Podcasts about rnav

Episode 390 Show Notes   Topic of the show: On this week's show, RH and AG discuss audio feedback from the Badger Pilot on best practices for conducting practice approaches if the tower is no longer participating in radar like services.  We also discuss parallel ILS/RNAV approaches, tons of checkride announcements, and more of your amazing aviation feedback/questions.    Feedback 1. Patron EM asks about visual separation on parallel RNAV approaches. 2. Patron SG shared some great audio of his co-pilot's radio skills.   Mentioned on the show: “For the 6th consecutive year, PilotEdge is hosting SimVenture- a virtual Oshkosh fly-in experience. Using a computer flight simulator, join hundreds of other pilots online and fly the iconic Fisk VFR arrival into Oshkosh a week ahead of the real AirVenture in order to prepare for your actual flight, or just experience the thrill of it for fun. And the best part? The voices you'll hear on the radio aren't just any controllers - they're the real Oshkosh air traffic controllers meaning you'll be getting as close to the real thing as possible, all from the comfort of your home cockpit.   SimVenture is happening July 11-13th on the PilotEdge flight simulator network. The event is free for new users. Visit pilotedge.net/simventure to learn more.”   Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don't be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com.  Music bumpers by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Legal Notice The views and opinions expressed on Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk are for entertainment purposes only and do not represent the views, opinions, or official positions of the FAA, Penguin Airlines, or the United States Army.  Episodes shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent. For official guidance on laws, rules, and regulations, consult an aviation attorney or certified flight instructor. 

Max talks about common gotchas with RNAV GPS approaches, especially when using vectors to final (VTF). The conversation picks up where Episode 383 left off, with listeners asking how vectors to final (VTF) influences glidepath capture on WAAS approaches. He explains that under normal circumstances—flying the approach via own navigation from an initial approach fix (IAF)—the GPS glidepath doesn't turn magenta or allow autopilot coupling until the FAF becomes the active waypoint. The magenta color indicates that the GPS receiver has completed a signal quality evaluation, verifying that the WAAS signal is good enough for LPV minimums. Until this point, the glidepath indicator remains a hollow white diamond, and the autopilot will not descend. However, activating VTF triggers this signal check immediately, regardless of the aircraft's location. If the aircraft's track is within approximately 100–110° of the final approach course, the glidepath indicator turns magenta and autopilot coupling becomes possible—even miles from the airport. This can be risky if the aircraft is outside the protected segment of the published procedure, especially in mountainous terrain where blindly following the glidepath can be hazardous. Max notes that activating VTF early, particularly from a downwind leg, may display the “SUSP” annunciator. He urges pilots not to press the SUSP button in this scenario, as it can inadvertently sequence legs inappropriately or disable the approach altogether. The SUSP annunciator will clear automatically during the final base-to-final turn, provided it's within 45° of the final approach course. The episode then shifts to a common gotcha with ILS and RNAV approaches when being vectored in close. If a controller brings an aircraft in at an altitude that puts it above the glidepath—and the vertical deviation indicator centers before the lateral CDI centers—the autopilot will capture lateral guidance but not vertical guidance. Max describes this firsthand from a recent Vision Jet flight into Orange County, where his awareness helped avoid a missed capture. If the autopilot fails to capture the glidepath due to this timing issue, pilots must use vertical speed (VS) mode to manually descend and re-intercept it. Responding to listener Matt's question, Max discusses the use of VNAV (Vertical Navigation) mode as another way to descend to the glidepath for early coupling. He clarifies that while VNAV is a separate topic, it's related because it can assist with managing step-down altitudes more precisely. If VNAV is properly configured—usually in conjunction with the APPR key—it can manage the descent and transition into the glidepath at the FAF. However, Max warns of several pitfalls: pilots often forget to dial in a lower altitude, which prevents descent; older G1000 systems may ignore VNAV commands if the top of descent (TOD) is more than five minutes away; and using VNAV may not align with ATC altitude restrictions. He concludes that while VNAV has become more reliable due to Garmin software improvements, it introduces complexity and requires careful verification of ATC clearances and altitude settings. If you're getting value from this show, please support the show via PayPal, Venmo, Zelle or Patreon. Support the Show by buying a Lightspeed ANR Headsets Max has been using only Lightspeed headsets for nearly 25 years! I love their tradeup program that let's you trade in an older Lightspeed headset for a newer model. Start with one of the links below, and Lightspeed will pay a referral fee to support Aviation News Talk. Lightspeed Delta Zulu Headset $1199 Lightspeed Zulu 3 Headset $899Lightspeed Sierra Headset $699 My Review on the Lightspeed Delta Zulu Send us your feedback or comments via email If you have a question you'd like answered on the show, let listeners hear you ask the question, by