Using high-altitude airways under 18K ft on IFR flight plan?

F

frcabot

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Feb 4, 2014
Messages
779
Display Name
Display name:
frcabot
Does anyone have experience using high-altitude airways on an IFR plan below 18K feet? Typically the V/T routes are low-level (below 18K), and J/Q routes are high-level (above 18K feet), but if you're using GPS it doesn't make much difference.

For example, flying from 97MT to 38W, using high-altitude airways, I could fly:
97MT CORDU Q140 J52 SHUKA 38W, for a total distance of 318nm. The highest altitude enroute is only about 7K (except for one area near Mt. Baker), meaning I could fly at 10K for most of the route and have well over 2K mountain clearance.

Using low-altitude airways, though, I'd have to fly a really long way around through Seattle since there are no low-altitude airways in the region:
97MT OLIBY V448 GEG V120 SEA V23 ACORD 38W, turning the 315nm trip into a 410nm trip.

The MEAs on the high-altitude routes are about 25K to 30K, but I don't view these as especially relevant since they're not MOCAs and the OROCAs are far less (highest OROCA is 13k ft). It seems the MEAs are mostly there to assure VOR reception for example, which makes absolutely no difference if you're flying GPS.

So could I submit a flight plan with the high-altitude airways with a lower altitude e.g. 13K feet since I'm /G? Thoughts?

And yes, I realize I could do whatever I wanted if I fly VFR, but I'm specifically inquiring about remaining on an IFR flight plan.
 
Last edited:
colojo said:
According to this website:

http://www.vatusa.net/training/tiki-index.php?page=airways_and_route_systems

"Aircraft flying at or above FL180 cannot use Victor airways in the route. Aircraft flying below FL180 cannot use high altitude airways in their route."
Click to expand...
That's a Microsoft Flight Simulator air traffic controller simulation, hardly the definitive authority :-D It also confuses MEA with "minimum safe altitude" (does not exist to my knowledge), and ATC can in fact issue clearances below the MEA in radar environment or in other circumstances (e.g., GPS certified aircraft above OROCA). For example, the MVA (minimum vectoring altitude) when available is by definition less than the MEA.
 
Last edited:
colojo said:
According to this website:

http://www.vatusa.net/training/tiki-index.php?page=airways_and_route_systems

"Aircraft flying at or above FL180 cannot use Victor airways in the route. Aircraft flying below FL180 cannot use high altitude airways in their route."
Click to expand...

You know, I've never given it much thought. I've certainly filed victor airways above FL180 and was given the clearance. Don't have the time to dig right now for the rules...

Your reference is training material for virtual air traffic control on the internet..so not sure I'd put much faith in that.
 
They often issue victors above FL180 for a short segment.
I'm guessing the high altitude routes were from the days before GPS, when you needed the extra VOR service volume seeing as though the navaids are further apart.

Either way it's not a violation of any FAR, so you may as well try it and see what happens.
 
frcabot said:
Does anyone have experience using high-altitude airways on an IFR plan below 18K feet? Typically the V/T routes are low-level (below 18K), and J/Q routes are high-level (above 18K feet), but if you're using GPS it doesn't make much difference.

For example, flying from 97MT to 38W, using high-altitude airways, I could fly:
97MT CORDU Q140 J52 SHUKA 38W, for a total distance of 318nm. The highest altitude enroute is only about 7K (except for one area near Mt. Baker), meaning I could fly at 10K for most of the route and have well over 2K mountain clearance.

Using low-altitude airways, though, I'd have to fly a really long way around through Seattle since there are no low-altitude airways in the region:
97MT OLIBY V448 GEG V120 SEA V23 ACORD 38W, turning the 315nm trip into a 410nm trip.

The MEAs on the high-altitude routes are about 25K to 30K, but I don't view these as especially relevant since they're not MOCAs and the OROCAs are far less (highest OROCA is 13k ft). It seems the MEAs are mostly there to assure VOR reception for example, which makes absolutely no difference if you're flying GPS.

So could I submit a flight plan with the high-altitude airways with a lower altitude e.g. 13K feet since I'm /G? Thoughts?

And yes, I realize I could do whatever I wanted if I fly VFR, but I'm specifically inquiring about remaining on an IFR flight plan.
Click to expand...

Why don't you just file 97MT direct to 38W?
 
Your clearance will more than likely get kicked back as a V route clearance. A better option would be to just file the turn waypoints individually or direct.
 
