What’s your on course heading?

GCA would be interesting with track assignment. One turn to final, nail the track, done.
 
asicer said:
I've never heard "own course". It's always been "own nav".
Click to expand...
Ah, yes, that's the phrase I was looking for, thanks. I was probably also confused why he was saying 'on navigation' and with a funny accent as well! :)
 
David Megginson said:
https://www.aviationweather.gov/windtemp

My devices can get upper winds from SiriusXM here in Canada, so I assume they're also available via FIS-B in the U.S. And the upper wind forecasts don't change that often, so whatever your app picked up from the internet an hour before your flight is probably still good enough.

Note that no one here is saying heading vectors are better than track vectors, and insisting that ATC should stick with them forever and ever (amen); just that right now — September 2021 — that's our operational reality while interacting with ATC. And in any case, we've all been trained how to calculate headings based on forecast upper winds during PPL ground school, so while it's a bit of an annoyance, it shouldn't actually puzzle any licensed pilot (or else they couldn't have passed the PPL written exam).
Click to expand...
Of course we all did. But if you are saying you can give you a heading, as opposed to course, right now which will take you all the way to the destination 100nm away with no change. it sounds to me like you are assuming the wind direction and strength will stay constant for that 100 miles so the heading you use in mile 1 will be the same as the heading you will need at mile 99.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Of course we all did. But if you are saying you can give you a heading, as opposed to course, right now which will take you all the way to the destination 100nm away with no change. it sounds to me like you are assuming the wind direction and strength will stay constant for that 100 miles so the heading you use in mile 1 will be the same as the heading you will need at mile 99.
Click to expand...

Would a track guarantee that you arrive at one point in varying conditions? I'm not seeing it. Navigating to a way point or a vor would, but a track, I'm doubting it, which is why I don't thing it's much better than a heading.
 
PaulS said:
Would a track guarantee that you arrive at one point in varying conditions? I'm not seeing it. Navigating to a way point or a vor would, but a track, I'm doubting it, which is why I don't thing it's much better than a heading.
Click to expand...
You are right. I'm thinking of course of course.

"What's your on course heading?" If we really want to drill down, I guess it comes down to, "what heading now, while you are here in my airspace, will put you on course to...?" Thats pretty much all I think they really care about. They don't know the destination and they want to make sure you are not going to cause separation issues when they clear you direct to that waypoint. Most of us will just answer with the course and it will be fine. With a 30 KT direct crosswind, we might give a calculated or guesstimated heading. Then, of course, we will fly the course.
 
PaulS said:
Would a track guarantee that you arrive at one point in varying conditions? I'm not seeing it. Navigating to a way point or a vor would, but a track, I'm doubting it, which is why I don't thing it's much better than a heading.
Click to expand...

To any reasonable standard, yes it would. If I determine that direct to my destination is a DTK of 275, I could just fly a track of 275 and I’ll get there within a reasonable tolerance that only depends on how precise I am. The wind could change from a crosswind one way to the other way, increase or decrease, a headwind to tailwind, whatever, it doesn’t matter. As long as I maintain 275 I’ll end up there. Remember that DTK, or course, is exactly the ground track we’re trying to follow, like it was plotted on a map. It is exactly what we try to accomplish in private pilot training with wind triangles and such, just we’re skipping right to the answer.
 
RussR said:
To any reasonable standard, yes it would. If I determine that direct to my destination is a DTK of 275, I could just fly a track of 275 and I’ll get there within a reasonable tolerance that only depends on how precise I am. The wind could change from a crosswind one way to the other way, increase or decrease, a headwind to tailwind, whatever, it doesn’t matter. As long as I maintain 275 I’ll end up there. Remember that DTK, or course, is exactly the ground track we’re trying to follow, like it was plotted on a map. It is exactly what we try to accomplish in private pilot training with wind triangles and such, just we’re skipping right to the answer.
Click to expand...

