If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Just look in a book of approach plates, David, and you will see approaches
listed as VOR/DME RNAV. I have nothing to do with the publication of updates. ASA policy is that only "safety of flight" information will be updated...everything else waits for the next edition. Bob Gardner "David Brooks" wrote in message ... VOR-DME is RNAV too? Now I'm confused. When can we get those updates, Bob? (I note that asa2fly.com is a little sparse in the "textbook updates" department). -- David Brooks "Bob Gardner" wrote in message news:nwQ%b.424998$na.813278@attbi_s04... I feel your pain. Since the FAA lumped GPS, Loran, and VOR-DME into one basket labelled RNAV, I have been going nuts trying to keep my books up to date. The KNS-80 and its ilk are still around, so I have to discuss that kind of RNAV, but because there are so many approaches labelled RNAV (GPS), the potential for confusion is there. It all boils down to the fact that if you can fly a random route using any one of the three, you have RNAV. Bob Gardner "PaulaJay1" wrote in message ... Coming into CLE the other day the controller ask if I had RNAV and I said no, that I was /G ,that is, IFR GPS. He said that it was the same and gave me direct..... Is it the same, should I have answered yes to his question? Of course I can navigate direct but do I have "RNAV"? Chuck |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
In article , paulajay1
@aol.com says... Coming into CLE the other day the controller ask if I had RNAV and I said no, that I was /G ,that is, IFR GPS. He said that it was the same and gave me direct..... Is it the same, should I have answered yes to his question? Of course I can navigate direct but do I have "RNAV"? It's interesting in that /G does not distinguish between being approved foro enroute vs. approach. I suppose if you were truly /G and this was in the enroute environment that it's the same. Scott www.privacytactics.com -- Protect Your Personal Infomration Assets |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... =20 =20 "John R. Copeland" wrote: And as Sammy said, it was either the common Tower frequency, or the common "Radio" frequency (meaning Flight Service Station). I *think* 3023.5 kHz was for calling "Radio", who could respond either on VHF or on the local LF/MF 4-course Adcock Range station. If that's right, then 3105 kHz probably was the frequency for = calling the Tower, who could respond on the fixed frequency of 278 kHz as standard, or on a small number of alternative HF frequencies if other towers = were nearby. Whew. I'd have to dig through some old stuff to remember this = exactly, but I'd lay money on Steven P. McNicoll's ability to turn it up = easily. ---JRC--- =20 I have some 1945 WACs for Southern California. I don't see that = frequency on those charts. I do see 126.18 all over the place, and some 140+ MHz. And, some really low = frequency stuff as well. =20 OK, Sammy, I dug up a 1955 Albany Sectional (price 25 cents!), and I = couldn't find any reference to 3023.5 or 3105 on it, either. But "Albany Radio" could transmit on the Albany LF/MF Range station at = 263 kHz, as well as Albany VOR at 116.9 MHz. Albany Tower's transmitting frequencies were 278 kHz, 118.7 MHz, and = 257.8 MHz. Nearby Schenectady Tower transmitted on 284 kHz, 126.18 MHz, and 257.8 = MHz. Elmira Tower used LF 278 kHz, too, but its neighboring Binghamton Tower = used LF 332 kHz. Both Syracuse and Rochester Towers, up to the north, were far enough = separated to re-use 278 kHz again. I gotta stop this nostalgic stuff. I'm forcing this thread out of = control. ---JRC--- |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... Air Traffic Communications Station, not FSS. ;-) Air Traffic Communications Stations only for a brief time. These facilities were named Airway Radio Stations when the Department of Commerce assumed responsibility for the transcontinental airway from the Post Office in 1927. They were renamed Airway Communications Stations in 1938 and later Interstate Airway Communications Stations. They became Air Traffic Communications Stations after the FAA was created in August 1958 and were renamed Flight Service Stations in March 1960. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
They became Air Traffic
Communications Stations after the FAA was created in August 1958 and were renamed Flight Service Stations in March 1960. That could be. But, that was the period in which I got my instrument rating and did my early IFR X-Countries. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
"John R. Copeland" wrote in
: No, Stan, it was 3023.5 kHz AM, in the HF Aeronautical Mobile band, which spans 2850-3155 kHz even to this day. You're right, I was having momentary retreating brain stall. 3 to 30 MHz, not kHz, is the HF band. 3025 kHz is near the bottom of the band. -- Regards, Stan |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
"Stan Gosnell" wrote in message = ... "John R. Copeland" wrote in :=20 =20 No, Stan, it was 3023.5 kHz AM, in the HF Aeronautical Mobile band, which spans 2850-3155 kHz even to this day. =20 You're right, I was having momentary retreating brain stall. 3 to 30 = MHz,=20 not kHz, is the HF band. 3025 kHz is near the bottom of the band. =20 =20 Ooooh! A "retreating brain stall". This fixed-wing pilot liked that. No problem, Stan. I guessed about as much. We all get occasional senior moments :-) ---JRC--- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
RNAV approaches | Kevin Chandler | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | September 18th 03 06:00 PM |
Are handheld GPSes becoming a defacto primary nav source? | Paul Tomblin | Instrument Flight Rules | 44 | September 13th 03 10:36 PM |
GPS-Y GPS-Z database question | John Clonts | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | September 5th 03 04:54 AM |
Another IFR "oops" | Dan Luke | Instrument Flight Rules | 15 | July 21st 03 09:02 PM |