Page 1 of 2

TEC Route Airplane Types

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 5:33 pm
by ChristophPreinfalk
I'm trying to plan TEC Route flights (e.g. between the focus fields of the day) and I'm not sure how to pick the right one for my aircraft type. I understand (or at least think) that PQ (e.g. PQ40) is for piston engine planes. JMPQxx seems to be for jets and pistons. JMxx seems to be for jets only. However, I'm not completely sure if I'm reading this correctly, and I've been trying to find out how exactly to read that, but I can't find any documentation (at least not via Google). I'm sure it's buried somewhere in various IFR manuals ...

I'd like to get into the Piaggio Avanti (one of the X-Plane default planes) as a gateway drug to fly faster planes on PE. Do I fly the PQ or the JM TEC routes with it?

Re: TEC Route Airplane Types

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 5:48 pm
by julio.elizalde
J - Jet Powered
M - Turbo-propeller Powered
P - Prop aircraft (Speed > 190 knots)
Q - Prop aircraft (Speed < 190 knots)

Re: TEC Route Airplane Types

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:06 pm
by ChristophPreinfalk
Thank you SO much!!!!

Re: TEC Route Airplane Types

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:41 pm
by Keith Smith
myflightroute.com lists the aircraft types, too, if it helps: http://myflightroute.com/tecsub.php?sta ... A&type=%25

You can always get it from the horse's mouth by going to the Digital AFD and searching for "TEC". The definitions of the aircraft types are listed there, too, along with some great information about the routes.

Re: TEC Route Airplane Types

Posted: Tue Nov 12, 2013 6:47 am
by Brazen
julio.elizalde wrote:J - Jet Powered
M - Turbo-propeller Powered
P - Prop aircraft (Speed > 190 knots)
Q - Prop aircraft (Speed < 190 knots)
I haven't been able to find out if these speeds are indicated or true. Can anyone point me to a document where it explains that?

Re: TEC Route Airplane Types

Posted: Tue Nov 12, 2013 7:07 am
by Pieces
I don't think it really matters. The A/FD lists it as Julio did with no specification other than "cruise". Also P and Q aircraft nearly always (always?) have the same route and altitude.

The FAA A/FD can be accessed from http://aeronav.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=ae ... ions/d_afd. You have to select the product link near the bottom of the page, then select California from the map. Hit search. Scroll up a line or two and select "Supplemental". The TEC route information is on page 391 (which is page 57 of the document).

Re: TEC Route Airplane Types

Posted: Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:50 am
by Jeff N
AWESOME, thanks Reece. I've been trying to find that doc on the FAA site but didn't know to click on "Supplemental". Pretty sure Keith mentioned it in one of the IFR workshops but I missed that particular detail.

Re: TEC Route Airplane Types

Posted: Tue Nov 12, 2013 9:13 am
by Peter Grey
For the P/Q class split the measurement is KTAS. The reference for this is the internal FAA SOP for the SCT area (which isn't publicly accessible), but is the only document I've seen that actually makes that distinction.

Re: TEC Route Airplane Types

Posted: Tue Nov 12, 2013 9:21 am
by Brazen
Pieces wrote:I don't think it really matters. The A/FD lists it as Julio did with no specification other than "cruise". Also P and Q aircraft nearly always (always?) have the same route and altitude.

The FAA A/FD can be accessed from http://aeronav.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=ae ... ions/d_afd. You have to select the product link near the bottom of the page, then select California from the map. Hit search. Scroll up a line or two and select "Supplemental". The TEC route information is on page 391 (which is page 57 of the document).
I haven't found a route that lists something different for P and Q, but I'm of the inquiring kind. :)

I already found the AFD, and that's why I asked if there's one that classifies the speed.

Thanks!

Re: TEC Route Airplane Types

Posted: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:58 am
by jtek
Peter Grey wrote:For the P/Q class split the measurement is KTAS. The reference for this is the internal FAA SOP for the SCT area (which isn't publicly accessible), but is the only document I've seen that actually makes that distinction.
Makes sense that it would be true, since indicated airspeed is a basically useless number for flight planning purposes.