But then you are flying to a waypoint, just enter that in and be done with it. No need to call out a 275 degree track. That is effectively what happens now, if ATC wants you to turn, they tell you, turn 20 left, you turn, fly that heading, once you are where or have gone by what they want you by, they tell you to fly direct to the next convenient fix, or they give you a heading to reintercept your original course.

I have never used a GPS just to steer a track, so I'm having a little trouble with how this would work, but what you just described is kind of pointless IMO, just enter the destination and fly to it, nothing more precise than that.

I started flying before GPS, so I've flown courses using ded reckoning, correcting headings for magnetic deviation and applying wind correction. The more this is explained to me, the more useless I think it is.
 
PaulS said:
i have never used a GPS just to steer a track, so I'm having a little trouble with how this would work, but what you just described is kind of pointless IMO, just enter the destination and fly to it, nothing more precise than that.
Click to expand...
For me, it's less "flying a track" than the difference between track and desired track. The DTK is the direction you want to go. Yeah, it's ultimately the course but,unlike a course, it does not need a destination. The track is the direction you are actually flying. Match them up and you are on course.

Winds blowing from the side? The heading which keeps TRK equal to DTK includes your WCA. I think ultimately it is a digital numerical highly accurate CDI. I don't use it that much, but on approaches, it can allow one to obain their reference heading almost immediately and make even smaller more timely corrections. It can make partial panel turns much easier than figuring out how many degrees to turn and divide by 3. It can serve as the GPS equivalent of flying a radial outbound something GPS navigators are not particularly good at (unknown in Avidyne; funky in Garmin).

Just another tool among the many our advanced ststems provide. Useful to understand what they are and what they do. And, like all computers, they may just represent different ways to accomplish the same goal. Then we all have our preferences about which we choose to use.
 
PaulS said:
But then you are flying to a waypoint, just enter that in and be done with it. No need to call out a 275 degree track.
Click to expand...

I agree, but I was just responding to your question about whether a ground track would always take you where you wanted to go (it will).

Here's a couple more examples.

First, I get this situation all the time around here. Like once or twice a week. I am flying SW. ATC needs to turn me to avoid the active MOA. They assign me a heading 250 to clear it. But depending on the wind, this may not actually clear it, or may clear it by way more than necessary. If it's not going to clear, then once that becomes apparent, either they or I suggest a different heading, adjusting as we go. If, instead, they said "Track 250" that would clear it every single time, regardless of wind. There's no guesswork on either the controller's part or my part. Once clear of it, a "direct destination" and we're done.

upload_2021-9-15_6-44-48.png

Second situation can also happen any time you're getting vectors for an approach. The approach course is 174. ATC is required in most cases to give you no greater than a 30 degree intercept. So they assign heading 150 here pretty routinely. However, depending on the wind, heading 150 could either cause greater than a 30 degree intercept (not really that big a deal in small airplanes), or could cause the intercept to happen too close to the FAF or even PAST the FAF (could be a very big deal). I have had both of these situations happen regularly. If the controller just said "Track 150" it would be repeatable and spot-on every single time.

upload_2021-9-15_6-44-56.png
 
Last edited:
midlifeflyer said:
Of course we all did. But if you are saying you can give you a heading, as opposed to course, right now which will take you all the way to the destination 100nm away with no change. it sounds to me like you are assuming the wind direction and strength will stay constant for that 100 miles so the heading you use in mile 1 will be the same as the heading you will need at mile 99.
Click to expand...
When you're VFR and ATC asks you for your intended heading on course, they just want to know the (approximate) heading you will follow for a few miles until you exit their class B/C/D airspace, not the heading you'll be on 100 nm later.
 
Last edited:
Can you just imagine how long it would take a group of POA pilots to order food at a nice restaurant ? The poor waitress would probably walk away and go home after all the discussion...can I substitute...on the side...free range....medium rare, no well done....good grief Charlie Brown :)
 
RussR said:
I agree, but I was just responding to your question about whether a ground track would always take you where you wanted to go (it will).

