Re: Low and high altitude airways

[David Megginson]

(K. Ari Krupnikov) writes:

> I've never flown a jet airway (and probably never will, except on an
> airliner), but here's a question. There are fewer J routes than V, and
> they connect fewer navaids. So it can happen that your destination is
> quite far from the nearest high-altitude navaid or interaction. Do you
> still file direct from the closest high-alt waypoint, go direct to a
> nearby navaid, or use low-altitude routes for your arrival?

That's an interesting question. Ari's seen my Warrior, so he knows
quite well that I cannot fly the jetways either, but in the spirit of
Usenet I'll take an uninformed guess.

From listening to Centre traffic when I'm flying IFR (or with flight
following), I get the impression that the airliners usually get
cleared for the standard jetways and arrival procedures, but then
start begging for direct as soon as they get to their cruising
altitudes -- just like we do, in other words.

The other thing to remember is that they have to descend at some point
before they land, and once they're below FL180, they're on the
low-level airways as well.


All the best,


David

[[email protected]]

"K. Ari Krupnikov" wrote:

> I've never flown a jet airway (and probably never will, except on an
> airliner), but here's a question. There are fewer J routes than V, and
> they connect fewer navaids. So it can happen that your destination is
> quite far from the nearest high-altitude navaid or interaction. Do you
> still file direct from the closest high-alt waypoint, go direct to a
> nearby navaid, or use low-altitude routes for your arrival?
>
> Ari.

If the destination is a major airport there will usually be a
high-altitude VOR in the proper position. Or, there will be a STAR
routing which, although it may use low-alitude VORs, it has been flight
inspected to be useable at the altitudes expected.

For flights into remote areas that may not have a nearby high VOR (unusal,
but possible) filing of a Victor airway for the last 200 miles, or so, is
acceptable, or even "the radials of V-999."

[K. Ari Krupnikov]

writes:

> For flights into remote areas that may not have a nearby high VOR (unusal,
> but possible) filing of a Victor airway for the last 200 miles, or so, is
> acceptable

I guess by then you would have descended below FL180 anyway, right?

> or even "the radials of V-999."

What's that?

Ari.

[[email protected]]

"K. Ari Krupnikov" wrote:

> writes:
>
> > For flights into remote areas that may not have a nearby high VOR (unusal,
> > but possible) filing of a Victor airway for the last 200 miles, or so, is
> > acceptable
>
> I guess by then you would have descended below FL180 anyway, right?

No, you won't usually be below 180 until about 50-60 miles out.

>
> > or even "the radials of V-999."
>
> What's that?
>

Since Victor airways don't exist above 17,500, that is one way of filing the
route without filing an airway that doesn't exist for the flight levels. More
typically, that is the way ATC will issue a clearance to fly a Victor airway
when in the flight levels. If they have you on radar it is a perfectly
acceptable practice. It works well in Montana, but not very good in New Jersey.
;-)

[JerryK]

About 40% of my flying is above FL180. I usually just file direct from the
end of the DP to point along the approach, or perhaps a point from which I
believe the approach will begin. Thus far I have never been give a
clearance with a jet airway. However, I file /G and I am based on the West
Coast. People that I know in the NE seem to get jet airways in their
clearance. However, they very seldom fly the airway that far. They are
usually cleared direct early in the procedure.

As far as filing goes, the people I know in the NE will file the jet airway
to the nearest point to the expected approach or as close as they can, and
then file either direct or Victor airway from that point to the destination,
or a waypoint near the destination.

jerry

"K. Ari Krupnikov" > wrote in message
...
> I've never flown a jet airway (and probably never will, except on an
> airliner), but here's a question. There are fewer J routes than V, and
> they connect fewer navaids. So it can happen that your destination is
> quite far from the nearest high-altitude navaid or interaction. Do you
> still file direct from the closest high-alt waypoint, go direct to a
> nearby navaid, or use low-altitude routes for your arrival?
>
> Ari.
>

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"K. Ari Krupnikov" > wrote in message
...
>
> I've never flown a jet airway (and probably never will, except on an
> airliner), but here's a question. There are fewer J routes than V, and
> they connect fewer navaids. So it can happen that your destination is
> quite far from the nearest high-altitude navaid or interaction. Do you
> still file direct from the closest high-alt waypoint, go direct to a
> nearby navaid, or use low-altitude routes for your arrival?
>

Any/all of the above, and STARs as well.

[Chip Jones]

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
. net...
>
> > wrote in message ...
> >
> >
> > "K. Ari Krupnikov" wrote:
> >
> > > writes:
> > >
> > > > For flights into remote areas that may not have a nearby high VOR
> (unusal,
> > > > but possible) filing of a Victor airway for the last 200 miles, or
so,
> is
> > > > acceptable
> > >
> > > I guess by then you would have descended below FL180 anyway, right?
> >
> > No, you won't usually be below 180 until about 50-60 miles out.
> >
> > >
> > > > or even "the radials of V-999."
> > >
> > > What's that?
> > >
> >
> > Since Victor airways don't exist above 17,500, that is one way of filing
> the
> > route without filing an airway that doesn't exist for the flight levels.
> More
> > typically, that is the way ATC will issue a clearance to fly a Victor
> airway
> > when in the flight levels. If they have you on radar it is a perfectly
> > acceptable practice. It works well in Montana, but not very good in New
> Jersey.
> > ;-)
> >
>
>
> Not nessesarily. I get cleared on Victor airways above FL180 in SoCal all
> the time.
>

That's because the controllers in SoCal either have forgotten the proper
phraseology to assign Flight Level ATC route clearances along Victor airways
or else they just don't care. Technically, you fly the radials of Victor
airways when you are operating AOA FL180 in CONUS.


Chip, ZTL

[[email protected]]

Mike Rapoport wrote:

>
> > Since Victor airways don't exist above 17,500, that is one way of filing
> the
> > route without filing an airway that doesn't exist for the flight levels.
> More
> > typically, that is the way ATC will issue a clearance to fly a Victor
> airway
> > when in the flight levels. If they have you on radar it is a perfectly
> > acceptable practice. It works well in Montana, but not very good in New
> Jersey.
> > ;-)
> >
>
> Not nessesarily. I get cleared on Victor airways above FL180 in SoCal all
> the time.
>
> Mike
> MU-2

I don't doubt it for a moment. Nonetheless, controllers can't change FARS.
Victor airways don't exist up there. They used to state "via the radials of..."
but that's too much work these days.