If it means anything, I've filed (ok, VFR) routing using specified Intersections as waypoints, regardless that they belonged to the VFR, Low-IFR, High-IFR, GPS (on non-GPS routings), etc. and ATC has never given indication that they didn't like it.
So maybe you just don't include Victor/Juliet listings on the plan and just do direct to Intersections. No problem
 
frcabot said:
Does anyone have experience using high-altitude airways on an IFR plan below 18K feet? Typically the V/T routes are low-level (below 18K), and J/Q routes are high-level (above 18K feet), but if you're using GPS it doesn't make much difference.

For example, flying from 97MT to 38W, using high-altitude airways, I could fly:
97MT CORDU Q140 J52 SHUKA 38W, for a total distance of 318nm. The highest altitude enroute is only about 7K (except for one area near Mt. Baker), meaning I could fly at 10K for most of the route and have well over 2K mountain clearance.

Using low-altitude airways, though, I'd have to fly a really long way around through Seattle since there are no low-altitude airways in the region:
97MT OLIBY V448 GEG V120 SEA V23 ACORD 38W, turning the 315nm trip into a 410nm trip
Click to expand...

I've heard folks cleared "via the fixes of V999" when in high altitude airspace, where the victor airway itself doesn't exist...

Paul
 
oldShar said:
If it means anything, I've filed (ok, VFR) routing using specified Intersections as waypoints, regardless that they belonged to the VFR, Low-IFR, High-IFR, GPS (on non-GPS routings), etc. and ATC has never given indication that they didn't like it.
So maybe you just don't include Victor/Juliet listings on the plan and just do direct to Intersections. No problem
Click to expand...
What do you mean you've filed VFR? ATC doesn't ever see your VFR flight plan so there's no way it would ever be kicked back to you. You can list whatever you want on a VFR flight plan, you don't need a clearance to fly it.
 
oldShar said:
If it means anything, I've filed (ok, VFR) routing using specified Intersections as waypoints, regardless that they belonged to the VFR, Low-IFR, High-IFR, GPS (on non-GPS routings), etc. and ATC has never given indication that they didn't like it.
So maybe you just don't include Victor/Juliet listings on the plan and just do direct to Intersections. No problem
Click to expand...

I don't think ATC ever see, let alone vet, VFR flight plans.
 
oldShar said:
If it means anything, I've filed (ok, VFR) routing using specified Intersections as waypoints, regardless that they belonged to the VFR, Low-IFR, High-IFR, GPS (on non-GPS routings), etc. and ATC has never given indication that they didn't like it.
So maybe you just don't include Victor/Juliet listings on the plan and just do direct to Intersections. No problem
Click to expand...

ATC does not receive your VFR flight plan, so they have no way of forming an opinion about it.

For IFR, you can file direct to anything you're equipped to navigate to. Whether you will get what you filed, who knows?

[Edit: I guess I type too slow! :D]
 
Last edited:
Palmpilot said:
ATC does not receive your VFR flight plan, so they have no way of forming an opinion about it.

For IFR, you can file direct to anything you're equipped to navigate to. Whether you will get what you filed, who knows?

[Edit: I guess I type too slow! :D]
Click to expand...

I know how to file a VFR flight plan that ATC will see....
 
In fact, nobody gives a hoot what routing you put in your VFR plan. It's not used for ANYTHING (not even S&R).
 
you can fly a victor airway above FL180, the controller will clear you "via the radials of vxxx"
It's probably not going to fly if you're nonradar or below the MVA however.

I'm sure they could do the same for the J's.
 
PeeGee said:
you can fly a victor airway above FL180, the controller will clear you "via the radials of vxxx"
It's probably not going to fly if you're nonradar or below the MVA however.
Click to expand...

Victor airways don't have MVAs, they have MEAs, and none of those MEAs are above FL180.
 
frcabot said:
That's a Microsoft Flight Simulator air traffic controller simulation, hardly the definitive authority :-D It also confuses MEA with "minimum safe altitude" (does not exist to my knowledge), and ATC can in fact issue clearances below the MEA in radar environment or in other circumstances (e.g., GPS certified aircraft above OROCA). For example, the MVA (minimum vectoring altitude) when available is by definition less than the MEA.
Click to expand...

Ha! You're right. I hastily tried to figure out what the source was but didn't.

Never mind!
 
