X-Country planning...VOR +80nm apart & foreflight and V-airways?

M

Magnus P.IFR

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Mar 6, 2018
Messages
126
Display Name
Display name:
Required
looking at doing an IFR flight plan for a mock checkride from 6S8-SLC. Found 2 routes that may be suitable for a 172sp...
6S8-NELWN-V187-OCS-NORDK arrival-ILS RWY17(shortest and easiest)
Or
6S8-REEPO-LVM-ZUBLI-BZN-HIA-DLN-DBS-PIH-MLD-OGD arrival...etc
Two things:
RIW&OCS VORs are +80nm apart- although the route can be identified by a third VOR-CKW.
-is this a legal flight path for an IFR flight plan below 18000?
And
Why can’t I just enter victor airways instead of waypoints/vor’s? I have to manually enter the checkpoints along the airway.

Thanks all.
 
MEA guarantees reception. What is the MEA?

How do you intend to use NORDK FIVE? Are you /G? - ATC hint for the day is that the entire arrival name must be read back. Same for departure names. The controller has to hear the entire name since you could be planning to use an older (superseded) version. Each version is named sequentially.
 
I had no trouble entering 6S8 REEPO V86 HIA V21 DBS V257 MLD V21 OGD in Foreflite. What are you having trouble entering airways into? 430/530? Some GPS units take airways, others don't. I'm guessing you have GPS if you were thinking of going OCS direct NORDK. Nothing wrong with that. The distance to SWEAT is the pertinant distance on V187, not the distance between RIW and OCS.
 
Last edited:
Kln 94. every time I put V187 in the flight plan it shows up as an error. Do you need to bookend an airway with a waypoint? I’ve tried a bunch of ways and it won’t recognize airways at all on a low enroute chart.ok so being able to recognize sweat is enough to maintain the route via V187.

And yes, MEA is good and the NORDK FIVE.
Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Some GPS navigators do airways, some don't. i'm guessing the KLN 94 is one that doesn't. I never even tried to put an airway in my old KLN 90B.

One other thing on reading back clearances, if a transition is named then the transition also has to be read back. Usually not a problem on an arrival since you're already on or starting the transition. It seems to be a common problem on departures.

Departing a remote airport out here in the west they'll give you a "cleared as filed" or "...and the rest as filed" and then when Approach gets you they'll give the arrival procedure. It helps a little bit to be expecting a particular procedure (Denver is easy) but in some places it can be difficult (Houston) because they can send you on one of several different routes.

Good luck with the training and checkride.
 
@Clark1961 is correct. The 94 doesn't do airways. Even the later Garmin 430/530 doesn't do airways. You have to put in the waypoints manually. Not sure, but I think the CNX 80/Garmin 480 was the first to recognize airways.
 
Three questions about the route. Four actually (3 and 4 are two parts of the same question):
  1. What makes you think the winds will favor runway 17 when you arrive?
  2. What makes you think ATC will assign the NORDK arrival (or any STAR for that matter)?
  3. Can you legally file the NORDK STAR?
  4. Whether you file it or not, assuming ATC does assign the NORDK arrival, can you accept it or do yo have to respond,"unable"?
 
So I just did my mock ride with the chief instructor and everything was made clear. I should have just filed to the airport (by way of victor airways listed) and then waited for ATC to assign the arrival and then choose an approach from there.

Heck if I was flying something capable enough I could file 6S8-KSLC direct while using RNAV. Then await further clearances on closer arrival to SLC.

midlifeflyer said:
@Clark1961 is correct. The 94 doesn't do airways. Even the later Garmin 430/530 doesn't do airways. You have to put in the waypoints manually. Not sure, but I think the CNX 80/Garmin 480 was the first to recognize airways.
Click to expand...

As far as inputing airways I was trying to do so on Foreflight, and have since figured out you need a waypoint on and off the airway to include it on the flight plan.

Thanks again all.
Definitely always learning to be had in th IFR world.
 
430/530 won't do airways, 650/750 does. If you are planning to fly an airway, the only points you'll need to enter are the ones on the airway with either a heading or an altitude change, or a mandatory reporting point.
 
Magnus P.IFR said:
So I just did my mock ride with the chief instructor and everything was made clear. I should have just filed to the airport (by way of victor airways listed) and then waited for ATC to assign the arrival and then choose an approach from there.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you covered my questions 1 and 2. How about 3 and 4?
 
denverpilot said:
Hopefully the “chief instructor” asked them in a “mock ride”, or ... well... hmmm.... that would be... not ideal. :(
Click to expand...
Once determining that generally, there's no reason to toss a STAR into your filed flight plan, the issue I'm referring to might not have come up. I think it's very important, but there are usually plenty of important things to cover in a mock checkride which may have higher priority to the folks administering it.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Three questions about the route. Four actually (3 and 4 are two parts of the same question):
  1. Can you legally file the NORDK STAR?
  2. Whether you file it or not, assuming ATC does assign the NORDK arrival, can you accept it or do yo have to respond,"unable"?
Click to expand...
I think I get where you’re going, whether my equipment is legal to fly the approach and whether I have said approach plate available to me in my possession.
 