recording your listener question using your phone. News Stories DOT Begins Search for Lead Contractor in ATC Overhaul GAMI G100UL not universal enough to replace avgas in California Beta Makes First Electric Flight into New York's JFK Airport Spatial disorientation: GA's deadliest threat Model injured during photo shoot with Aviat pilot Pilot loses control on landing when feet get stuck on rudder North Pole man accused of flying while intoxicated Mentioned on the Show Buy Max Trescott's G3000 Book Call 800-247-6553 Lightspeed Delta Zulu Headset Giveaway Video of the Week: Canopies Open during A-26 Intruder Flight  NTSB News Talk Podcast UAV News Talk Podcast Rotary Wing Show Podcast Free Index to the first 282 episodes of Aviation New Talk So You Want To Learn to Fly or Buy a Cirrus seminars Online Version of the Seminar Coming Soon – Register for Notification Check out our recommended ADS-B receivers, and order one for yourself. Yes, we'll make a couple of dollars if you do. Get the Free Aviation News Talk app for iOS or Android. Check out Max's Online Courses: G1000 VFR, G1000 IFR, and Flying WAAS & GPS Approaches. Find them all at: https://www.pilotlearning.com/ Social Media Like Aviation News Talk podcast on Facebook Follow Max on Instagram Follow Max on Twitter Listen to all Aviation News Talk podcasts on YouTube or YouTube Premium "Go Around" song used by permission of Ken Dravis; you can buy his music at kendravis.com If you purchase a product through a link on our site, we may receive compensation.

Max Trescott examines the tragic crash of a Citation S550, N666DS, in San Diego during an attempted RNAV (GPS) 28R approach to Montgomery Field at approximately 3:46 AM. After departing Teterboro, NJ, and making a fuel stop at Wichita's Jabara Field, the pilot continued westbound overnight. After refueling, the flight continued to San Diego, where the Montgomery Field AWOS was inoperative, and weather was marginal. The pilot requested weather at nearby airports. The aircraft correctly crossed the final approach fix PENYY at 2500 feet but then flew below the glide path and failed to stabilize. Speeds decreased from 200 knots to 124 knots on final, increasing workload and destabilizing the descent. Flight path data suggests the pilot may have flown the approach as if it were a non-precision LNAV approach, mistakenly observing step-downs like the PALOS fix, which applies only to LNAV. Two level-offs occurred—one around 1300–1400 feet, then again at 500 feet—further evidence of a step-down approach profile, inconsistent with a stabilized LPV descent. Ultimately, the jet was 173 feet below LPV minimums and 440 feet below LNAV minimums when it leveled at 500 feet before crashing. The autopilot appeared to be disengaged near the end, with irregular lateral path and a brief climb after leveling at 500 feet. Fatigue may have played a significant role, as the pilot had been flying for over 7.5 hours and the crash occurred at 3:45 AM Pacific (6:45 AM Eastern), squarely in the circadian low period when alertness suffers. Max points out that older aircraft like this 40-year-old Citation often have non-intuitive or limited autopilot functionality for RNAV approaches. Social media commenters speculated the aircraft may have had either a non-WAAS FMS providing limited vertical guidance, or a Jet Tech STC'd Garmin 750 setup requiring autopilot workarounds. Either case complicates RNAV approach execution—especially when the pilot is tired. Given the ILS 28R approach was available and offered the same minimums, Max questions why the pilot didn't choose it. Even older autopilots generally handle ILS approaches more reliably than LPV. He concludes that while RNAV approaches are preferred in modern aircraft, an older jet with dated avionics at night, may warrant choosing the simpler, more robust ILS option. Max reiterates a fundamental safety takeaway: Always tailor your approach to the aircraft and situation. What works best in a G1000 or G3000 might not be safe in a 1980s-era Citation. And never underestimate the risks of fatigue, especially during early morning hours. If you're getting value from this show, please support the show via PayPal, Venmo, Zelle or Patreon. Support the Show by buying a Lightspeed ANR Headsets Max has been using only Lightspeed headsets for nearly 25 years! I love their tradeup program that let's you trade in an older Lightspeed headset for a newer model. Start with one of the links below, and Lightspeed will pay a referral fee to support Aviation News Talk. Lightspeed Delta Zulu Headset $1199 Lightspeed Zulu 3 Headset $899Lightspeed Sierra Headset $699 My Review on the Lightspeed Delta Zulu Send us your feedback or comments via email If you have a question you'd like answered on the show, let listeners hear you ask the question, by recording your listener question using your phone. Mentioned on the Show Buy Max Trescott's G3000 Book Call 800-247-6553 Lightspeed Delta Zulu Headset Giveaway Free Index to the first 282 episodes of Aviation New Talk So You Want To Learn to Fly or Buy a Cirrus seminars Online Version of the Seminar Coming Soon – Register for Notification Check out our recommended ADS-B receivers, and order one for yourself. Yes, we'll make a couple of dollars if you do. Get the Free Aviation News Talk app for iOS or Android. Check out Max's Online Courses: G1000 VFR, G1000 IFR, and Flying WAAS & GPS Approaches. Find them all at: https://www.pilotlearning.com/ Social Media Like Aviation News Talk podcast on Facebook Follow Max on Instagram Follow Max on Twitter Listen to all Aviation News Talk podcasts on YouTube or YouTube Premium "Go Around" song used by permission of Ken Dravis; you can buy his music at kendravis.com If you purchase a product through a link on our site, we may receive compensation.

