Alphabet Challenge Leg 12 KLGB - KMYF

[Talan2000]

Pilots,

Another nice little hop down the coast - a good change of pace from the desert!

Lessons Learned:
(O)DPs - Keep an eye on the (O)DPs at these airports - they keep popping up. Expect them

Fight Complacency: At this point you have done quite a bit of flying. Congratulations. And on this flight there is a TEC route so you can just load up that GPS baby (without having to program it all in by hand). For me at least, this almost immediately means the complacency meter starts climbing. "It's a TEC route, it'll be straightforward, no worries.I don't even have to do the planning. Whoo hoo..."

And the flight isn't hard but I found myself a little bit behind the airplane because I didn't thoroughly brief the flight legs -- specifically there's a bit of jinking off the coast nearing Oceanside. Nothing hard "if you have your radios set up" but I was surprised that HUBRD and CARDI were defined off intersections with radials off LAX! (Whoa that's way back behind me!) so I was late getting LAX Dialed in and I ended up fudging the corner a little by just turning to the next heading at 220kts GS. ( I know Keith is already puking on his monitor in disgust reading this -- no need to fly this one Keith . Both points can be defined by OCN but the segment HUBRD-CARDI requires LAX, and I brushed over that in flight prep.

Upon review I was really appalled at the corner (in yellow) but I think the time sampling overstates it a bit. I think it was better than it looks - that's always my story anyway. Yes, I could have just used GPS but who wants to be a robot? You guys make a better turn, ok?

And, I guess I really just wanted to fly near OORAH.

Semper Fi!

sloppy turn

sloppy turn.JPG (152.79 KiB) Viewed 4434 times

If in Doubt Ask: I asked for the ILS/LOC 28R approach and got vectors. I asked again where he was sending me ( to the IAF?) and I will admit I got a little antsy being assigned HDG 100 descend to 3800 from 5000 when aimed towards what looked like some pretty tall hills and towers up to 3790 -- but they were probably 3 - 5 miles ahead of me. Still I didn't hesitate to query ATC on that 100 heading (maybe it was supposed to be 180)? Nope 100. Then I got a turn all the way around . It kinda cracks me up that you can't get a >30 degree intercept on the Localizer but you CAN get a 120 degree turn?? Oh well.All's well that ends well.

[flyingdrill]

An odd one this. If one is flying the PQ50 TEC route, myflightroute.com produces a route for this flight, which zig zags all over the place, while if you just follow the obvious route East off SLI, etc. on v64, and continue along the V routes, it's all straightforward, through ELB, DANAH, OCN and MZB. I filed the route in a bit more detail, rather than the TEC route one, and the controller and I discussed why I did that - and I did because I wanted to make it clear where I was going rather than using the route that myflightroute.com produced on Skyvector and the FMS file.

Nice flight, but I messed up the use of the Garmin 530 in my C206 while being vectored for the approach. Personally, I prefer a conventional DME on an approach. Later while established, I cut in the A/P and it wanted to fly me way off - I have no idea why, because it behaves normally usually. Anyway, I disconnected it, and hand flew the ILS nicely, only to vacate 25R on 5/23, because I just didn't see the light colored taxiway G in time! The controller and I had a laugh on that! Thank goodness this is not RW!

[kullery]

I filed the route in a bit more detail, rather than the TEC route one, and the controller and I discussed why I did that

I apologize that the Skyvector link (and the FMS file which uses the same data) for the CSTN36 route was incorrect. It has been corrected. Please understand that the data for the Skyvector links was largely manually compiled for all 425 TEC Routes. Some route parsing was utilized and in this case an error slipped through that was not detected.

However the TEC route for CSTN36 was correct as published (SLI V64 V363 DANAH V23 MZB) and this is what should have been filed. While the planning tools (Skyvector and FMS) were clearly wrong, as PIC you are ultimately responsible to ensure that your planning tools accurately reflect the route so please always double check routings you receive from any ANY source. Your clearance delivery conversation with the controller was interesting but I couldn't tell exactly what route you had filed. Apparently you filed something other then "SLI V64 V363 DANAH V23 MZB".

Please drop me note when any issues are noticed so they can be corrected as soon as possible.

Again, my apologies for the confusion the error caused you. Good luck on the remainder of the Alphabet Challenge.

[flyingdrill]

Hi

Thanks. I thought I was not mad! Actually, I did file as you published, but instead of filing that way, I put in the VORs on the Vroutes, so as to make it totally clear to the controller where I was going! I was going the right way! In fact, I could have filed the TEC route number, but I was concerned because of the mismatch with both Skyvector and the FMS file generated by myflightroute.com. The wording (SLI, V64, etc.) does show where to go, which is how I worked it out. I was just being pedantic because of my confusion over what had been generated. This also then made the controller scratch his head! PE controllers presumably don't look at your site to see what the TEC route should be, and so couldn't understand why I was questioning what had been generated!

Later on, I flew it again, and just filled in the TEC route number in the flight plan. Everyone was happy

Also, I flew it to my satisfaction this time, including coping with a minor diversion to the route, given by the controller.

Now for "lucky" 13!