Routing question

[rtataryn]

I filed for a fairly simple IFR flight from KTOA to KVNY using the TEC route SCTN2, which is SMO SMO317R CANOG. My clearance leaving runway 29 at KTOA was Fly runway heading, Intercept the LAX170R LIMBO V64 SMO125R SMO SMO317R then as filed. No problem, I studied the route on the ground and loaded it and was ready to go. While on V64, SoCal approach tells me I'm supposed to be on V64 until intercepting the SMO 125 radial, which of course is exactly what I was doing. I'm immediately given a vector heading 030 to intercept the SMO125 radial and then proceed on course. Somewhat flustered, I complied and then tried to sort out where I went wrong. As far as I can tell, I was expected to fly east on V64 after LIMBO, but instead I flew north on V64 with the intention of intercepting the SMO125 from that direction. How could I have known ahead of time what ATC's expectation was for me? How can I avoid this issue in the future. I'm glad this learning experience happened on PilotEdge and not in the real world.

[jtek]

If you fly the LAX 170 radial to LIMBO, it would be a full 180° turn to go north from there on V64. It's rather unlikely that you would ever be assigned a route that has you fly one direction then turn around and fly back the way you came! (Ok, yes, except for a holding pattern...) That would have been your first clue. Second, I'm pretty sure the portion of V64 north of LIMBO never intersects with the SMO 125 radial.

So, to answer your question, how can you avoid this in the future: situational awareness.

[rtataryn]

Yeah, I thought the 180 turn was odd, but figured maybe it was to sequence traffic or to get me up to altitude before I overflew LAX. And yes, you're right, V64 ends at LAX, which is about the SMO153 radial, and does not continue north of that, so it does not intersect the SMO135. That 18 degrees didn't register on the ground with me, but I should have seen that and would have/should have brought at least a query from me to ATC. As I studied the assigned route closer, after the fact, the SMO125 radial intersects V64 eastbound at WILMA. I'm curious why the clearance didn't just state LIMBO V64 WILMA SMO. It seems that would have been much clearer. Is there a reason a VOR radial was given rather than a fix to fix?

[stevekirks]

Skyvector link here

Please post a link from PEaware or a date/time of your flight

If you took off from runway 29 you would indeed have to fly *south* to get to LIMBO and as a non-PE controller, this would make sense if you are a slow prop plane. You're underneath the LA Class B shelf so you'll need time to climb to an altitude for SoCal to be comfortable crossing over LAX.

(Oh Oracle of Mr. Grey - if an aircraft is flying on a line that separates two levels of airspace, does the more restrictive one apply? - Example LIMBO to LAX via V64)

The TEC route makes sense assuming you can climb quickly to a safe altitude to cross over LAX because the SMO317R is similar to the Mini Route and maybe complementary to desired traffic flows.

(Note: while posting I saw the reply)

[wmburns]

I want you to know that I FEEL your pain..... I got tripped up on this EXACT same route making the exact same mistake. The key to understanding the route is to visualize it. It NEVER occurred to me to fly V64 counter clockwise (East bound). Once I saw it was possible to fly V64 East bound, the route made sense.

Take a look at the Skyvector link.

http://skyvector.com/?ll=33.83338761511 ... :A.K2.KVNY

I hope this helps you to understand the route (and it provides the distance needed to climb prior to crossing back over KLAX).

[NameCoin]

Yeah, I thought the 180 turn was odd, but figured maybe it was to sequence traffic or to get me up to altitude before I overflew LAX. And yes, you're right, V64 ends at LAX, which is about the SMO153 radial, and does not continue north of that, so it does not intersect the SMO135. That 18 degrees didn't register on the ground with me, but I should have seen that and would have/should have brought at least a query from me to ATC. As I studied the assigned route closer, after the fact, the SMO125 radial intersects V64 eastbound at WILMA. I'm curious why the clearance didn't just state LIMBO V64 WILMA SMO. It seems that would have been much clearer. Is there a reason a VOR radial was given rather than a fix to fix?

