Various ATC questions

[Mxsmanic]

A few questions on ATC:

1. If I am told to "depart XYZ heading 150" while IFR, and the last
heading given to me by ATC does not quite take me to an intercept of
the XYZ VOR, should I turn to intercept the VOR? Should I wait for
ATC to tell me to turn directly towards the VOR? Should I turn and
apprise ATC of my turn? Or should I just intercept the 150 radial
from the VOR, and then turn to follow that? The last time this
happened, I just silently turned to intercept the VOR (I wasn't far
off, and I assumed that ATC wanted me vectored towards the VOR to
begin with, since it was in my flight plan and I had previously been
vectored in that general direction), but I don't know if this was
right.

2. If I am VFR in Class B, on a transition route, are altitude and
heading at my discretion (within the limits of the transition route)
UNLESS ATC directs me to a specific altitude and/or heading, or do I
always wait for ATC to provide exact instructions?

3. If ATC says "proceed direct to XYZ," and XYZ is a waypoint in my
IFR flight plan, do I assume that I can resume my own navigation after
reaching XYZ, or do I maintain the same course and altitude until
otherwise instructed, even after reaching XYZ?

4. If an IFR departure plate says "fly runway heading, then vectors to
fix (or) XYZ," I take that to mean that I continue on the runway
heading after take-off, until ATC tells me to turn towards some other
fix. Is this correct? If the fix is on my flight plan, do I
automatically resume my own navigation after reaching it, or do I
maintain my heading until ATC says otherwise? If the fix is on the
plate, and the plate says "then own navigation," do I resume my own
navigation after reaching the fix, or do I wait for ATC instructions?

As you can see, I'm still confused as to when I must wait for ATC
instructions to change altitude or heading, and when I'm at my
discretion to do so (either without restriction, as in VFR, or
according to my flight plan in IFR). Recently I went too far in a
Class B airspace in my sim because I had been told which runway I was
being given, but I had not been told to turn, and I thought I had to
continue in the same direction until ATC explicitly gave me a new
heading. So I'm still confused.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[A Lieberma]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> A few questions on ATC:

Mx quote on another post.

> I
> don't call pilots on their mistakes, as a general rule, in order to
> avoid embarrassment; but I do silently write them off.

Please don't waste your time answering his question.

Thanks!

Allen

[Thomas Borchert]

A,

> Please don't waste your time answering his question.
>

I hope it works. He has shown such disdain for this group in his last
few posts that it is hard to believe anyone will answer, but so far,
someone always has.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Tony]

pause the simulation, check the various references, resume the
simulation.


On Nov 26, 7:37 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> A few questions on ATC:
>
> 1. If I am told to "depart XYZ heading 150" while IFR, and the last
> heading given to me by ATC does not quite take me to an intercept of
> the XYZ VOR, should I turn to intercept the VOR? Should I wait for
> ATC to tell me to turn directly towards the VOR? Should I turn and
> apprise ATC of my turn? Or should I just intercept the 150 radial
> from the VOR, and then turn to follow that? The last time this
> happened, I just silently turned to intercept the VOR (I wasn't far
> off, and I assumed that ATC wanted me vectored towards the VOR to
> begin with, since it was in my flight plan and I had previously been
> vectored in that general direction), but I don't know if this was
> right.
>
> 2. If I am VFR in Class B, on a transition route, are altitude and
> heading at my discretion (within the limits of the transition route)
> UNLESS ATC directs me to a specific altitude and/or heading, or do I
> always wait for ATC to provide exact instructions?
>
> 3. If ATC says "proceed direct to XYZ," and XYZ is a waypoint in my
> IFR flight plan, do I assume that I can resume my own navigation after
> reaching XYZ, or do I maintain the same course and altitude until
> otherwise instructed, even after reaching XYZ?
>
> 4. If an IFR departure plate says "fly runway heading, then vectors to
> fix (or) XYZ," I take that to mean that I continue on the runway
> heading after take-off, until ATC tells me to turn towards some other
> fix. Is this correct? If the fix is on my flight plan, do I
> automatically resume my own navigation after reaching it, or do I
> maintain my heading until ATC says otherwise? If the fix is on the
> plate, and the plate says "then own navigation," do I resume my own
> navigation after reaching the fix, or do I wait for ATC instructions?
>
> As you can see, I'm still confused as to when I must wait for ATC
> instructions to change altitude or heading, and when I'm at my
> discretion to do so (either without restriction, as in VFR, or
> according to my flight plan in IFR). Recently I went too far in a
> Class B airspace in my sim because I had been told which runway I was
> being given, but I had not been told to turn, and I thought I had to
> continue in the same direction until ATC explicitly gave me a new
> heading. So I'm still confused.
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Judah]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> A few questions on ATC:

If you are confused by ATC instructions, you should ask ATC to clarify.

[Jon Kraus]

If I were a betting man I would bet that someone will take his bait.
Matter of fact, I KNOW someone will...

Jon


Thomas Borchert wrote:

> A,
>
>
>>Please don't waste your time answering his question.
>>
>
>
> I hope it works. He has shown such disdain for this group in his last
> few posts that it is hard to believe anyone will answer, but so far,
> someone always has.
>

[A Lieberma]

Jon Kraus > wrote in news:ePjah.34885$OE1.32229
@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com:

> If I were a betting man I would bet that someone will take his bait.
> Matter of fact, I KNOW someone will...
>
> Jon

So far so good :-) Other then our non aviation heads ups, no other replies
to him has made it to my server.

Can only keep our fingers crossed that it continues for this and future
"questions".......

Allen

[Mxsmanic]

Judah writes:

> If you are confused by ATC instructions, you should ask ATC to clarify.

In theory, yes, and sometimes I do. But they seem to be awfully busy
at times, and I hate to ask them to explain things when there are a
hundred other planes in their airspace.

Of course, in my case, it's simulation, so we do have more flexibility
to ask questions if we don't understand--learning is part of the
experience for most users. But the busy factor still kicks in when
the virtual skies are crowded (last night I spent an hour on the
ground in Boston waiting to start my flight and the chatter was
constant).

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Jon Kraus]

Yup.. So far so good.... I see him getting frustrated because nobody is
taking a lick of his troll-bait, so he is responding out of desperation:

"last night I spent an hour on the ground in Boston waiting to start my
flight and the chatter was constant." I wonder if he makes real airplane
noises too. :-)

Jon

A Lieberma wrote:
> Jon Kraus > wrote in news:ePjah.34885$OE1.32229
> @tornado.ohiordc.rr.com:
>
>
>>If I were a betting man I would bet that someone will take his bait.
>>Matter of fact, I KNOW someone will...
>>
>>Jon
>
>
> So far so good :-) Other then our non aviation heads ups, no other replies
> to him has made it to my server.
>
> Can only keep our fingers crossed that it continues for this and future
> "questions".......
>
> Allen

[TxSrv]

Tony wrote:
> pause the simulation, check the various references, resume the
> simulation.
>

Better yet, just ignore ATC within MSFS, or any sim weenie on the
net playing ATC, and use the slew controls to get back on course.
According to one's filed IFR flight plan, which ATC doesn't
really have, I believe.

F--

[Doug[_1_]]

The whole idea of ATC is to communicate with them and coordinate your
flight with other flights.

I can tell you that if you listen to experienced pilots "hangar talk",
it's usually about "ATC did this" and "ATC did that". Most of the
problems involve ATC communication. So it's not unusual to have some
unresolved issues with ATC. Still the system works pretty well.

[Judah]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Judah writes:
>
>> If you are confused by ATC instructions, you should ask ATC to clarify.
>
> In theory, yes, and sometimes I do. But they seem to be awfully busy

In practice, if you do not clearly understand an instruction from ATC, and
you do not ask for clarification, you risk putting yourself and possibly
others in danger.

You, as the pilot, are responsible for the safety of flight, and that means
ensuring that you properly understand and follow ATC instructions and
assignments.

> at times, and I hate to ask them to explain things when there are a
> hundred other planes in their airspace.

Your request for clarification should not take more time than any other
instruction. But you will present a much bigger inconvenience if you fly
somewhere other than where you were assigned.