Gucci Pilot said:
But in your example you aren't operating in Norcal.
Click to expand...
Right, I guess my question in that regard is do other ARTCCs actually approve GPS direct routing on 315+ nm flights? Seems unlikely, the regs say you need a waypoint every 200nm minimum plus in every ARTCC. You could make an artificial one with long/lat coordinates I suppose.
 
roncachamp said:
Victor airways don't have MVAs, they have MEAs, and none of those MEAs are above FL180.
Click to expand...
No, you're kidding?! REALLY?!!?

And J airways don't always have MEA's, do they?

Which is why I said you need to be above the minimum VECTORING altitude to fly the radials of a J airway below class a airspace.
 
Last edited:
frcabot said:
Right, I guess my question in that regard is do other ARTCCs actually approve GPS direct routing on 315+ nm flights? Seems unlikely, the regs say you need a waypoint every 200nm minimum plus in every ARTCC. You could make an artificial one with long/lat coordinates I suppose.
Click to expand...

I have gotten direct Harrisburg(start of our arrival) from San Diego.
 
frcabot said:
Right, I guess my question in that regard is do other ARTCCs actually approve GPS direct routing on 315+ nm flights? Seems unlikely, the regs say you need a waypoint every 200nm minimum plus in every ARTCC. You could make an artificial one with long/lat coordinates I suppose.
Click to expand...
you know there's a giant grid of RNAV waypoints, right? It literally covers like, the entire country.
 
PeeGee said:
you know there's a giant grid of RNAV waypoints, right? It literally covers like, the entire country.
Click to expand...
I've filed RNAV PTP before and never gotten it approved so dunno what to tell you.
 
Palmpilot said:
That's not a regulation.
Click to expand...

Well the FAA says so.

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_poli...ument_procedures_handbook/media/Chapter_2.pdf

Operations above FL 450—use NAVAIDs not more
than 200 NM apart. These aids are depicted on en
route high altitude charts.
2. Operation off established routes from 18,000 feet
MSL to FL 450—use NAVAIDs not more than 260
NM apart. These aids are depicted on en route high
altitude charts.
3. Operation off established airways below 18,000 feet
MSL—use NAVAIDs not more than 80 NM apart.
These aids are depicted on en route low altitude charts.
4. Operation off established airways between 14,500
feet MSL and 17,999 feet MSL in the conterminous
United States—(H) facilities not more than 200NM
apart may be used.


Pilots flying aircraft that are equipped with approved area
navigation equipment may file for RNAV routes throughout
the NAS and may be filed for in accordance with the
following procedures:
1. File airport-to-airport flight plans.
2. File the appropriate RNAV capability certification
suffix in the flight plan.
3. Plan the random route portion of the flight plan
to begin and end over appropriate arrival and
departure transition fixes or appropriate NAVAIDs
for the altitude stratum within which the flight is
conducted. The use of normal preferred DPs and
STAR, where established, is recommended.
4. File route structure transitions to and from the
random route portion of the flight.
5. Define the random route by waypoints. File route
description waypoints by using degree distance fixes
based on navigational aids that are appropriate for
the altitude stratum.
6. File a minimum of one route description waypoint
for each ARTCC through whose area the random
route is flown. These waypoints must be located
within 200 NM of the preceding center’s boundary.
7. File an additional route description waypoint for
each turnpoint in the route.
8. Plan additional route description waypoints as
required to ensure accurate navigation via the filed
route of flight. Navigation is the pilot’s responsibility
unless ATC assistance is requested.
9. Plan the route of flight so as to avoid prohibited and
restricted airspace by 3 NM unless permission has
been obtained to operate in that airspace and the
appropriate ATC facilities are advised.
 
frcabot said:
I've filed RNAV PTP before and never gotten it approved so dunno what to tell you.
Click to expand...
the computer does what it does. and it didn't like what you filed. ask for direct airborne.
 
frcabot said:
Well the FAA says so.

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_poli...ument_procedures_handbook/media/Chapter_2.pdf

Operations above FL 450—use NAVAIDs not more
than 200 NM apart. These aids are depicted on en
route high altitude charts.
2. Operation off established routes from 18,000 feet
MSL to FL 450—use NAVAIDs not more than 260
NM apart. These aids are depicted on en route high
altitude charts.
3. Operation off established airways below 18,000 feet
MSL—use NAVAIDs not more than 80 NM apart.
These aids are depicted on en route low altitude charts.
4. Operation off established airways between 14,500
feet MSL and 17,999 feet MSL in the conterminous
United States—(H) facilities not more than 200NM
apart may be used.


