IFR Flights Using VOR Navigation Only?

[pandmbake]

Hello! Would it be acceptable to conduct an IFR flight using VOR navigation only? I am an X-Plane user and I have the wonderful FlyJSim aircraft (737-200 and 727-200) but neither one have an FMC or even a GPS. I have done flights like this on VATSIM and I always put a little note in the comments section of the flight plan that I am "VOR nav only" and it has never been a problem. Thanks!

Paul

[Marcus Becker]

File the appropriate equipment suffix and plan your flight appropriately. Between VOR's, there are usually airways to utilize to keep you clear of MOA's, restricted airspace, terrain and others. Proper flight planning, file your IFR flight, call for clearance and be flexible. No need to put anything in your remarks as long as your equipment suffix is good.

[RyanK]

I fly that way often on PE. It's more fun and more challenging in my opinion. Like Marcus said, file the appropriate equipment and an appropriate route and you're set.

[Keith Smith]

/A is the equipment suffix for VOR/DME non-RVSM (generally not allowed above FL280)

/W would VOR/DME for RVSM aircraft (allowed to go above FL280)

Tons of us fly the 737-200 on PE, it's a great airplane. The only issue is that X-Plane's VOR reception is based on strict, generic service volumes for VORs. Therefore, certain VORs which are part of the low and high enroute structure will not be receivable from distances which would work in real life (it's routine for airways to exceed standard service volumes of VORs). DAG is a great example...you're not going to receive it from more than 45nm away in the sim, and that causes issues on just about every SID out of SNA, BUR, VNY, LAX and SAN.

However, just let the controller know you're not yet receiving the VOR and they'll accommodate.

While it is a dying art and GPS is clearly the future, there's really no better way to be engaged in your flight than tuning and turning at 450KTAS. Here's a sample shared cockpit video during a busy event a couple of years ago featuring the very plane you're talking about: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMVsRmR9fDM&t=771s

[kullery]

The only issue is that X-Plane's VOR reception is based on strict, generic service volumes for VORs. Therefore, certain VORs which are part of the low and high enroute structure will not be receivable from distances which would work in real life

It's worth pointing out that if the reception range for a particular VOR is not realistic, it can be edited in the earth_nav.dat file. In this example, the SEA VOR is set to a maximum reception range of 130nm.

3 47.43538889 -122.30961111 354 11680 130 19.0 SEA SEATTLE VORTAC

As you point out, DAG defaults to an unrealistically low 40nm, but it is consistent with the range defined for a class L VOR.

3 34.96244444 -116.57816667 1760 11320 40 15.0 DAG DAGGETT VORTAC