I don't see that SMO125 intersects WILMA - it's still a little off. If you fly the route next time, you'll see that the 125 radial actually sends you over KLAX midfield, keeping you out of the way of departures and arrivals. There isn't an airway or fix taking you from V64 to SMO in this way, hence the routing defined by a radial.

[rtataryn]

I want you to know that I FEEL your pain..... I got tripped up on this EXACT same route making the exact same mistake. The key to understanding the route is to visualize it. It NEVER occurred to me to fly V64 counter clockwise (West bound). Once I saw it was possible to fly V64 West bound, the route made sense.

Take a look at the Skyvector link.

http://skyvector.com/?ll=33.83338761511 ... :A.K2.KVNY

I hope this helps you to understand the route (and it provides the distance needed to climb prior to crossing back over KLAX).

Thanks! That does help to visualize it.

[rtataryn]

Yeah, I thought the 180 turn was odd, but figured maybe it was to sequence traffic or to get me up to altitude before I overflew LAX. And yes, you're right, V64 ends at LAX, which is about the SMO153 radial, and does not continue north of that, so it does not intersect the SMO135. That 18 degrees didn't register on the ground with me, but I should have seen that and would have/should have brought at least a query from me to ATC. As I studied the assigned route closer, after the fact, the SMO125 radial intersects V64 eastbound at WILMA. I'm curious why the clearance didn't just state LIMBO V64 WILMA SMO. It seems that would have been much clearer. Is there a reason a VOR radial was given rather than a fix to fix?

I don't see that SMO125 intersects WILMA - it's still a little off. If you fly the route next time, you'll see that the 125 radial actually sends you over KLAX midfield, keeping you out of the way of departures and arrivals. There isn't an airway or fix taking you from V64 to SMO in this way, hence the routing defined by a radial.

Oh yes, the SMO125 radial is east of WILMA. I was reading my own typo above and looking at the 135R.

[Peter Grey]

(Oh Oracle of Mr. Grey - if an aircraft is flying on a line that separates two levels of airspace, does the more restrictive one apply? - Example LIMBO to LAX via V64)

The more restrictive airspace applies per 71.9:

§71.9 Overlapping airspace designations.
(a) When overlapping airspace designations apply to the same airspace, the operating rules associated with the more restrictive airspace designation apply.

(b) For the purpose of this section—

(1) Class A airspace is more restrictive than Class B, Class C, Class D, Class E, or Class G airspace;

(2) Class B airspace is more restrictive than Class C, Class D, Class E, or Class G airspace;

(3) Class C airspace is more restrictive than Class D, Class E, or Class G airspace;

(4) Class D airspace is more restrictive than Class E or Class G airspace; and

(5) Class E is more restrictive than Class G airspace.

Note technically the line is an infinitely small line, but if you somehow were in both the more restrictive applies. There is no case where you could comply with the rules for the more restrictive airspace without complying with the rules for the less restrictive.

Also as this all happened under IFR airspace most airspace rules don't apply (with regards to entry requirements).

[Keith Smith]

This routing ensures that you're at the desired altitude as you approach corridors around LAX, rather than climbing to the altitude, potentially becoming a hood ornament for the mini-route and SFRA traffic while you reach 4000.

You asked how to ensure that this doesn't happen again. You stated that you made an assumption that V64 joined the SMO R-125 at LAX, but you never verified the assumption. A closer look at the airways coming off SMO would show that the R-125 runs east of LAX (along T-245). This would then force you to evaluate the 'other' method of using V64 (ie, eastbound on V64), which would absolutely intersect the SMO R-125.

Don't feel too bad about this, it's one of the most complex routes in Socal, and one with a significant number of deviations on the first attempt. It also seems ambiguous at first glance. If that ever happens in the future, take a second glance and query ATC if you're not sure.