Victor and Jet routes?

[arrex 5]

Hi,

probably stupid remark: why LNM still uses the nomenclature of "Victor" and "jet" routes? AFAIK, this is something limited to the FAA and already obsolete btw... the rest of the program seems more adherent to ICAO standard (see for example regulations of class D airspaces). So, shouldn't these routes be called simply "high" and "low" altitude?

 

[albar965 1,047]

No so stupid remark, for sure. Skyvector shows J/V in North America and nothing in Europe.

In LNM this also has historical reasons like the airways having these names in FSX.

Thanks for the hint. Note taken. I keep this in mind and have to see how and if this can be solved.

Alex

[G550flyer 1,015]

8 hours ago, arrex said:

So, shouldn't these routes be called simply "high" and "low" altitude?

Yeah, in the USA and Canada, the V(Victor) is for VOR since these low altitude routes go from VOR to VOR. They are below 18000 MSL and have a designation such as V257 or V28. J(Jet) routes are 18000 MSL to 45000 MSL and use higher range high VORs. They are designated as J257 or J28. We also have Q routes that are mainly RNAV routes. We still use them here and will probably be around until we start moving away from VORs for navigation.