Questions regarding flight planning in America

[Jefferson 3]

Felipe, I'm brazilian, and gotta correct your statement. In brazil, there's a prediction, in fact, but for NDB's. VOR's will remain in use. (Dunno for how long, though)Some beacons will remain in use, mostly the ones acting as Locators on ILS assembles over the country.But most of 'em will be dismantled. My 2 cents.

[Turbine777 13]

Now if we're talking NDB's in the US, then yes, those started to be phased out years ago and already a ton are gone. I sigh with a little relief on the life of the VOR from Jeff's post. I still think they're pretty amazing for how they work and their simplistic function. Although over time with GPS really not 100% wide spread and still relatively young I'm sure I will probably see them turned off in my lifetime :(

[klk232 0]

Another good topic To illustrate just how good GPS is getting there are 3 oceanic tests of a system known as ATOPS, Which uses GPS and radio telemetry to track position far out over water. This has allowed reduction of in- trail spacing to as low as 30 - 50 miles instead of the 100 miles in trail in use over the NAT system. NY, ZAK, and ZHU oceanic sectors have been using these for a couple of years now.

[FACA 0]

Felipe, I'm brazilian, and gotta correct your statement. In brazil, there's a prediction, in fact, but for NDB's. VOR's will remain in use. (Dunno for how long, though)Some beacons will remain in use, mostly the ones acting as Locators on ILS assembles over the country.But most of 'em will be dismantled. My 2 cents.

Got to correct myself either, must have confused articles. But to make things clear, I´m just reading an article here of future of ATC here in Brazil and I´m putting here a basic roadmap. In 2009, ADS-C was already implemented in Atlantic FIR. Their (the military) prediction is that by 2015, ADS-B is implemented on the whole continental Brazil. And by 2020 aircraft will be able to execute direct routes, independent of VOR/NDB positioning (I think there was my mistake), only obeying SID/STAR. Talking about navigation precision, they´re planning RNP-2 in continental routes and RNP-4 on oceanic routes (the main one being the Euro-Sam corridor). If you want to read the whole article, in on the Aero Magazine N° 191 (a brazilian magazine, but if you want any more details from here, I can search and put on this topic. Can also talk with some miltaries, since some of the responsible for these changes are teachers at the university I study).

[realpilotsimpilot 11]

I think it may be a very long while before VORs are phased out in the U.S. There's a variety of reasons for this: GPS can be subject to signal degradation that renders it unsafe for use. (In fact, pilots are supposed to check a forecast on the GPS strength before taking off using it.) Many older aircraft are still in use and don't have GPS. Yes, this number is waning, but it will never be zero. And unlike NDBs (and approaches that rely on them), there aren't nearly as many overlays of VORs as there are NDBs. Sure, the number is increasing, but I think you're talking about along time before the go the way of the dodo. FWIW, when my NDB died, we took it out and didn't replace it. I missed it because I couldn't use it to get radio anymore, but not as a navigation usage.

[downscc 1,327]

In my opinion, the only reason we still have VORs is because the FAA is a very large inefficient bureaucracy. For example, they spent over US$10 Billion over a decade just studying the future airspace plan and there is nothing but reports to show for it. They have been studying ADS-B for years and so far have tested it in Alaska and started implementing it in slivers in the lower 48. I know there are lots of smart motivated people in the FAA but the organization as a whole can't seem to do anything quickly except respond to political emergencies.

[victorlima01 4]

Dan you should meet Brazil´s FAA. You´d be smiling and thankful for yours hehe. Not many people know this but bureaucracy was actually invented within the halls of Brazil´s FAA

[realpilotsimpilot 11]

In my opinion, the only reason we still have VORs is because the FAA is a very large inefficient bureaucracy. For example, they spent over US$10 Billion over a decade just studying the future airspace plan and there is nothing but reports to show for it. They have been studying ADS-B for years and so far have tested it in Alaska and started implementing it in slivers in the lower 48. I know there are lots of smart motivated people in the FAA but the organization as a whole can't seem to do anything quickly except respond to political emergencies.

Nice one, Dan. No argument here. They spent years and billions carefully redoing the Washington DC airspace, including the creation of Potomac unified approch from the separate ones they used to have here, and then threw it all in the crapper when they just plopped down some reactionary special flight rules without study or comment.

[asdf987 0]

In my opinion, the only reason we still have VORs is because the FAA is a very large inefficient bureaucracy. For example, they spent over US$10 Billion over a decade just studying the future airspace plan and there is nothing but reports to show for it. They have been studying ADS-B for years and so far have tested it in Alaska and started implementing it in slivers in the lower 48. I know there are lots of smart motivated people in the FAA but the organization as a whole can't seem to do anything quickly except respond to political emergencies.

And to think that CASA (Australia) are trying to copy the FAA :oNick Jones