Here's a couple more examples.

First, I get this situation all the time around here. Like once or twice a week. I am flying SW. ATC needs to turn me to avoid the active MOA. They assign me a heading 250 to clear it. But depending on the wind, this may not actually clear it, or may clear it by way more than necessary. If it's not going to clear, then once that becomes apparent, either they or I suggest a different heading, adjusting as we go. If, instead, they said "Track 250" that would clear it every single time, regardless of wind. There's no guesswork on either the controller's part or my part. Once clear of it, a "direct destination" and we're done.

View attachment 100070

Second situation can also happen any time you're getting vectors for an approach. The approach course is 174. ATC is required in most cases to give you no greater than a 30 degree intercept. So they assign heading 150 here pretty routinely. However, depending on the wind, heading 150 could either cause greater than a 30 degree intercept (not really that big a deal in small airplanes), or could cause the intercept to happen too close to the FAF or even PAST the FAF (could be a very big deal). I have had both of these situations happen regularly. If the controller just said "Track 150" it would be repeatable and spot-on every single time.

View attachment 100071
Click to expand...

How do you enter "track 250" into your system.
 
PaulS said:
How do you enter "track 250" into your system.
Click to expand...

If you're hand flying, there is no entering into the system to be done. It's a simple matter of steering to that track.

If using an autopilot, that's the problem I previously identified. At least in most modern light GA GPS and autopilot units, there's no easy way to do that. It's not a function of technological capability - I can't imagine it would very difficult to update the software to allow this. It's just that that capability does not exist because it's not a thing we currently do. "Chicken or the egg" scenario.
 
RussR said:
If you're hand flying, there is no entering into the system to be done. It's a simple matter of steering to that track.

If using an autopilot, that's the problem I previously identified. At least in most modern light GA GPS and autopilot units, there's no easy way to do that. It's not a function of technological capability - I can't imagine it would very difficult to update the software to allow this. It's just that that capability does not exist because it's not a thing we currently do. "Chicken or the egg" scenario.
Click to expand...

Ok, that's what was messing me up. I don't see headings as a problem. I'm rarely concerned with what they are trying to steer me around unless I'm about to hit it. Usually I'll get a heading change, an altitude change and a frequency change in the same breath from a controller, so the simpler the better as far as I'm concerned. YMMV.
 
Doug Reid said:
Can you just imagine how long it would take a group of POA pilots to order food at a nice restaurant ? The poor waitress would probably walk away and go home after all the discussion...can I substitute...on the side...free range....medium rare, no well done....good grief Charlie Brown :)
Click to expand...

Best comment so far! :happydance:
 
Doug Reid said:
Can you just imagine how long it would take a group of POA pilots to order food at a nice restaurant ? The poor waitress would probably walk away and go home after all the discussion...can I substitute...on the side...free range....medium rare, no well done....good grief Charlie Brown :)
Click to expand...
Been there done that. No problem at all.
 
Doug Reid said:
Can you just imagine how long it would take a group of POA pilots to order food at a nice restaurant ? The poor waitress would probably walk away and go home after all the discussion...can I substitute...on the side...free range....medium rare, no well done....good grief Charlie Brown :)
Click to expand...

Lol, yet you keep coming back.
 
Doug Reid said:
Can you just imagine how long it would take a group of POA pilots to order food at a nice restaurant ? The poor waitress would probably walk away and go home after all the discussion...can I substitute...on the side...free range....medium rare, no well done....good grief Charlie Brown :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, but POA got no corner on that. Lemme tell ya bout some non pilots I know. If the waitress shot them I would testify that they pulled a knife on her first:fingerwag:
 
RussR said:
Oh, and while we're at this admitted pipe dream, when we implement it we might as well do away with all this "magnetic north" stuff at the same time.
Click to expand...
Perhaps less of a pipe dream, because Canada is already actively lobbying the ICAO about switching to true north.

