Re: [Flightgear-devel] radials

[John D. <sf...@av...>]

On 01/03/2007 09:07 PM, Dave Perry wrote:

> This may seem a nit.  I had the following quote "drilled" into my mind
> by Don Berman in one of his well know Instrument Written Ground School
> seminars.
> 
> "Radials eminate from the station; direction of flight has nothing to
> do with location."  

1) That's is correct w.r.t logic and etymology;  radials
  "should" radiate.

2) I assume that is correct w.r.t written tests, although I
  haven't personally checked lately.

3) OTOH that nit is not correct w.r.t real-world flying.  As
  documentation I offer FAA Order 7110.65R : "Air Traffic Control"
    http://www.faa.gov/ATPubs/ATC/
  in particular chapter 5 section 6 : "Vectoring"
    http://www.faa.gov/ATPubs/ATC/Chp5/atc0506.html
  which agrees with my experience of what controllers
  actually say.  If you are west of the station inbound, the
  may give you vectors to intercept the 090 radial inbound.

  They call it a radial.  They are /required/ to call it a
  radial.  That Order does not explicitly require them to call
  it the 090 radial (as opposed to the 270 radial) but in
  practice they do call it 090, for the obvious practical
  reasons:  090 is also the /course/ they want you to fly.
  It would be madness for them to mention anything involving
  270.  Nitpickers might suggest they call it the 090 bearing
  or the 090 anti-radial or whatever ... but in practice they
  call it the inbound radial.  By way of documentation on this
  specific point I refer to
    http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/CNT/2-1-I.htm
    http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/FSS/fss0504.html
  among other FAA documents which use the phrase "inbound radial"
  without the slightest hesitation.


There are many other instances where you need to know one thing
when taking the written test, and need to know something quite
different for flying in the real world.  Unless otherwise specified,
you can assume what I say comes from the real-world point of view.