane that reads about 60 degrees off some directions. It's my self-imposed penance for following too many magenta lines.
 
Sounds like a good route. Do say Hi when in KDTL.

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk
 
mondtster said:
Yep! I learned that on my first cross country up there. Not all of the lakes are depicted on the charts. They all start to look alike and it can be hard to determine which lake you're actually looking at. If you're familiar with the area however, the big ones are generally obvious.
Click to expand...
One my first XCs was to KDTL. Except I flew in from the East (7Y3).

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk
 
Enjoyed reading this post since going on my dual xcountry next week. Was supposed to solo this week but planes are in the shop one for new avionics and the other 100hr. Next week i will be flying 4 days , one being the xcountry. But weather is looking like it might be a problem. I'm going to start planning this week. I already planned a bit. But a member here no names "bigbadlou" is trying to get me to detour my plans for better plans lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top