PilotEdge Forums

Thanks Anthony. I actually saw restricted area W-289 on the Sectional, looked it up, and saw that it was issued by NOTAM only. So I assumed it would be no factor on PE. Maybe not the case? Regardless, my general question still stands... (and it's a very fundamental question):

With IFR, is it required to file an already-published and/or generally-accepted route (given by Foreflight or SimRoutes.com, for example), or can I make up my own routing based on a few VORs of my own choosing, all while avoiding inclusion of SIDs and STARs in the plan?

Cheers.

Pieces wrote:It seems to defeat the purpose to fly IFR (i.e. you can't see out the window because its cloudy) to go sight-seeing. The goal is to safely get planes from point A to point B in less than great weather.

Thanks, Reece. And I was anticipating that reply . But since IFR provides separation and safety advantages over VFR, I might still like to file IFR even on a clear day.

To which the next reply might be, why not file VFR with Flight Following?

To which my answer would be, because I want practice with nice and complicated clearances and routing/vectoring.

Perhaps I should just finished the workshops first.........

Cyrus wrote:Thanks Anthony. I actually saw restricted area W-289 on the Sectional, looked it up, and saw that it was issued by NOTAM only. So I assumed it would be no factor on PE. Maybe not the case? Regardless, my general question still stands... (and it's a very fundamental question):

With IFR, is it required to file an already-published and/or generally-accepted route (given by Foreflight or SimRoutes.com, for example), or can I make up my own routing based on a few VORs of my own choosing, all while avoiding inclusion of SIDs and STARs in the plan?

Cheers.

Just so you know, there is a difference between a Warning Area (like W-289) and a Restricted Area.

You can file whatever you'd like; however, that doesn't mean that you will receive that route in your clearance. By filing a route that is far from the preferred route (if one does exist) it creates more work for the controller to have to type out and configure a full route clearance for your flight. ATC will simply change your route and expect you to be able to comply.

Once you're in the air, you can request an amendment to your route (e.g., direct to somewhere). So long as the request can be accomodated, ATC can approve it. Of course, this is also determined by whether or not your routing amendment remains within the controller's area of responsibility. If not (as in, it involves coordinating with another sector), then a bit more is involved and a pointout and proper coordination needs to take place in order for your amendment to be approved.

As far as the IAP issue, simply put "No SID/STAR" in the Remarks section of your flight plan and ATC will not issue one.

Cyrus wrote:But since IFR provides separation and safety advantages over VFR, I might still like to file IFR even on a clear day

Cyrus, I just want to make sure you know that safe separation still remains on your shoulders as Pilot-in-Command (PIC). Even if you are in VMC executing an IFR flight, you are ultimately responsible for watching out for other aircraft.

I just want to make sure everyone understands that just because you're IFR, it doesn't mean that ATC is soley responsible for the overall safe operation of your aircraft (as in blindly following direction without adequate situational awareness).

Roger, wilco - and thanks (on both your final replies).

Hope to be "with you" soon then.

Cyrus,

If you want to dip your toe in the water with IFR, then I urge you to use the Pilot Training Program. What you're attempting to do is similar to what a good friend of mine tried to do when he was interested in learning to fly RC planes. He bought a plane and said, "I'm just going to takeoff, fly it for 5 seconds, then land, just baby steps and keeping it really simple." Little did he know he was making his life absurdly complicated. Needless to say, the plane was destroyed within seconds of leaving the ground when it returned to terra firma with considerably more gusto than he would've liked.

Dip your toe in the water by using established, simple routes (such as the I-2 rating). Coming up with your own route is going to result in frustration, because you're not going to be issued that route. It's perfectly LEGAL to file what you have in mind. However, it's irrelevant because you're simply not going to get issued that route. It's not a controller decision either (at least in the r/w). The computer is literally going to spit out a flight strip with your amended route...the controller won't even KNOW what you originally filed, other than the fact that it was something that had no resemblance to the new route (because the strips show which part of the route it amended vs what was part of the originally filed route).

Be aware, filing 'NO SID/STAR" in your flight plan remarks only means they can't issue you the SID by name. They can still basically read the entire SID to you and have you fly it. It may be helpful to know that 'NO SID/STAR" is an option for historical reasons that have little to do with pilot skills, but based on the fact that in the past, the book containing SIDs/STARs was different that than book of published instrument approaches. It was common, from what I understand, for pilots to have one (the instrument approaches) but not the other. That's why the 'NO SID/STAR' option came about. Once SIDs/STARs started getting published in the same book as the instrument approaches, there was little excuse for filing NO SID unless there was a real performance requirement on the departure that you couldn't meet.

