The "Greenie aviation" thread got me thinking, why don't we fly more "direct to"?
I can understand the need for IFR airways in the "olden days" when we used to fly from navaid to navaid, but with GPS, particularly TSO 146a GPS, that is no longer necessary? So why are we still required to flightplan, as I understand it, to fly IFR designated routes or airways when in controlled airspace under radar coverage?
I can understand it when outside radar coverage it helps ATC know where I am, and I know some of the waypoints are ATC frequency/handover points but are they essential when within radar coverage? Does the radar system allow controllers to mark a point handover point?
For example, the designated IFR route from Townsville to Rockhampton is: YBTL-WALTA-BWN-MK-MURPH-YBRK
but lately, once I change to TL Appr, I am being given "track direct to MURPH"! Yippe! Way to go!
Why not "track direct to Rockhampton"?
A couple of months ago I decided to push the envelope a bit and flightplanned Toowoomba direct Townsville. On departure YTWB, once established with BN Centre I was cleared "direct Townsville", but I think that, theorectically at least, I am supposed to flightplan via designated IFR routes where possible.
Any ATC out there able to enlighten me?
Dr 