Slide deck: https://www.navcanada.ca/en/magnetic-north-vs-true-north.pdf

Working paper: https://www.navcanada.ca/en/true-north-reference-system.pdf

We don't get any extra say because the ICAO is headquartered in Montreal, but we can at least afford to send more people there more often to bug them about it. :)
 
TommyG said:
Seems to me some people have forgot PPL basic flight planning.
Click to expand...
I will admit that when I picked up an E6B or the first time in 17 years a couple of years ago, I had to review how to use it — it had completely left my head.
 
F5224DAE-E15A-4A96-8CA7-12E7FAF577F2.jpeg

I had a nice x wind on this day!
Heading 147 track 120.
 
luvflyin said:
That is pretty breezy. So the Controller says "say on course heading." What do you say?
Click to expand...

Controller never asked but if they did I’d have gave them both heading and track. “Heading 147, track 120”. Just because it was so far off.
 
I would think that the controller would already know your track. My guess is they want to know what your heading is, gives them an idea of winds aloft. Otherwise he/she would ask for your track. Track and heading being two different things, and heading being what is asked for, I give them what my compass is showing. If track is asked for I give them the direction of the line drawn on the map relative to magnetic north.
 
bluerooster said:
I would think that the controller would already know your track. My guess is they want to know what your heading is, gives them an idea of winds aloft. Otherwise he/she would ask for your track. Track and heading being two different things, and heading being what is asked for, I give them what my compass is showing. If track is asked for I give them the direction of the line drawn on the map relative to magnetic north.
Click to expand...
More often than not, when a Controller asks for 'on course heading' what they are doing is projecting out. It's the Course, aka Track, they care about. They want to know where you are going to be down the road. Are you going to miss that Special use Airspace out yonder? What other Controllers airspace are you going into next? Are you going to go in front of, behind of, or right at that other airplane out there. Things like that. But yeah, if they ask for Heading, they asked for Heading. When they ask me for 'on course heading', I have responded before with "my course is ###, I'll get back to you in a minute with the heading." They always respond with words to the effect of, 'that's ok, I don't need the heading.
 
Last edited:
AlphaMike said:
View attachment 100790

I had a nice x wind on this day!
Heading 147 track 120.
Click to expand...
:yeahthat:That's what I put in my plane (along with a Garmin GFC500 AP) so I wouldn't have to remember all that annoying flight planning stuff. I just punch a few buttons and, as Greyhound used to say, "leave the driving to us." Of course, I still have to keep my handy dandy "how to land" handbook in the back seat. o_O
 
Archer Jack said:
I just punch a few buttons and, as Greyhound used to say, "leave the driving to us." Of course, I still have to keep my handy dandy "how to land" handbook in the back seat. o_O
Click to expand...

Garmin Autoland! Coming soon to an airplane near you ... :D
 
Archer Jack said:
:yeahthat:That's what I put in my plane (along with a Garmin GFC500 AP) so I wouldn't have to remember all that annoying flight planning stuff. I just punch a few buttons and, as Greyhound used to say, "leave the driving to us." Of course, I still have to keep my handy dandy "how to land" handbook in the back seat. o_O
Click to expand...

I agree. Having a good autopilot has drastically increased my Netflix time on those 4 hour x country’s! I can now get a solid 3 and a half hours in before I need to start thinking about landing.
 
This confuses me - if ATC asked for my "on-course heading", that strictly sounds to me like they want the heading my nose is pointed toward to stay on course due to WCA. But that doesn't seem very useful to ATC, why would they care which way I'm pointed in order to stay on course? I would give them my magnetic course since that's direction my plane is actually vectoring.
 
