VOR navigation question

Flyingfanatic

Flyingfanatic

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Aug 6, 2013
Messages
151
Display Name
Display name:
Flying Fanatic
Without GPS or radar vectors, can you navigate from an airport to an intersection on a VOR airway or just to the airway itself without first going to a VOR?

I think the answer is no, because you don’t have positive navigation guidance. But I’m not sure.

If I want to depart an airport and join an airway, my understanding is I need to go to the VOR first, absent any radar vectors or GPS navigation.

Is there a way to file radar vectors to an intersection? So if I want to depart the airport and get vectors to an intersection, I can ask for that in the flight plan?
 
You can intercept the radial the Victor airway is on.

This is basic ppl stuff, there are some good videos on yt that show how to do it. Watch those, and some time with a cfi wouldn't hurt either.
 
PaulS said:
You can intercept the radial the Victor airway is on.

This is basic ppl stuff, there are some good videos on yt that show how to do it. Watch those, and some time with a cfi wouldn't hurt either.
Click to expand...

The question is about how to file it in an IFR flight plan.
 
Sure, you can file direct to an intersection. If the intersection is at the cross radials, you can use two VOR receivers to get there directly. If it is a DME fix from one station, that may be a bit harder.
You can file radar vectors, assuming you will be above the vectoring altitude.
Basically, you can file whatever you want. But the question is would you be able to fly the filed route if things go south?
 
Flyingfanatic said:
Without GPS or radar vectors, can you navigate from an airport to an intersection on a VOR airway or just to the airway itself without first going to a VOR?

I think the answer is no, because you don’t have positive navigation guidance. But I’m not sure.

If I want to depart an airport and join an airway, my understanding is I need to go to the VOR first, absent any radar vectors or GPS navigation.

Is there a way to file radar vectors to an intersection? So if I want to depart the airport and get vectors to an intersection, I can ask for that in the flight plan?
Click to expand...
You can Dead Reckon towards the Intersection and then when you get close and the Needles start moving, do your intercept of the radial from there. If they give you that Intersection as the first Fix on your Route, how you get there is up to you unless they give you specific Departure Instructions. While you can put 'REQUEST VECTORS' in Remarks, there is not a way to put it in the Route, that I know of. Whether you'll get them or not, you'll find out when you get your Clearance
 
Last edited:
luvflyin said:
That was the second question. The first one was about navigating to the Intersection.
Click to expand...

If you can do it legally IFR. Not how. I'd imagine that a CFI knows how to use a VOR.
 
sarangan said:
Sure, you can file direct to an intersection. If the intersection is at the cross radials, you can use two VOR receivers to get there directly.
Click to expand...
IMO, not really. Trying to bring in two VOR needles which can have individual errors of up to 4 degrees so the meet at exactly the same time may be a nice idea but ultimately it's point-to-point navigation which, in the modern NAS, requires RNAV capability. I spent a little time looking into this for my IFR Magazine article on IFR dead reckoning.
 
dmspilot said:
The question is about how to file it in an IFR flight plan.
Click to expand...

Lol, missed which forum this is and that he is a cfi. I would file to the vor, then continue from there, if you have a single vor. It's getting harder and harder to use vors around here, they are decommissioning most of them. If you have two, you can file to an intersection that has cross radials charted. You can also use dme if you have that.

I've never filed asking for radar vectors, not sure if that would work, but you can certainly ask when you get your clearance.
 
Flyingfanatic said:
Without GPS or radar vectors, can you navigate from an airport to an intersection on a VOR airway or just to the airway itself without first going to a VOR?

I think the answer is no, because you don’t have positive navigation guidance. But I’m not sure.

If I want to depart an airport and join an airway, my understanding is I need to go to the VOR first, absent any radar vectors or GPS navigation.