Magnus P.IFR said:
I think I get where you’re going, whether my equipment is legal to fly the approach and whether I have said approach plate available to me in my possession.
Click to expand...
Close and what you specify is sufficient but not necessary. You are required to have current approach information, not the plate or chart itself. Since you are only required to have the information it can be provided over the radio by ATC...or a buddy can give the info to you over the phone when you've in some podunk airport and weather is forcing you to take an unplanned route home and ya gotta have an approach at the newly selected fuel stop. EFB resolve most of these types of concerns but they aren't infallible.

For a SID or STAR all that is required is the textural description of the procedure. If you don't have it on board ATC may just include the fixes in your clearance or read the textural description. Clearance Delivery at reliever airports gets entertaining sometimes if you can listen without paying Hobbs time...or waiting patiently for your clearance...
 
Magnus P.IFR said:
I think I get where you’re going, whether my equipment is legal to fly the approach and whether I have said approach plate available to me in my possession.
Click to expand...
I assume you have the plate. But yes, I was talking about the equipment.

Never mind the "Turbojet Only." You told us you were flying with a KLN 94. You don't have the legal equipment to fly the NORDK STAR.
 
Last edited:
midlifeflyer said:
I assume you have the plate. But yes, I was talking about the equipment.

Never mind the "Turbojet Only." You told us you were flying with a KLN 94. You don't have the legal equipment to fly the NORDK STAR.
Click to expand...
The 94 certainly has the required accuracy. Not sure what you are trying to say. Either way you’ve chosen an exceptionally poor way to try to teach something. Just saying “the equipment isn’t legal” without saying why you think the equipment isn’t legal is just plain wrong.
 
Clark1961 said:
The 94 certainly has the required accuracy. Not sure what you are trying to say. Either way you’ve chosen an exceptionally poor way to try to teach something. Just saying “the equipment isn’t legal” without saying why you think the equipment isn’t legal is just plain wrong.
Click to expand...
Learning is sometimes a back and forth of hints and research. Like, "oh, I see that now" Or "Why?" Or even, "I think you are full of crap."

Yes, I have been intentionally oblique. And yes, back-and-forth is probably not the best forum format. But since you apparently prefer spoon-feeding... (Do you read the last chapter of mysteries first?)

The NORDK is not a STAR. It is an RNAV STAR and even has notes indicating equipment requirements. RNAV SID and STARS are set to a higher standard than standard GPS approaches and statdard SIDS/STARS/ODPs. Not every GPS, even those generally ok for terminal ops is up to the standards described in AC 90-100A. That can be difficult to read, so the FAA nice enough to give us a 90-100 Compliance Tables listings of equipment and the operations they are certified for.

Would it be wrong to suggest you look up the KLN94 (and your 90B) to see which ops it is and is not eligible for, or do you want the page number? Hint: the column you are looking for says "Eligible to fly RNAV SID/STAR/ ODP"

That said, I could still be wrong. Perhaps there has been a major upgrade and an increase in it capabilities, but the list has not been amended?
 
Last edited:
midlifeflyer said:
Learning is sometimes a back and forth of hints and research. Like, "oh, I see that now" Or "Why?" Or even, "I think you are full of crap."

Yes, I have been intentionally oblique. And yes, back-and-forth is probably not the best forum format. But since you apparently prefer spoon-feeding... (Do you read the last chapter of mysteries first?)

The NORDK is not a STAR. It is an RNAV STAR and even has notes indicating equipment requirements. RNAV SID and STARS are set to a higher standard than standard GPS approaches and statdard SIDS/STARS/ODPs. Not every GPS, even those generally ok for terminal ops is up to the standards described in AC 90-100A. That can be difficult to read, so the FAA nice enough to give us a 90-100 Compliance Tables listings of equipment and the operations they are certified for.

Would it be wrong to suggest you look up the KLN94 (and your 90B) to see which ops it is and is not eligible for, or do you want the page number? Hint: the column you are looking for says "Eligible to fly RNAV SID/STAR/ ODP"

That said, I could still be wrong. Perhaps there has been a major upgrade and an increase in it capabilities, but the list has not been amended?
Click to expand...
I said nothing about spoon feeding. I said your method was wrong and it is. Get over yourself and teach rather than be condescending when someone has a legitimate question.
 
midlifeflyer said:
The NORDK is not a STAR. It is an RNAV STAR and even has notes indicating equipment requirements. RNAV SID and STARS are set to a higher standard than standard GPS approaches and statdard SIDS/STARS/ODPs. Not every GPS, even those generally ok for terminal ops is up to the standards described in AC 90-100A. That can be difficult to read, so the FAA nice enough to give us a 90-100 Compliance Tables listings of equipment and the operations they are certified for.
Click to expand...
The pilot shouldn't have to be conversant with AC-90-100A. What he does need to know that the box at the upper right that I've outlined in magenta are regulatory requirements. If a pilot accepts this or any STAR without being in compliance with every item listed he could be subject to enforcement action if circumstances warrant that. I show a Jepp chart but the FAA chart has the same list.