Last edited:
I ran into this yesterday coming out of HND. I had planned on the VFR corridor from HND to to VGT (north las Vegas) and then north bound. To my surprise, my first contact with LAS app was to be cleared into the bravo, which I requested to stay in the corridor and he handed me off to another controller who did the same thing (cleared into the bravo), at this point, I should have probably told him the same thing but then he asked me my on course heading and I frankly bumbled it, gave him my course to my next destination vs. my next waypoint which would have put me into terrain I couldn't cross. I tried to be humble and told him I needed to go direct VGT to avoid terrain and that I'd like to descend out of the bravo and remain in the VFR corridor as I'd planned. Controller was mildly irritated but allowed me to descend and had me squawk VFR. It was nerve racking for me and I'm not sure how I should have done it differently.

Should I have told him I need to fly over VGT and then NW to avoid terrain? Should I have just said 'unable' when he cleared me through the bravo? Appreciate any thoughts.
 
Rex Kwan Do said:
I ran into this yesterday coming out of HND. I had planned on the VFR corridor from HND to to VGT (north las Vegas) and then north bound. To my surprise, my first contact with LAS app was to be cleared into the bravo, which I requested to stay in the corridor and he handed me off to another controller who did the same thing (cleared into the bravo), at this point, I should have probably told him the same thing but then he asked me my on course heading and I frankly bumbled it, gave him my course to my next destination vs. my next waypoint which would have put me into terrain I couldn't cross. I tried to be humble and told him I needed to go direct VGT to avoid terrain and that I'd like to descend out of the bravo and remain in the VFR corridor as I'd planned. Controller was mildly irritated but allowed me to descend and had me squawk VFR. It was nerve racking for me and I'm not sure how I should have done it differently.

Should I have told him I need to fly over VGT and then NW to avoid terrain? Should I have just said 'unable' when he cleared me through the bravo? Appreciate any thoughts.
Click to expand...

First, just relax. I would have told them my route with the request. I do this all the time. When I fly to Nantucket (ACK) direct puts me over something like 50 miles of ocean, so I tell them Nantucket via Martha's vineyard. Generally it's not an issue. If it is they vector me to a spot I'm not in the way, then tell me continue own nav, to which I say, own nav, via Martha's vineyard. Short and sweet.

Don't worry about being humble, if you screw up just tell them. If they are mad, don't worry, they'll get over it.
 
Rex Kwan Do said:
I ran into this yesterday coming out of HND. I had planned on the VFR corridor from HND to to VGT (north las Vegas) and then north bound. To my surprise, my first contact with LAS app was to be cleared into the bravo, which I requested to stay in the corridor and he handed me off to another controller who did the same thing (cleared into the bravo), at this point, I should have probably told him the same thing but then he asked me my on course heading and I frankly bumbled it, gave him my course to my next destination vs. my next waypoint which would have put me into terrain I couldn't cross. I tried to be humble and told him I needed to go direct VGT to avoid terrain and that I'd like to descend out of the bravo and remain in the VFR corridor as I'd planned. Controller was mildly irritated but allowed me to descend and had me squawk VFR. It was nerve racking for me and I'm not sure how I should have done it differently.

Should I have told him I need to fly over VGT and then NW to avoid terrain? Should I have just said 'unable' when he cleared me through the bravo? Appreciate any thoughts.
Click to expand...
What is the VFR Corridor you’re talking about. I can’t find it.
 
Its the flyway chart for the Las Vegas class B airspace. If you have foreflight you go to documents>FAA>Fly Charts>Las Vegas FLY. It shows the VFR corridors into the airports under the bravo shelf. I was flying the VFR corridor between HND to VGT which is a <4,000 route clockwise until you meet I-95 and then you follow I-95 NW out of the bravo airspace.
 
Brad Z said:
Regardless, even though they ask fo ra heading, I don't think they want a heading.
Click to expand...

"On course heading" is what they ask for. Give them what they ask for, not what you think they want. This is how we get people coming here thinking that they should be flying GPS tracks when ATC issues a vector like "fly heading 270" :mad:

If you truly don't know the heading, that's another story. Guess or give them the course and say "approximately." But deliberately telling them one thing when they asked for a different thing is not how it's supposed to work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top