Checkpoints

[Daddy O]

Sunday night my clearance included two waypoints that were problematic :Burdee and coate
I had trouble because they did not appear on any of the maps or sectionals. I finally found them by taking the clearance in PE and typing them into skyvector. It found them, but they did not appear on any maps (burdee was actually covered by a legend for the nearby VOR)

Someone was telling Kieth that that airport uses another route, this could be why. Anyone not using FMS or GPS would not be able to find those points.

[Alex Stjepanovic]

Hi Adam,

I wasn't privy of the entire discussion about the MRY-APC via V27 route that you heard Keith's part of conversation of, as I had to go before that flight landed, but I was the guy that issued you your PAO-STS clearance - So I'll only answer that part here.

The reason that I assigned that route, was it because it was the only one available in simroutes.com - Which itself is built to be a high-fidelity, and as is often the case, a high-realism-route generator. While by no means was this the only possible route for the pair of airports at hand, since you had filed only two VORs(OAK SAU I think it was), I used it(Like with all other flights that flew between those airports), as we folks from VATSIM are for the most part, used to using it, relying on and trusting its data, which itself has been built up by a slew of people from various backgrounds, over the many years that IE has been running the site.

EDIT: Just to re-clarify something here - I believe this previous paragraph may have given an impression of a pan-PE policy on the use of routes. As stated, the reason why simroutes was used as a source, was due to an old habit that many of us have on VATSIM. However it is by no means a PE policy that pilots are expected to fly only routes found there, or even be restrained to any one set of routes for that matter, unless a prescribed preferred route exists in the first place. Pilots should not interpret this paragraph as a golden rule, but rather something that was used during this specific beta night's flows and traffic levels, and also to answer O/P's initial query.

Most important of all, since NorCal area is still being developed, I chose to use a most reasonable route source available. Once the work on local route procedures there is complete, pilots will experience more consistency with what they can expect to be assigned/granted.

-AT

As far as the fixes go, as you can imagine, if every single fix was displayed on every chart, it would be quite a mess (If you'd like a screenshot of our scopes with *all* the fixes turned on, let me know. I'd be happy to send it to you. Only some of those are visible on the various/appropriate charts.)

Anyone not using FMS or GPS would not be able to find those points.

Not quite true - This is exactly why I issued(And why the route has) the radials in between those fixes.

The full route you were given was:

Turn right heading 060 to begin the turn within 1 mile of the airport, radar vectors OSI (Along) V25 (Along) SFO (Direct) SAU (Along) SAU330R (To) BURDE (Along) STS141R (To) COATI.

If you have a specific route in mind and would prefer to fly it, or feel uncomfortable with what you were given, by all means let us know before departing.

Hope that helps clarify the part of your flight that I dealt with

[Keith Smith]

Adam,

I definitely know what you mean about the confusion that can be generated with a clearance involving points that aren't published on low-enroute charts. My home drone here in NJ is just like that, where every outbound IFR aircraft gets "MOREE direct Chatham NDB radar vectors [exit fix]." MOREE is an obscure compass locater on a nearby ILS approach, if you can believe it You either have to have and ADF or GPS to navigate to it, and either have local knowledge, or a GPS to even find it to begin with.

The fixes in question, BURDE and COATI are intersections on the VOR RWY 32 approach at STS (I did not know this until I looked just this moment).

Alex is correct, your clearance did provide guidance as to how to get from fix to fix (via specific radials from the SAU and STS VORs). That said, I think we should see if we can remove those elements from the clearance, since they simply mirror the feeder route from the SAU VOR. That is, you could simply have SAU as the last fix in your route and still be in great shape.

The learnings should be 1) clearances sometimes involve fixes that aren't published on a low-enroute chart, 2) if you're not comfortable with a clearance, ask for clarification, or negotiate a different route (either in the air or on the ground).

And yes, the on-air discussion you heard about routing was for a different airport/route. The pilot filed a route, was cleared for it, and was flying it perfectly. I asked if he wanted a shortcut, and the reason for the circuitous route, and he stated that he received that route in real life quite often. That was what you were hearing. He actually wasn't questioning the route, I was.

Keith

[Daddy O]

Cool. being new to IFR I was curious if this was common in RW flying. I went through all the charts on skyvector and none showed those fixes. I had the headings and courses, but with steam guages and a map it was hard to translate that into tangible routes (my B200 does not have radar.) I was never good at calculating slant angle with DME so I like to have a visual mapped so I can better tell when I should be transitioning from one radial to another.

I am working on adding more navigational equipment to my simulator. I have a franken-box under construction in my workshop, complete with touchscreen, but it is having a minor compatability issue with Xplane and the video card. Once that is done I will be learning GPS, FMS, and all those wiz-bang, new-fangled devices.