Is there a way to file radar vectors to an intersection? So if I want to depart the airport and get vectors to an intersection, I can ask for that in the flight plan?
Click to expand...
You are correct, unless, of course, you happen to be on the airway. File and plan to navigate to a VOR on the airway. Hopefully, once in contact with ATC, they will give you a vector to join. Feel free to ask.
 
midlifeflyer said:
IMO, not really. Trying to bring in two VOR needles which can have individual errors of up to 4 degrees so the meet at exactly the same time may be a nice idea but ultimately it's point-to-point navigation which, in the modern NAS, requires RNAV capability. I spent a little time looking into this for my IFR Magazine article on IFR dead reckoning.
Click to expand...
BTW, the article is here but it's a subscription-required one.
 
I deal with this at San Diego Brown Field every time. Going to Phx, the first fix I file is the nearby VOR, Poggi (PGY).

What I actually get is: on departure turn heading 280, radar vectors for PGY. The have me fly West so as to gain some altitude before turning me East into the terrain of Otay Mountain.

I'd love to be able to actually file the Radar Vectors portion of the clearance so that I could achieve the hallowed "Cleared as Filed" - but it'll never happen.
 
midlifeflyer said:
BTW, the article is here but it's a subscription-required one.
Click to expand...
I'm sure you covered DR legs on approaches. What about MEA Gaps? They've gotten rid of a lot Victor airways over the last few years. Are there any of those left? On the RNAV required for point to point navigation, yeah for Waypoint to Waypoint. But I'm not seeing that as always being required from Departure Airport to first Fix, the OP's scenario.

EDIT: Found one. V134 between PUC and YMONT
 
Last edited:
midlifeflyer said:
You are correct, unless, of course, you happen to be on the airway. File and plan to navigate to a VOR on the airway. Hopefully, once in contact with ATC, they will give you a vector to join. Feel free to ask.
Click to expand...


This is exactly what I was thinking, but I wanted confirmation.

Thank you!
 
Rgbeard said:
I deal with this at San Diego Brown Field every time. Going to Phx, the first fix I file is the nearby VOR, Poggi (PGY).

What I actually get is: on departure turn heading 280, radar vectors for PGY. The have me fly West so as to gain some altitude before turning me East into the terrain of Otay Mountain.

I'd love to be able to actually file the Radar Vectors portion of the clearance so that I could achieve the hallowed "Cleared as Filed" - but it'll never happen.
Click to expand...
"...turning me East OVER the terrain of Otay Mountain..." FTFY:goofy:
 
midlifeflyer said:
IMO, not really. Trying to bring in two VOR needles which can have individual errors of up to 4 degrees so the meet at exactly the same time may be a nice idea but ultimately it's point-to-point navigation which, in the modern NAS, requires RNAV capability. I spent a little time looking into this for my IFR Magazine article on IFR dead reckoning.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was easy. When flying direct to an intersection of two VORs, you are flying inside a narrowing cone of airspace that becomes a point at the intersection. The angle of the cone depends on the angle defined by the VOR radials. The father you are from the intersection, the wider the cone, and that could potentially place you outside the protected airspace. But if you combine it with a computed heading, assuming there are no howling winds or mountains in the way, I wouldn't be too worried about flying it. If you have RNAV, then of course it is a no brainer.
 
Although not used in an actual flight plan, in the old days we had a training exercise to fly to an intersection of two VOR radials and hold on one of the radials. The process was to intercept one of the radials with a 90 degree intercept and then figure out which way to turn on that radial to get to the intersection. No moving map, unless you dropped your map on the floor. No RNAV, couldn't even spell it. This was before even the KNS80, just a couple of KX170B and before transponders were required.
 
You can still get cleared as filed, even if you join the route via vectors, a few waypoints, or a SID. "Example: Cleared to Reynolds Airport; David Two Departure, Kingham Transition; then, as filed." How you join the route can be part of the clearance and from that point cleared as filed or rest of route unchanged, example “Cessna Two One Alfa cleared via Victor Forty−One Frank, Victor Seventy−One Delta, rest of route unchanged.”
 
luvflyin said:
I'm sure you covered DR legs on approaches. What about MEA Gaps? They've gotten rid of a lot Victor airways over the last few years. Are there any of those left? On the RNAV required for point to point navigation, yeah for Waypoint to Waypoint. But I'm not seeing that as always being required from Departure Airport to first Fix, the OP's scenario.

