Re: I-03 routing questions
Posted: Mon May 23, 2016 9:01 am
Thanks for the help everyone -
First, please note that I wasn't using the term "discrepancy" as a negative of any type, just to indicate a difference in what I was seeing in two different places.
Interesting to know that established VOR radials don't (or, at least, haven't) changed; I assumed they would be updated periodically! I haven't been using a GPS in the tasks (though I do use the RealityXP 430/530 otherwise) so wasn't comparing the numbers in practice.
Keith, thanks - I took a look at the area chart and see that.
wmburns, "Is it possible that you are over thinking this on some different levels?" - sure, it's possible, and likely! As noted, I haven't used GPS on these tests yet, but saw the difference in two number I expected to be identical, so it made me wonder. A few of the planes I fly for real have 430s, and I use the OBS setting somewhat frequently to extend radials and centerlines, but haven't tried it in PE yet. I haven't tried making route comparisons locally (in my home area) but will do so.
(It's still a little weird to me that the radial on the other side (311) is aligned just fine.)
This also addresses another thing I was thinking about:
From http://www.ocair.com/newsroom/news/2014/nr-2014-06-30
"Due to a gradual shift of the Earth’s magnetic poles, JWA’s runways will get new number designations. JWA’s commercial runway will become two left and two zero right (2L-20R), and the general aviation runway will become two right and two zero left (2R-20L)."
I figured that's probably what it was in that case, but again, figured that VORs would be updated, too. I guess many more things would be affected by "rotating" a VOR.
First, please note that I wasn't using the term "discrepancy" as a negative of any type, just to indicate a difference in what I was seeing in two different places.
Interesting to know that established VOR radials don't (or, at least, haven't) changed; I assumed they would be updated periodically! I haven't been using a GPS in the tasks (though I do use the RealityXP 430/530 otherwise) so wasn't comparing the numbers in practice.
Keith, thanks - I took a look at the area chart and see that.
wmburns, "Is it possible that you are over thinking this on some different levels?" - sure, it's possible, and likely! As noted, I haven't used GPS on these tests yet, but saw the difference in two number I expected to be identical, so it made me wonder. A few of the planes I fly for real have 430s, and I use the OBS setting somewhat frequently to extend radials and centerlines, but haven't tried it in PE yet. I haven't tried making route comparisons locally (in my home area) but will do so.
(It's still a little weird to me that the radial on the other side (311) is aligned just fine.)
This also addresses another thing I was thinking about:
From http://www.ocair.com/newsroom/news/2014/nr-2014-06-30
"Due to a gradual shift of the Earth’s magnetic poles, JWA’s runways will get new number designations. JWA’s commercial runway will become two left and two zero right (2L-20R), and the general aviation runway will become two right and two zero left (2R-20L)."
I figured that's probably what it was in that case, but again, figured that VORs would be updated, too. I guess many more things would be affected by "rotating" a VOR.