[Tony]

OK, pilots. How many of you would wait an hour for a sim program to
allow you to roll back, or taxi out, or whatever?

I did have fun at Logan once, a little M20J merged into a row of jets,
waiting for take off (BOS was the most convenient place to clear
customs coming in from Canada) but it was late at night. Hint to real
pilots -- even after waiting for wake turb to fade, do request a turn
into the crosswind as early as you can.




On Nov 26, 12:59 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Judah writes:
> > If you are confused by ATC instructions, you should ask ATC to clarify.In theory, yes, and sometimes I do. But they seem to be awfully busy
> at times, and I hate to ask them to explain things when there are a
> hundred other planes in their airspace.
>
> Of course, in my case, it's simulation, so we do have more flexibility
> to ask questions if we don't understand--learning is part of the
> experience for most users. But the busy factor still kicks in when
> the virtual skies are crowded (last night I spent an hour on the
> ground in Boston waiting to start my flight and the chatter was
> constant).
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Thomas Borchert]

Jon,

> Yup.. So far so good...
>

Too late. The thread has developed, many again have fallen for him, the
back and forth is taking the usual way. IMHO, the group is pretty much
toast for the next weeks or even months.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[A Lieberma]

Thomas Borchert > wrote in
:

> Too late. The thread has developed, many again have fallen for him, the
> back and forth is taking the usual way. IMHO, the group is pretty much
> toast for the next weeks or even months.

I have only seen two "initial" responses on my newserver, and hopefully
those folks will see our portion of this thread and take heed not to answer
Msmaniac's postings.

Allen

[Newps]

ATC is a giant government conspiracy.




TxSrv wrote:

> Tony wrote:
>
>> pause the simulation, check the various references, resume the
>> simulation.
>>
>
> Better yet, just ignore ATC within MSFS, or any sim weenie on the net
> playing ATC, and use the slew controls to get back on course. According
> to one's filed IFR flight plan, which ATC doesn't really have, I believe.
>
> F--

[Danny Dot]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
>A few questions on ATC:
>
> 1. If I am told to "depart XYZ heading 150" while IFR, and the last
> heading given to me by ATC does not quite take me to an intercept of
> the XYZ VOR, should I turn to intercept the VOR? Should I wait for
> ATC to tell me to turn directly towards the VOR? Should I turn and
> apprise ATC of my turn? Or should I just intercept the 150 radial
> from the VOR, and then turn to follow that? The last time this
> happened, I just silently turned to intercept the VOR (I wasn't far
> off, and I assumed that ATC wanted me vectored towards the VOR to
> begin with, since it was in my flight plan and I had previously been
> vectored in that general direction), but I don't know if this was
> right.

This is an OK question. I am a former pilot in the USAF and lost
communication was a big part of our training. I don't remember the lost
comm procedures for being put on a vector that didn't intercept the flight
plan then loosing comm. Any ideas????

Danny Dot
See what happens at NASA.
www.mobbinggonemad.org
snip

[Mark Hansen]

On 11/26/06 14:54, Danny Dot wrote:
> "Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
> ...
>>A few questions on ATC:
>>
>> 1. If I am told to "depart XYZ heading 150" while IFR, and the last
>> heading given to me by ATC does not quite take me to an intercept of
>> the XYZ VOR, should I turn to intercept the VOR? Should I wait for
>> ATC to tell me to turn directly towards the VOR? Should I turn and
>> apprise ATC of my turn? Or should I just intercept the 150 radial
>> from the VOR, and then turn to follow that? The last time this
>> happened, I just silently turned to intercept the VOR (I wasn't far
>> off, and I assumed that ATC wanted me vectored towards the VOR to
>> begin with, since it was in my flight plan and I had previously been
>> vectored in that general direction), but I don't know if this was
>> right.
>
> This is an OK question. I am a former pilot in the USAF and lost
> communication was a big part of our training. I don't remember the lost
> comm procedures for being put on a vector that didn't intercept the flight
> plan then loosing comm. Any ideas????

Ideas? Well, yes. Have a look at 14 CFR Part 91.185 (c) (1) (iv). Here's
the paragraph:

§ 91.185 IFR operations: Two-way radio communications failure.