EDIT: Found one. V134 between PUC and YMONT
Click to expand...
Yep, I discussed both. Also DR segments on ODPs, published visual segments on final approach courses (technically visual but designed for dead reckoning), and dead reckoning legs on ODPs. Gave honorable mention to the death of TACAN point-to-point in the NAS.
 
sarangan said:
I didn't say it was easy.
Click to expand...
I didn't say it was hard. The old Brown Book Flight Guides use to give intersecting radials for airport locations. I used to use those at night all the time, even before I got my instrument rating.

What I did say is that it is not part of IFR navigation in the NAS in 2021. If you think it is, let me ask this: what the the RNP value using dual VOR homing as a primary means of RNAV navigation? Is it "suitable RNAV equipment" under FAR 91.205 and 1.1?
 
I guess I can. When I got my instrument rating Dead Reckoning appropriate for IFR navigation was requirement under 61.65(b). Used to file to an intersection on an airway as the first fix, but it also was like eight mile from the departure airport.
 
Clip4 said:
I guess I can. When I got my instrument rating Dead Reckoning appropriate for IFR navigation was requirement under 61.65(b). Used to file to an intersection on an airway as the first fix, but it also was like eight mile from the departure airport.
Click to expand...
I always wondered why they got rid of it considering the continued existence of MEA gaps and other published DR legs. Maybe they just figured it wasn't "normal" anymore (I'm sure it was at one time) and was just part of reading and understanding the charts where they appeared.
 
Sure why not file direct to KMAN to Emett, as long as I can meet the 91.177(a)(2) altitudes before I go IMC.

upload_2021-10-17_21-20-55.png

Pull out my sectional chart and plot a course to Emett, Private Pilot Navigation 101. Intercept the Airway and proceed on course NW.

Only navigation equipment required is a VOR receiver.

Brian
 
Clip4 said:
Considering MON coming they ought to bring it back because without the magenta line most would be lost.
Click to expand...
MON navigation will probably be a combination of RADAR, VOR to VOR, and radial to radial intersections, not dead reckoning or triangulation.

A non radar vectored, non GPS instruction in @Flyingfanatic's scenario would be direct to a VOR to join the airway not direct to an RNAV-required waypoint on the airway. IMO, the removal of DR as a regular primary method of enroute navigation is akin to the removal of most enroute uncontrolled airspace. A combination of better equipment and more traffic. The remaining DR legs in the NAS are all pretty limited in distance and I expect to see MEA gaps disappearing as Victor airways get replaced by T routes.
 
Flyingfanatic said:
If I want to depart an airport and join an airway, my understanding is I need to go to the VOR first, absent any radar vectors or GPS navigation.
Click to expand...
HUH? People join airways without going to the defining VOR all the time. It's just done based on some other form of navigation (possibly being on the radial of some other VOR).
 
Last edited:
brcase said:
Sure why not file direct to KMAN to Emett, as long as I can meet the 91.177(a)(2) altitudes before I go IMC.

View attachment 101049

Pull out my sectional chart and plot a course to Emett, Private Pilot Navigation 101. Intercept the Airway and proceed on course NW.

Only navigation equipment required is a VOR receiver.

Brian
Click to expand...
IMC has nothing to do with it.
 
Last edited:
midlifeflyer said:
MON navigation will probably be a combination of RADAR, VOR to VOR, and radial to radial intersections, not dead reckoning or triangulation.

A non radar vectored, non GPS instruction in @Flyingfanatic's scenario would be direct to a VOR to join the airway not direct to an RNAV-required waypoint on the airway. IMO, the removal of DR as a regular primary method of enroute navigation is akin to the removal of most enroute uncontrolled airspace. A combination of better equipment and more traffic. The remaining DR legs in the NAS are all pretty limited in distance and I expect to see MEA gaps disappearing as Victor airways get replaced by T routes.
Click to expand...