Max tackles a common frustration among pilots: why RNAV (GPS) glide paths sometimes fail to couple with the autopilot. A recent Facebook post from a pilot flying a Cirrus SR22T triggered the discussion, as the poster encountered exactly this problem during an LPV approach, mistakenly attributing it to an expired database. Max explains that the real culprit was a fundamental misunderstanding of RNAV approach procedures. Unlike an ILS glide slope, which is a physical radio beam transmitted from ground equipment, an RNAV glide path is a computed construct generated by the aircraft's GPS navigator. It only becomes “real” for the autopilot to couple to when flown properly, following all step-down altitudes as published. A key indicator is the glide path diamond: it remains hollow and white until the aircraft crosses the fix before the Final Approach Fix (FAF), at which point it turns solid magenta, signaling that the autopilot can engage. Max emphasizes that this behavior contrasts with ILS approaches, where pilots sometimes get away with intercepting the glide slope from above. Doing so on RNAV approaches, however, won't work because the computed glide path isn't extended infinitely; it's activated only within a defined segment of the approach. To verify this, Max conducted simulator flights on multiple RNAV approaches. He discovered a consistent pattern: the glide path diamond always turned magenta while crossing the fix immediately before the FAF—not at a set distance before or after a particular waypoint. This nuance is crucial for ensuring autopilot capture and a stabilized approach. Drawing a parallel to AIM 5-4-5b, Max reinforces that both ILS and RNAV approaches are designed to be intercepted at specific altitudes. Deviating from these procedures risks automation surprises, or worse, capturing false glide slopes in the case of ILS. He recalls the Air India Express Flight 812 crash as a tragic example of why proper interception altitudes matter. The key takeaway is a simple formula for reliably flying RNAV approaches: descend to each step-down fix altitude, and ensure you're at the target altitude when crossing the fix before the FAF. When done correctly, the glide path diamond will turn magenta, allowing the autopilot to capture it and guide the descent. Max's detailed breakdown underscores why relying on social media for technical advice can be misleading. Instead, pilots should seek information from authoritative sources and understand the underlying principles behind automation behavior. By following published procedures and recognizing cues like the hollow versus solid glide path diamond, pilots can avoid surprises and maintain safe, stable approaches. If you're getting value from this show, please support the show via PayPal, Venmo, Zelle or Patreon. Support the Show by buying a Lightspeed ANR Headsets Max has been using only Lightspeed headsets for nearly 25 years! I love their tradeup program that let's you trade in an older Lightspeed headset for a newer model. Start with one of the links below, and Lightspeed will pay a referral fee to support Aviation News Talk. Lightspeed Delta Zulu Headset $1199 Lightspeed Zulu 3 Headset $899Lightspeed Sierra Headset $699 My Review on the Lightspeed Delta Zulu Send us your feedback or comments via email If you have a question you'd like answered on the show, let listeners hear you ask the question, by recording your listener question using your phone. News Stories ForeFlight integrates FAA weather cameras FAA Lifts Some Restrictions on Experimental Aircraft Duffy Will Allow Air Traffic Controllers to Work Past 56 ATC ‘hotline' between Pentagon and Reagan Washington National Airport broken since 2022 Pilot seriously injured when he forgets to remove wheel chocks Overrun Accident Traced to Pilot Fatigue, Other Factors Pilot Sentenced Over Threat to Kill Prospective Employer Mentioned on the Show Buy Max Trescott's G3000 Book Call 800-247-6553 Lightspeed Delta Zulu Headset Giveaway Video of the Week: Garmin AutoLand in SR22/G7 Tom Turner's Flying Lessons Weekly Free Index to the first 282 episodes of Aviation New Talk So You Want To Learn to Fly or Buy a Cirrus seminars Online Version of the Seminar Coming Soon – Register for Notification Check out our recommended ADS-B receivers, and order one for yourself. Yes, we'll make a couple of dollars if you do. Get the Free Aviation News Talk app for iOS or Android. Check out Max's Online Courses: G1000 VFR, G1000 IFR, and Flying WAAS & GPS Approaches. Find them all at: https://www.pilotlearning.com/ Social Media Like Aviation News Talk podcast on Facebook Follow Max on Instagram Follow Max on Twitter Listen to all Aviation News Talk podcasts on YouTube or YouTube Premium "Go Around" song used by permission of Ken Dravis; you can buy his music at kendravis.com If you purchase a product through a link on our site, we may receive compensation.