On a broader note, anyone who believes he can fly a SID, STAR, or IAP without a current chart is on a fool's errand. That was a bogus bit of fluff AOPA achieved in the 1970s long before RNAV came into being.
 

Attachments

  • NORDK.jpg
    NORDK.jpg
    314.2 KB · Views: 24
Thanks all, I have what I need and will forego any further question asking on the subject. Lots of contention to be seen and not what I’m looking for in a forum I guess. Thanks.
 
midlifeflyer said:
The NORDK is not a STAR. It is an RNAV STAR and even has notes indicating equipment requirements. RNAV SID and STARS are set to a higher standard than standard GPS approaches and statdard SIDS/STARS/ODPs. Not every GPS, even those generally ok for terminal ops is up to the standards described in AC 90-100A. That can be difficult to read, so the FAA nice enough to give us a 90-100 Compliance Tables listings of equipment and the operations they are certified for.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the links. I see what you mean about the AC being a difficult read. Even the tables are a bit confusing in some respects.

Am I correct in thinking that there is a requirement for an RNAV SID/STAR/ODP to be in the equipment's database if you're going to fly it, and that the KLN-94 does not meet that requirement?

Also, where it says that the unit is not eligible for VOR substitution, does that mean that you are not allowed to use it under IFR to navigate to a VOR? If so, that would seem to be a pretty severe restriction.
 
aterpster said:
The pilot shouldn't have to be conversant with AC-90-100A. What he does need to know that the box at the upper right that I've outlined in magenta are regulatory requirements. If a pilot accepts this or any STAR without being in compliance with every item listed he could be subject to enforcement action if circumstances warrant that. I show a Jepp chart but the FAA chart has the same list.
Click to expand...
I agree he shouldn't need to be conversant with 90-100A. . The FAA chart has the same notes as the Jepp. The problem is that pilots aren't necessarily conversant with what some of those notes mean, and how they relate to the equipment. Take my friend Clark for example. He's way above average in his knowledge of this stuff, but yet made the assumption "The 94 certainly has the required accuracy."

The real lesson to me (which is the reason for my vague responses) is not whether the KLN94 can fly the NORDK. It's that not all boxes are eligible to fly all procedures. We should at least understand that, which, in turn should lead us to check to see if ours complies when we see an equipment requirement on a procedure.
 
Magnus P.IFR said:
Thanks all, I have what I need and will forego any further question asking on the subject. Lots of contention to be seen and not what I’m looking for in a forum I guess. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Don't worry about the contention. Some of us are working to reduce the crap that makes it difficult to learn. Others are not so cooperative in sharing knowledge.
 
Larry in TN said:
I know a number of GA pilots who are convinced that the iPad, with Foreflight, "has the required accuracy" for RNAV procedures and approaches.
Click to expand...
Thus, the way it has been since I joined this game in 1958.
 
Magnus P.IFR said:
Kln 94. every time I put V187 in the flight plan it shows up as an error. Do you need to bookend an airway with a waypoint? I’ve tried a bunch of ways and it won’t recognize airways at all on a low enroute chart.ok so being able to recognize sweat is enough to maintain the route via V187.

And yes, MEA is good and the NORDK FIVE.
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Because you can't. It's easy, waypoint to waypoint. If the waypoints are on the airway, then you're on the airway.
 
Larry in TN said:
I know a number of GA pilots who are convinced that the iPad, with Foreflight, "has the required accuracy" for RNAV procedures and approaches.
Click to expand...
They would be incorrect.
 
Larry in TN said:
I know a number of GA pilots who are convinced that the iPad, with Foreflight, "has the required accuracy" for RNAV procedures and approaches.
Click to expand...

When you say “GA Pilots” do you mean Instrument rated ones, or not?
 
Magnus P.IFR said:
Thanks all, I have what I need and will forego any further question asking on the subject. Lots of contention to be seen and not what I’m looking for in a forum I guess. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Good luck dude, it's no so much this forum as it called interacting with humanity, especially pilots, might be good to toughen up a wee bit.




As for the waypoints, good time saver is to turn "bends only" on in foreflight, it'll remove waypoints that don't need to be entered.

IMG_1771.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top