Who Moved The VOR At Savannah?

[S Ramirez]

This past couple of days the wife and I went to Columbia, SC. Our IFR
flight path was as follows:

ORL -> V267 -> CRG -> V37 -> KELER -> SAV -> V37 -> ALD -> V37 ->
CAE -> KCUB

The IFR flight plan was flown using two VORs with a Garmin 295 GPS as a back
up. As we approached KELER intersection, the Garmin 295 started to deviate
from what the VORs were telling me. Of course I followed the VORs.

The Garmin 295 and the Flight Guide both show the Savannah VOR (SAV) in the
wrong location. This is probably due to an old database and information,
because the VOR was moved from about 5 miles NE of Savannah Hilton Head
International to just north of RW 36. It was a clear day, and I verified
this by looking for the VOR on the ground as I passed over RW 6 and
continued north until the TO/FROM flag switched.

At Columbia I referenced the approach plate for SAV ILS RW 36, and it shows
the VOR in the correct location, no doubt since it helps determine an IAF
and a missed approach holding pattern intersection.

Does anyone here know when this VOR was moved?

Simon Ramirez

[BTIZ]

I guess that's why GPS is only as good as the data base..

BT

"S Ramirez" > wrote in
message om...
> This past couple of days the wife and I went to Columbia, SC. Our IFR
> flight path was as follows:
>
> ORL -> V267 -> CRG -> V37 -> KELER -> SAV -> V37 -> ALD -> V37 ->
> CAE -> KCUB
>
> The IFR flight plan was flown using two VORs with a Garmin 295 GPS as a
back
> up. As we approached KELER intersection, the Garmin 295 started to
deviate
> from what the VORs were telling me. Of course I followed the VORs.
>
> The Garmin 295 and the Flight Guide both show the Savannah VOR (SAV) in
the
> wrong location. This is probably due to an old database and information,
> because the VOR was moved from about 5 miles NE of Savannah Hilton Head
> International to just north of RW 36. It was a clear day, and I verified
> this by looking for the VOR on the ground as I passed over RW 6 and
> continued north until the TO/FROM flag switched.
>
> At Columbia I referenced the approach plate for SAV ILS RW 36, and it
shows
> the VOR in the correct location, no doubt since it helps determine an IAF
> and a missed approach holding pattern intersection.
>
> Does anyone here know when this VOR was moved?
>
> Simon Ramirez
>
>

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "S Ramirez" > said:
>Does anyone here know when this VOR was moved?

Wasn't there a big long thread about that very VOR a few weeks ago, when
somebody discovered that his GPS had both locations, and sometimes would
cough up one and sometimes cough up the other and his back and forth with
Garmin about it? Or am I thinking of somewhere else?


--
"The magic of usenet has never been its technology; and, only in part, its
reach. Its magic -- its power -- is based on the very real human connections
that form 'round its threads of conversation... the relationships that are
kindled, flamed and, on occasion, extinguished and mourned." -deCadmus

[S Ramirez]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
> In a previous article, "S Ramirez"
> said:
> >Does anyone here know when this VOR was moved?
>
> Wasn't there a big long thread about that very VOR a few weeks ago, when
> somebody discovered that his GPS had both locations, and sometimes would
> cough up one and sometimes cough up the other and his back and forth with
> Garmin about it? Or am I thinking of somewhere else?

Paul, if there was a thread about this, I don't know about it because I
didn't research the archives and I haven't been monitoring this newsgroup in
a while. I'll go search the archives. Thanks. Simon

[Andrew Gideon]

S Ramirez wrote:

>> Wasn't there a big long thread about that very VOR a few weeks ago, when
>> somebody discovered that his GPS had both locations, and sometimes would
>> cough up one and sometimes cough up the other and his back and forth with
>> Garmin about it? Or am I thinking of somewhere else?
>
> Paul, if there was a thread about this, I don't know about it because I
> didn't research the archives and I haven't been monitoring this newsgroup
> in
> a while. I'll go search the archives. Thanks. Simon

It was in rec.aviation.ifr, I believe.

The crux of the problem was what occurs when a DB update moves
a navaid that's in a stored flight plan. In that case, the DB
update didn't work properly with respect to the navaid.

As a software engineer, I found the discussion quite interesting.
Although Garmin "fixed" the problem, I found myself wondering at
the quality of the fix. More, I wasn't sure what the right "fix"
should be.

Should the flight plan move with the navaid? This could result
in an undesired (or at least unexpected) route. Should the flight
plan's waypoint stay fixed in space, even if not connected to the
navaid? To someone (such as myself) that follows the flight plan
with the navaids as well as the GPS, this could quickly become
very disconcerting.

I couldn't see a solution any better than "flagging" the flight
plan as requiring review by the user before the next use.

Here's the start of the followup thread:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=0EMwb.303206%24Tr4.959505%40attbi_s03

- Andrew

[S Ramirez]

I just noticed that AOPA's Real-Time Flight Planner has SAV VOR in the wrong
location also.

Simon

[Rob Perkins]

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 03:37:15 GMT, "S Ramirez"
> wrote:

>The Garmin 295 and the Flight Guide both show the Savannah VOR (SAV) in the
>wrong location. This is probably due to an old database and information,
>because the VOR was moved from about 5 miles NE of Savannah Hilton Head
>International to just north of RW 36.

I wonder if that makes the sectional for that area any easier or
harder to read. I recall that Savannah was one of the "tricky" VOR
chart sections included as figures for the FAA Written Exam.

Rob

[Kyler Laird]

Rob Perkins > writes:

>>The Garmin 295 and the Flight Guide both show the Savannah VOR (SAV) in the
>>wrong location. This is probably due to an old database and information,
>>because the VOR was moved from about 5 miles NE of Savannah Hilton Head
>>International to just north of RW 36.

>I wonder if that makes the sectional for that area any easier or
>harder to read.

Well, if one is too hard to read, you can try another...and another.
http://aviationtoolbox.org/munge/masked/Atlanta%2071%20South.jpg
http://aviationtoolbox.org/munge/masked/Charlotte%2074%20South.jpg
http://aviationtoolbox.org/munge/masked/Jacksonville%2072%20North.jpg
....or just mix them all together if you really want a headache.
http://aviationtoolbox.org/munge/chunked/chunk_28_-7.jpg

--kyler