RC fly heading xx until suitable

[Doug Moldenhauer 3]

This is just a heads op for people who have RC complaining that you are off the airway and fly heading xx until suitable.  Its one possible problem to this issue.  I'm sure others may know this but I thought it worth a mention and to save JD some typing

 

I use a online service for flight plan generation.  I use SimBrief.com.  It is a very professional free planner.   Anyway,  I've had some problems since I've used this planner with a route that I always fly when I want a short hop.   PHLI to PHOG (Hawaii).   I use the Aerosoft Airbus and when simbrief generates a plan,  it includes a VOR that is located at the airport.  This causes you to fly a SID as part of your departure with RC as the first waypoint is inside 30nm.  

 

Anyway,  I kept getting the fly xx until suitable even though I engage the Autopilot and FMC plan on departure.   The Airbus appears to see that it is close enough to the 1st Waypoint which is that VOR and considers the 1st waypoint has been achieved and goes on to the next one right after you leave the ground.  RC's window of achievement must be greater than that of the Airbus so it gets ###### you missed 

one of your waypoints and complains about it when your like 40nm out and wants you to turn around.

 

Just a heads up for people who use FMC's and get this complaint.  You may want to compare your RC flight plan and what your FMC thinks it is.   It may be because of this.

 

[ronzie 21]

Yes. In the departure phase the RC window is narrower than enroute for waypoint crossing credity. From the manual:

 

"IMPORTANT NOTE – DP checkpoint tolerance is 2 miles. You must fly to within 2 miles of a filed checkpoint for credit. You must receive credit for all filed checkpoints. Checkpoint tolerance outside 30 miles of your departure airport (enroute) is 5 miles."

 

It is recommended for fast aircraft that any VOR within in a short distance from the departing runway and not in line with it be removed from the flight plan.

 

Many airliners have a typical roll/bank limitation of fifteen degrees for passenger comfort and to reduce the chance of stalls at the slower speeds of initial departure. With the higher speeds of jetliners, this limitation may not allow crossing this initial close fix within the tight tolerance of the 2 nm crossing requirement.

 

Occasionally you may encounter  a ninety degree or more path change during a departure mapped route even further out than the RC 30 nm limit. Unless you keep the airliner at a slow speed, the rounding anticipation turn system will cause the turn to commence to far in advance to meet even the five nm limit so be aware of this. These typically occur in departing through mountainous territory.

 

Finally some on airport VORs exist to define points of starting turns as VOR/DME waypoints and are not meant to be over flown. Some also exist to place a path limit to avoid not turning soon enough to get into another airport's traffic airspace.

 

In other words, not every on or near airport VOR is a flyover waypoint.

[ronzie 21]

As far as I do regarding use of RC with an FMC type instrument with a terminal database of procedures, here is a tip sheet I wrote on what to include in the RC plan (FS plan) and what to use for procedures in the FMC to get the best sync between them:

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/owuz7p2ohx7y7st/fsb%20tips%20and%20update.pdf?dl=0

 

While based on FSB many other planners accommodate editing waypoint inclusions.

 

Besides navigraph, Aerosoft has the Navdata Pro product. Both offer a one-off update and for one fee you get as many formats as you require to match your planners and aircraft fleet that use these databases of enroute waypoints and terminal procedures.