Your best bet would be to become intimately familiar with the low-enroute structure (victor airways), which is the heart of flying GA IFR in busy terminal areas. You can get really good at tracking courses without flying IFR, just go for a VFR flight along a series of airways of your choice. Avoid long, boring enroute segments where nothing is happening. Once you can hop from airway to airway, you're well-positioned to handle SIDs (which are nothing more than tracking a series of courses), enroute, STARs (same again) and even instrument approaches. At that point, you can really dive into IFR and enjoy it.

Filing VOR to VOR routing on an IFR flight plan in Socal is not going to yield the introduction that you're hoping for. It's also not going to prepare you for what you need to know to fly IFR in any case. If you'd like a 'simple' IFR flight, SNA to CRQ is a good one (the I-2).

Thanks Keith. It's funny, but after this discussion yesterday, I actually watched your I-2 video and figured "well, apart from the relatively quiet leg along V23, this looks challenging enough” and – low and behold – I convinced myself to fly it in the Skyhawk (I went for a slow plane because it had been about 6 weeks since my last PE flight, and I was getting a little rusty on comms too). I can honestly say that the experience was fantastic, the workload was plenty (even at 110kts), and I got all the VOR-to-VOR and IFR chart holding that I could handle. And now I even have a few questions regarding my flight:

1. How do I avoid the hyperspace jump-line on PE between planned flights? Should I have asked to close out my IFR plan once parked at Palomar, or is it best to just disconnect and reconnect?

2. At 10:43 on this recording, I was asked (just outside of OCN), “[Skyhawk 17]6CM, do you want to fly the ILS from Oceanside or vectors to final?” I botched my subsequent replies, but was told “cleared rwy 24 ILS approach”, after which I came back for clarification, because I wanted the full “rectangular” vectoring (although I get that it’s not so necessary in a slow/single piston). So my question is, if I had simply opted to “fly the ILS from Oceanside” what would have happened next, i.e. would I have been expected to modify my altitude and heading to get lined up for the localizer/gs by myself?

3. At 1:16 on the same audio track, you’ll hear my audio being very garbled. In fact, it is like this for most of *my* calls in the recording. Everything sounded fine on my end (other pilots too), and ATC didn’t complain about audio at all. In fact, I even got a “loud and clear” from a radio check in the previous hour as soon as I logged on. I have noticed this before on the recordings, so I’m wondering if something is getting garbled during the archive process with my setup. Again, ATC didn’t complain at all.

4. Like you, Keith, I could not get any DME out of the ILS at Palomar and, after having just seen your I-2 video, I really thought that I was being punked or something. I’m on FSX and you were on X-Plane, so what’s up with those skanky old transmitters over at Palomar anyway?

So, anyway, I was on such a high from that I-2 practice run, that I decided to take the Learjet out for a quickie VFR hop from SBA to SMX, using VOR-to-VOR nav only, although SBA Approach allowed me to shoot the ILS rwy 12 from Morro Bay. This was also an awesome experience for me; my first flight and landing in a jet on PE. Things happen so fast at 250kts, and it’s funny to see (from the PEaware map) how I overshot each VOR that I had planned for. (I must have really been turning some of those windmills at Solvang! )

In summary, thanks for all of the above advice! I really love that I can mix it up on PE. And now I’m certainly more comfortable about easing myself into the IFR world, as well as continuing to practice flying VFR. Speaking of which, I need to start thinking about the V-3 soon.

More tonight… if the kids cooperate.

check this link for a fix for the DME at KCRQ

I used this program: http://www.airportdesigneditor.co.uk/ to add DME to the Palomar ILS in FSX

Ken and Josh, thanks for the info about Palomar DME.

By the way, I flew Grand Canyon to LAS in the Learjet last night, IFR. It was a relatively simple route and, again, things all happened quite fast (especially towards the end). Loved it. I think I have the jet thing out of my system now, and will continue my IFR adventures in the Cessna (for the most part, at least... although I might treat myself to an IFR 747 run one of these nights )

Oh, and same problem with the audio recording again , although absolutely no issues in-flight.