Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Part 135 (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/part-135/)

- - Handheld GPS (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/part-135/47897-handheld-gps.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoyGonnaDoIt (Post 757144)

What makes you sure he was /G with a handheld? That's a pretty big assumption if all you heard was what you put in your post. Direct routings are given every day by ATC to pilots with handheld GPS who have filed something other than /G.

The conversation usually involves some version of direct routing ion a radar environment with the understanding that the aircraft is on radar, is choosing a heading based on the situational awareness being provided, and an expectation that if there is a course issue, ATC will advise.

"I have my handheld GPS onboard" is often shorthand for all that, with both the pilot and ATC aware of the requirement that GPS not be used for primary navigation.

A longer version of the conversation might be something like this real one:

ATC: Proceed direct FIXNAME
Pilot: We're VFR GPS only. It looks like a heading of 275°. Will you advise of course deviations?
ATC: Will advise. proceed direct FIXNAME on that heading.

It was IMC (he had to be IFR)...and you can't take a "heading direct when able" to a FIX that isn't ground based without a panel mounted IFR approved GPS

If he did have an INS/RNAV system, then ok. I doubt the late night, cargo carrying, get rid of every extra piece of equipment caravan had it. Who knows though. Maybe I was presumptuous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by joepilot (Post 757351)

We had a good laugh, then went direct via the creased map method.

I'll bite- What's the "creased map" method. I think I have a general idea, but I'd love to hear the explanation. :)

Okay, I'll jump in here and stir up the pot. Have done in the past, and still do to this day. Flying along in a non /G airplane. Request a direct clearance. ATC is informed of the VFR only GPS. They have asked me what heading do I need to get there. I inform them. They issued me a clearance to fly that heading. This is a legal loophole (if you want to call it that). Of course I was flying Part 91. When I change controllers, I advise them "Flying last assigned heading xxx". I have NEVER had a problem with this. Okay now, here it comes...:)

Quote:

Originally Posted by wizepilot (Post 757463)

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. You're one of the everyday people I mentioned earlier. (How's that for a flame?)

Quote:

Originally Posted by detpilot (Post 757408)

I'll bite- What's the "creased map" method. I think I have a general idea, but I'd love to hear the explanation. :)

If I'm thinking of the same thing, it's just a way to "draw" a straight line without ruler and pencil.

You take your chart, pinch your current position with one thumb and forefinger, then pinch your "direct" destination with another to create a crease that gives you a courseline between here and there. You then find a nearby VOR and the radial that parallels your courseline (or in the case of VOR too far away to receive, the VOR you are heading for) and, voila! – instant magnetic course. Calculate/estimate a wind correction and...

Essentially, it's dead reckoning. I've seen some pretty heated discussions about whether dead reckoning is legal under IFR, with positions falling generally into the "always", "never", and "in radar contact" categories. No clear guidance form the FAA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoyGonnaDoIt (Post 757546)

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. You're one of the everyday people I mentioned earlier. (How's that for a flame?)

Yeah, I'm one of those everyday people who has only been flying for 37 years. Go figure.:p

Me: "Center, whizbang 102?"

Center: "Whizbang 102, center."

Me: "Hey uh...it looks like a heading of xxx would really work out well for vectors to MYFIX. Can I get a vector direct?"

Center: "Whizbang 102, sure, fly heading 103 vectors to MYFIX."

Me: "Whizbang 102, heading 103 vectors to MYFIX. Thank you."

It's called a RADAR vector, folks. We get them all the time.

"Fly heading 120 vectors for your climb."

"Fly heading 080 vectors around airspace."

"Fly heading 180 vectors to final."

"Fly heading 360 vectors for controller amusement."

Really, it's not a big deal. Quit worrying about what the other guy is doing and fly your aircraft.

No, I've never clicked "direct" and flown that course with the clearance "cleared direct to___" using a handheld, but I've suggested headings for vectors. It's perfectly legal.

-mini

To add to what I said earlier. I have, on several occasions, had a controller ask ME if I had a handheld GPS onboard. I affirmed, and he asked what heading I needed to get to "X". Like mini said, it is a radar vector, therefore, it is legal. If they need you to change your course, believe me they will tell you. Okay, we have beat this one to death already. Move along...:D

Many of us have had them, even weekend warriors like me. Even have had them on IFR dual cross country training flights. The dialog can take some different forms but when both ATC and the pilot are on the same page they are essentially a radar vector. It's when the dialog doesn't take place that there's a potential for a problem.