My point is the MON service altitude is 5000 ft and there are still some areas of the country where a departing aircraft that loses GPS may also be below an altitude for communications.
 
flyingron said:
HUH? People join airways without going to the defining VOR all the time. It's just done based on some other form of navigation (possibly being on the radial of some other VOR).
Click to expand...
“Without GPS” is what I said. Obviously I can navigate to an intersection if I’m on an airway or established radial.
 
Flyingfanatic said:
“Without GPS” is what I said. Obviously I can navigate to an intersection if I’m on an airway or established radial.
Click to expand...
GPS has nothing to do with it. And while it is OBVIOUS (which is why the "Huh?") That's not what you said. And you don't even need to be on an airway or established radial. I've gotten clearances that involve taking off and intercepting an airway.
 
midlifeflyer said:
IMO, not really. Trying to bring in two VOR needles which can have individual errors of up to 4 degrees so the meet at exactly the same time may be a nice idea but ultimately it's point-to-point navigation which, in the modern NAS, requires RNAV capability. I spent a little time looking into this for my IFR Magazine article on IFR dead reckoning.
Click to expand...

I think you mean, "You can, but you risk a potential pilot deviation en-route due to the inherit inaccuracies using a dual VOR to effectively triangulate a GPS waypoint." Right? I mean I don't know of any FAR that precludes identifying a GPS waypoint using ground-based NAVIADs. Provided you have confidence in your dual VOR setup, I see no reason why you couldn't use them to track and identify (I agree, it could be very difficult depending on context).

Btw, Mark, great article. I read it when it came out. Really, well done.
 
Trogdor said:
I think you mean, "You can, but you risk a potential pilot deviation en-route due to the inherit inaccuracies using a dual VOR to effectively triangulate a GPS waypoint." Right? I mean I don't know of any FAR that precludes identifying a GPS waypoint using ground-based NAVIADs. Provided you have confidence in your dual VOR setup, I see no reason why you couldn't use them to track and identify (I agree, it could be very difficult depending on context).

Btw, Mark, great article. I read it when it came out. Really, well done.
Click to expand...
Thanks you. Appreciate it.

I guess I mean the difference between "you can" and "you may."

While the regs and guidance may leave some arguable wiggle room, I think (assuming no vectoring) that while Airplane A is permitted to fly IFR Direct BREDY with even a single VOR, airplane B requires some form of approved RNAV capability.
upload_2021-10-18_13-2-48.png
 
Last edited:
Yeah, totally agree. Though again, what FAR actually doesn't allow plane B to estimate the radial that perhaps intersects it (not a Victor) and use that to track inbound? I mean it's not like ATC is really going to say, "Hey Mark, you're 2 degrees off, say intentions." LOL.

However, realistically, ATC would never give plane B direct BREDY if you didn't file the equivalent of '/G' etc. so I certainly agree with your overall sentiments about this scenario (as well as the NAS being RNAV driven).
 
midlifeflyer said:
Don't forget to meet the 91.205 and 1.1 requirements for RNAV IFR navigation too.
Click to expand...

FAR 1.1 "performance criteria (including accuracy) established by the air navigation service provider for certain routes"

I only need to meet RNAV requirement if there are RNAV requirements specified for the route.
or I am missing something else the prevents me just flying to heading to intercept an airway which in reality is what I am doing. I could probably just file KMAN MH340 to V4.

Brian
 
brcase said:
FAR 1.1 "performance criteria (including accuracy) established by the air navigation service provider for certain routes"

I only need to meet RNAV requirement if there are RNAV requirements specified for the route.
or I am missing something else the prevents me just flying to heading to intercept an airway which in reality is what I am doing. I could probably just file KMAN MH340 to V4.

Brian
Click to expand...
Completely different question, Nothing prevents you from accepting a vector to intercept an airway. The airway itself is defined by VOR. Fly the instructed heading until the needle comes in and intercept. Just as valid today as 30 years ago.

OTOH, "point to point" self-navigation is RNAV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top