You guys keep throwing the RW clearances at me. If that is how they do it in RW, then hit me with it, baby! I was just curious how RW IFR pilots deal with that same issue.

[Keith Smith]

SAU, SAU R-330, STS R-141 to COATI can be flown without DME or GPS, simply using steam gauges.

Join the SAU 330 radial outbound (NW) using one of the nav radios. Have the OTHER nav radio set to intercept the STS R-141 inbound (set the OBS to 321 to track the 141 inbound).

You're basically going to make a small, 9 degree course change when the needle centers on the second nav radio. It's a very shallow intercept, which makes it a little tricky to fly (the needle will center very slowly). For additional situational awareness, check out the STS VOR RWY32 approach plate. You'll see some other crossing radials which will help identify those intersections.

[Keith Smith]

Lastly, although this information might not be readily accessible in a real cockpit, I wouldn't be shy about using it for online flying:
http://www.airnav.com/airspace/fix/COATI
http://www.airnav.com/airspace/fix/BURDE

[Daddy O]

I am still a little confused about something though. Yes, you can use radials to triangulate on a checkpoint, but when all you have is a map (that does not list the checkpoint) how do you know these radials? I had gone through all of the maps available on skyvector and these waypoints are not lsited on any of them. The question is; is it common to receive waypoints that are only listed in electronic format?

[Alex Stjepanovic]

I am still a little confused about something though. Yes, you can use radials to triangulate on a checkpoint, but when all you have is a map (that does not list the checkpoint) how do you know these radials? I had gone through all of the maps available on skyvector and these waypoints are not lsited on any of them. The question is; is it common to receive waypoints that are only listed in electronic format?

My non-rw pilot guess would be that since you were actually issued the clearance with those points between navaids(And with radials in this case as well), that that should be sufficient enough to draw/image/etc.

[Jason Baxter]

When receiving these seemingly disjointed waypoints they are usually part of a published procedure such as an ODP or an approach, if they aren't charted take a look at the ODP or instrument approaches. I have yet to fly into a situation where it wasn't one of the above, filing that ask.

[Dan Everette]

Rather interesting questions/situation and one I’ve been thinking about for a bit. I was approaching this more along the lines of “what if a student asked me this, how would I respond?”
In my opinion, this is actually the most complex “administrative” part of instrument flying. There are no published TEC routes between PAO-STS in the NFDC Preferred Routes Database. So the:

OSI V25 SFO SAU SAU330R BURDE STS141R COATI

Is likely an inter-facility LOA route, since as far as I’m able to tell, it’s not published anywhere a common IFR pilot would be able to find it (I’m talking the route, not specifically the fixes yet). In the RW, one thing you can do is file, and look when you pop up on FlightAware (or if using FltPlan.com, you’ll get an e-mail/txt message with what your cleared route will be), to give you time to locate any weird fixes.

A big chunk of confusion can be eliminated with through pre-flight planning. When doing an IFR flight, I used to pull the IAP in use at my origin and all the major IAP’s out for my destination out of my Jepp Binder and keep them in one of those nifty IFR flight planning books.

You asked if getting sent to fixes that are not published on enroutes is common. I would say it’s not very common, but does happen. The key is how to deal with it.

- On the ground: You have tons of time. First look on the enroute. Not there? Look on the IAP’s for your destination (which would have solved your original question). Still can’t find it, phraseology I’ve used in the past is “…. We’re unfamiliar with XYZ, and can’t locate it on any charts, where is near?” ATC will work with you. Finally, as I told my students, never accept a clearance that you are not 100% sure you know how/where to navigate along.

- In the air: This is where it gets hinky and you can rapidly approach task saturation if you’re not smart about it. Obviously this applies to reroutes. If your single-pilot, IFR, and especially if you’re IMC, and are given a reroute where you can’t immediately locate the fix… Notify ATC. Many people don’t realize that the controller is the single-pilot IFR’s best friend and most useful resource.

As others have said, when in doubt, ask for clarification. From complex flight planning, to curveballs thrown enroute, to seeing the rabbits come out of the fog, instrument flight is one of the most challenging and rewarding things out there (in my opinion). I’m a glutton for punishment, but I absolutely love busy terminal areas and bad weather. There was a flight that Keith and I did a few years ago in different a/c which he filmed. We were flying through Boston Approach airspace and I was incredibly busy during that flight (both with flying and listening to comms, as there wasn’t a break in the radio chatter), that when I landed I said “Phew… Oh My God that was intense…….. let’s go do it again!”

Cheers, and enjoy the ride!