Pilots flying aircraft that are equipped with approved area
navigation equipment may file for RNAV routes throughout
the NAS and may be filed for in accordance with the
following procedures:
1. File airport-to-airport flight plans.
2. File the appropriate RNAV capability certification
suffix in the flight plan.
3. Plan the random route portion of the flight plan
to begin and end over appropriate arrival and
departure transition fixes or appropriate NAVAIDs
for the altitude stratum within which the flight is
conducted. The use of normal preferred DPs and
STAR, where established, is recommended.
4. File route structure transitions to and from the
random route portion of the flight.
5. Define the random route by waypoints. File route
description waypoints by using degree distance fixes
based on navigational aids that are appropriate for
the altitude stratum.
6. File a minimum of one route description waypoint
for each ARTCC through whose area the random
route is flown. These waypoints must be located
within 200 NM of the preceding center’s boundary.
7. File an additional route description waypoint for
each turnpoint in the route.
8. Plan additional route description waypoints as
required to ensure accurate navigation via the filed
route of flight. Navigation is the pilot’s responsibility
unless ATC assistance is requested.
9. Plan the route of flight so as to avoid prohibited and
restricted airspace by 3 NM unless permission has
been obtained to operate in that airspace and the
appropriate ATC facilities are advised.
Click to expand...

No one cares if you file GPS direct.
and also, that's like the oldest text every. Holy **** strips? really?
 
frcabot said:
Well the FAA says so.

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_poli...ument_procedures_handbook/media/Chapter_2.pdf

Operations above FL 450—use NAVAIDs not more
than 200 NM apart. These aids are depicted on en
route high altitude charts.
2. Operation off established routes from 18,000 feet
MSL to FL 450—use NAVAIDs not more than 260
NM apart. These aids are depicted on en route high
altitude charts.
3. Operation off established airways below 18,000 feet
MSL—use NAVAIDs not more than 80 NM apart.
These aids are depicted on en route low altitude charts.
4. Operation off established airways between 14,500
feet MSL and 17,999 feet MSL in the conterminous
United States—(H) facilities not more than 200NM
apart may be used.


Pilots flying aircraft that are equipped with approved area
navigation equipment may file for RNAV routes throughout
the NAS and may be filed for in accordance with the
following procedures:
1. File airport-to-airport flight plans.
2. File the appropriate RNAV capability certification
suffix in the flight plan.
3. Plan the random route portion of the flight plan
to begin and end over appropriate arrival and
departure transition fixes or appropriate NAVAIDs
for the altitude stratum within which the flight is
conducted. The use of normal preferred DPs and
STAR, where established, is recommended.
4. File route structure transitions to and from the
random route portion of the flight.
5. Define the random route by waypoints. File route
description waypoints by using degree distance fixes
based on navigational aids that are appropriate for
the altitude stratum.
6. File a minimum of one route description waypoint
for each ARTCC through whose area the random
route is flown. These waypoints must be located
within 200 NM of the preceding center’s boundary.
7. File an additional route description waypoint for
each turnpoint in the route.
8. Plan additional route description waypoints as
required to ensure accurate navigation via the filed
route of flight. Navigation is the pilot’s responsibility
unless ATC assistance is requested.
9. Plan the route of flight so as to avoid prohibited and
restricted airspace by 3 NM unless permission has
been obtained to operate in that airspace and the
appropriate ATC facilities are advised.
Click to expand...

The Instrument Procedures Handbook is not a regulation.
 
PeeGee said:
No, you're kidding?! REALLY?!!?"
Click to expand...

Really. I'm not kidding.

And J airways don't always have MEA's, do they?"
Click to expand...
Jet routes rarely have MEAs.

Which is why I said you need to be above the minimum VECTORING altitude to fly the radials of a J airway below class a airspace.
Click to expand...
You didn't say that. You said; "you can fly a victor airway above FL180, the controller will clear you 'via the radials of vxxx'
It's probably not going to fly if you're nonradar or below the MVA however."

Why do I bother with this cesspool of "experts"
Click to expand...
A good reason for you to bother with it is to increase your knowledge and correct your misconceptions.
 
Last edited:
frcabot said:
Right, I guess my question in that regard is do other ARTCCs actually approve GPS direct routing on 315+ nm flights?
Click to expand...

Yes.

Seems unlikely, the regs say you need a waypoint every 200nm minimum plus in every ARTCC. You could make an artificial one with long/lat coordinates I suppose.
Click to expand...

There is no regulation that says that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top