(a) General. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each pilot who
has two-way radio communications failure when operating under IFR
shall comply with the rules of this section.

(b) VFR conditions. If the failure occurs in VFR conditions, or if
VFR conditions are encountered after the failure, each pilot shall
continue the flight under VFR and land as soon as practicable.

(c) IFR conditions. If the failure occurs in IFR conditions, or if
paragraph (b) of this section cannot be complied with, each pilot
shall continue the flight according to the following:

(1) Route. (i) By the route assigned in the last ATC clearance received;

(ii) If being radar vectored, by the direct route from the point of
radio failure to the fix, route, or airway specified in the vector
clearance;

(iii) In the absence of an assigned route, by the route that ATC has
advised may be expected in a further clearance; or

(iv) In the absence of an assigned route or a route that ATC has advised
may be expected in a further clearance, by the route filed in the flight
plan.



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

[Newps]

Danny Dot wrote:
I don't remember the lost
> comm procedures for being put on a vector that didn't intercept the flight
> plan then loosing comm. Any ideas????



Yes, make sure the comm is securely fastened in the panel.

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Newps > wrote:

> > comm procedures for being put on a vector that didn't intercept the flight
> > plan then loosing comm. Any ideas????
>
> Yes, make sure the comm is securely fastened in the panel.

<BG>

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[[email protected]]

Hey may talk like an idiot and he may behave like an idiot, but don't
let that fool you... mxsmanic IS AN IDIOT!

Do the newsgroup a favor... if you have nothing negative and insulting
to say to him... don't say anything.

[Jon Kraus]

Thomas,

Oh ye of little faith :-) ... I have hope that we can get rid of him
just like the sim group did...

Jon

Thomas Borchert wrote:

> Jon,
>
>
>>Yup.. So far so good...
>>
>
>
> Too late. The thread has developed, many again have fallen for him, the
> back and forth is taking the usual way. IMHO, the group is pretty much
> toast for the next weeks or even months.
>

[Gene Seibel]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> A few questions on ATC:

Some people came to our country and wanted to learn to "fly", but not
get a license. They flew into the World Trade Center. What are your
intentions?
--
Gene Seibel
Hangar 131 - http://pad39a.com/gene/plane.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

[A Lieberma]

"Gene Seibel" > wrote in news:1164642000.243988.66840
@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:

> Some people came to our country and wanted to learn to "fly", but not
> get a license. They flew into the World Trade Center. What are your
> intentions?

Unfortunately Gene the above is a very insightful response........ We do
have plenty of enemies.......

Allen

[Mxsmanic]

Gene Seibel writes:

> Some people came to our country and wanted to learn to "fly", but not
> get a license. They flew into the World Trade Center. What are your
> intentions?

It rained this weekend, and I saw a lady wearing black lace on the way
home. What are your intentions?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[[email protected]]

> > It rained this weekend, and I saw a lady wearing black lace on the way
> home. What are your intentions?
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Please don't lie to us, we are well aware that you would never do such
a thing as venture out of your attic, nor attempt to interact with the
outside world on a personal (non-newsgroup) basis, hence your claim of
seeing a lady in black lace on your way home is proposterous.

However Gene pointed out some rather founded similarities between you
and psychopaths, which all seem to make sense, at least a lot more
sense than anything you've ever said on this newsgroup.

Also, I'd like to say to the French... Thanks for Tahiti, but can you
put mxsmanic back in his cage?

Now, considering that you've never flown a plane and interacted with
real ATC I don't think you're in any position to understand the concept
of Pilot in Command (that's what your "questions" dealt with in an
indirect basis), and don't give me the "flight simulator" routine,
that's not even close to cutting it. Also, since you seem to have a
problem accepting anyones general statements as true, I can suggest two
things to you, I will gladly volunteer NASA to help you out... go
ahead, email someone at NASA and start pestering them with your
elementary questions, just don't be surprised if a sattelite
inadvertantly falls on you one day, second, go use wikipedia, go use
any other resource than real world pilots, leave this group, leave it
for good... and never return.