DIY airways

[tmmorris]

Finding myself planning an off-airways IFR route the other day, the usual beacon-to-beacon below CAS kind of thing, I realised I was doing the same calculations as I'd done for other routes. After all, there are only so many beacons in the area I usually cover.

Then I thought, why not make a chart with the beacons shown, with routes between them, MSAs and max altitudes/FL's already calculated, distances, bearings, times, &c...

Then I realised I'd just reinvented airways, only outside CAS. So should I create a DIY low-level airways chart for southern England, for my own use...?

Or am I mad?

Tim

(PS yes, this shouldn't be necessary, IMC-rated pilots should have access to airways or an easier IR, &c &c, not to start those debates again :-) )

[jezbowman]

I've thought the same before. Every time I go somewhere there is often a common pattern to the start of the route. Like EGNX - DTY for Turweston, Elstree, Wellsbourne, Coventry, etc. So that line is always drawn on my map along with its radial.

I guess that 'EGNX - DTY' is a basic 'airway' for me.

If you did do a basic airways chart for outside CAS then it'd only be of use for planning, as you'd still need a 'proper chart' in the air. Plus if you are VFR, you need a VFR map to divert around CB's or other unexpected deviations from route. You can't do that without a VFR map (D/R areas, CAS, terrain, etc). Airways charts work becuase of the enviorment (Class A) in which you are flying, and that enviorment does'nt exsist in Class G AS.

I guess IFR wouldnt be so bad, providing you can assure a RAS for entire length of the journey.

If we did have a national publicised network of low-level 'airways' in uncontrolled AS then they could be published as such and encouraged for use for IFR/VFR flights alike, then VFR 'messing around with nowhere in-mind' types could stay clear. Then we could encourage use of the quad rule in the 'airway' for seperation, to save the work-load of radar controllers.

I do like the idea of a DIY chart for planning though, might give a Central England / Wales area one a go myself.

[tmmorris]

Depends how far you take it. You could mark DAs, RAs, airspace, &c. &c. on it - but then it would need to be checked regularly against chart updates and NOTAMs, for currency... I'm beginning to understand why AERAD is so expensive.

That said, if you made sure your charted altitudes/FLs avoided airspace problems, you could certainly use them IFR. You'd still need a 1/2-mil chart as a backup, perhaps with just a course line drawn on. You'd only need, therefore, to put on the chart airfields with an IAP, as if you became VFR you'd use the 1/2 mil chart, transferring to that as necessary.

I might give it a go and see how difficult the task turns out to be.

Tim

[drauk]

Why not just print a map for your specific route from NavBox Pro Plan? You can configure which of the elements you want to see (e.g. remove town outlines and terrain info if flying IFR). The one obvious thing that it won't do is put the radials and distances on the legs from beacon to beacon, but those are on the plog that it will print for you.

Other advantages are that the database can be regularly updated pretty cheaply and the maps are printed on plain paper which you can write all over and chuck away at the end of the trip. It'll also print a list of all the frequencies, morse code idents and so on.

[Algirdas]

The number of times I've seen planes following motorways @ 2000' makes me think that perhaps these are the real VFR airways?

[jezbowman]

The number of times I've seen planes following motorways @ 2000' makes me think that perhaps these are the real VFR airways?

Not much good in IMC though, are they? :)

[Algirdas]

Chocolate fireguards....

[tmmorris]

I had a go last night creating some routes around the CPT - CFD - DTY - HON - LIC - SWB - GST kind of area. It's very fiddly work, threading your way around the various things in the way, and that's without even starting to look at the DOC of the various navaids to check they are useable for the bits of the routes I want to use them for. Also, while the routes need to be clear of class A, there's a case for alternative 'direct' routes through class D - that way you could plan to use the class G version but ask for a routing through class D to cut off a corner and have it already planned for you on the chart.

It looks worthwhile. I'm writing max and min altitudes (min is usually MSA, max limited by airways above) but there are a worrying number of sectors in the London penumbra that have

____
4500
2500

written on them - not much latitude (ha ha)

Tim

[niknak]

Tim,

which demonstrates that, while your idea is entirely laudable, the practical application requires a precise overview for every trip.

This may be something that someone with your experience and currency may be able to cope with, without any difficulty, but without that experience and currency, it could be a recipie for disaster.