VFR GPS

This is not just for controllers.
Will it help if I file in the remarks "VFR GPS"
I file 172/U
Will I get more direct to commands.
I still fly VOR to VOR but sometimes I am out of range, but still get proceed
direct.
Hank

"Hankal" wrote in message
...

This is not just for controllers.
Will it help if I file in the remarks "VFR GPS"
I file 172/U
Will I get more direct to commands.
I still fly VOR to VOR but sometimes I am out of range, but
still get proceed direct.


If you want direct, file direct. If ATC can provide radar monitoring they
can clear you direct regardless what equipment suffix you use.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:



If you want direct, file direct. If ATC can provide radar monitoring they
can clear you direct regardless what equipment suffix you use.

What if I file direct between two VORs that are 180 miles apart, I am cleared
as filed, then while proceeding between those two VORs, ATC radar goes down?

wrote in message ...

What if I file direct between two VORs that are 180 miles apart, I
am cleared as filed, then while proceeding between those two
VORs, ATC radar goes down?


Then ATC will put you on an appropriate nonradar routing, probably on
airways.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

wrote in message ...

What if I file direct between two VORs that are 180 miles apart, I
am cleared as filed, then while proceeding between those two
VORs, ATC radar goes down?



Then ATC will put you on an appropriate nonradar routing, probably on
airways.



When radar fails, do ATC folks have at their avail the last recorded
positions of all aircraft or a computed projection (coast?), or do
all the screens just go black? :O I don't doubt that most controllers
can revert back to non-radar procedures and successfully handle traffic,
I'm just curious how the transition would occur.

--Don

Donald Ramsey wrote:

When radar fails, do ATC folks have at their avail the last recorded
positions of all aircraft or a computed projection (coast?), or do
all the screens just go black? :O

Depends on what failed. If the radar itself failed then you would still
have the coast tags. If the radar display itself failed you have your
paper strips and your memory.


I don't doubt that most controllers
can revert back to non-radar procedures and successfully handle traffic,
I'm just curious how the transition would occur.

A real display failure with any amount of traffic is a total goat rope.
Approach controllers don't do nonradar and if forced to do so on
zero notice it could get real ugly real fast.

Newps wrote:



A real display failure with any amount of traffic is a total goat rope.
Approach controllers don't do nonradar and if forced to do so on
zero notice it could get real ugly real fast.

Centers these days don't do real well at non-radar, either, compared to the
"good old days." This is particularly so where they provide non-radar
terminal services, such as at a place like Jackson Hole, Wyoming.

Our problem is the opposite. When we file using airways we almost
always get a direct via radar vectors. This messes things up if it
happens to be a training flight. We end up having to renegotiate an
airway clearance. If I include "training flight" in the remarks box I
have had better luck with getting the route I want.


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message ink.net...
"Hankal" wrote in message
...

This is not just for controllers.
Will it help if I file in the remarks "VFR GPS"
I file 172/U
Will I get more direct to commands.
I still fly VOR to VOR but sometimes I am out of range, but
still get proceed direct.


If you want direct, file direct. If ATC can provide radar monitoring they
can clear you direct regardless what equipment suffix you use.

Newps wrote in message
news:Fys8c.2523$K91.15525@attbi_s02...

A real display failure with any amount of traffic is a total goat
rope.
Approach controllers don't do nonradar and if forced to do so on
zero notice it could get real ugly real fast.


So you recommend being the first aircraft to declare an emergency when
the failure happens? ;-)

--

Scott
--------

tscottme wrote:
Newps wrote in message
news:Fys8c.2523$K91.15525@attbi_s02...

A real display failure with any amount of traffic is a total goat

rope.

Approach controllers don't do nonradar and if forced to do so on
zero notice it could get real ugly real fast.



So you recommend being the first aircraft to declare an emergency when
the failure happens? ;-)


No, the first one to cancel.