Max talks with Ranferi Denova about what pilots need to know about flying small planes to Mexico, though the advice applies broadly to international flights from the U.S., including to Canada and the Caribbean. Ranferi assures pilots that flying to Mexico is safe and rewarding, provided they plan ahead and follow proper procedures. He details aircraft and pilot documentation requirements, such as an airworthiness certificate, insurance, and an FCC radio license. He also explains essential paperwork, like the Mexican flight permit (A IU) and the newly required LOPA (Layout of Passenger Accommodations). Flight planning considerations include IFR versus VFR flights, the necessity of submitting an eAPIS manifest before departure, and understanding Mexican air traffic control procedures. Ranferi provides guidance on clearing customs both upon arrival and when returning to the U.S., emphasizing the importance of preparation and patience. Additionally, he discusses common pitfalls, offers practical tips for a smooth experience, and introduces tools like FlashPass to simplify the process. Whether heading to Mexico, Canada, or the Caribbean, pilots will gain valuable knowledge to navigate international flying confidently. If you're getting value from this show, please support the show via PayPal, Venmo, Zelle or Patreon. Support the Show by buying a Lightspeed ANR Headsets Max has been using only Lightspeed headsets for nearly 25 years! I love their tradeup program that let's you trade in an older Lightspeed headset for a newer model. Start with one of the links below, and Lightspeed will pay a referral fee to support Aviation News Talk. Lightspeed Delta Zulu Headset $1199 Lightspeed Zulu 3 Headset $899Lightspeed Sierra Headset $699 My Review on the Lightspeed Delta Zulu Send us your feedback or comments via email If you have a question you'd like answered on the show, let listeners hear you ask the question, by recording your listener question using your phone. News Stories High Winds in Texas lead to two jets going off runways HondaJet, N524HJ veers off runway NTSB issues final report for Nashville Saratoga crash FAA Probes False Alerts TCAS Alerts at Reagan National GE Aerospace's Catalyst turboprop engine has been certified by the FAA 100% Bonus Depreciation Return Could Ignite Aviation Industry FlightRadar24 is Fighting An Ongoing DDoS Cyber Attack Actor and pilot Gene Hackman has passed away Mentioned on the Show Buy Max Trescott's G1000 Book Call 800-247-6553 Buy Max Trescott's G3000 Book Call 800-247-6553 Max's January FLYING column: Choosing ILS vs RNAV approaches FlashPass App for making border crossings easy and fast Ranferi Denova's Flying to Mexico website Free Index to the first 282 episodes of Aviation New Talk So You Want To Learn to Fly or Buy a Cirrus seminars Online Version of the Seminar Coming Soon – Register for Notification Check out our recommended ADS-B receivers, and order one for yourself. Yes, we'll make a couple of dollars if you do. Get the Free Aviation News Talk app for iOS or Android. Check out Max's Online Courses: G1000 VFR, G1000 IFR, and Flying WAAS & GPS Approaches. Find them all at: https://www.pilotlearning.com/ Social Media Like Aviation News Talk podcast on Facebook Follow Max on Instagram Follow Max on Twitter Listen to all Aviation News Talk podcasts on YouTube or YouTube Premium "Go Around" song used by permission of Ken Dravis; you can buy his music at kendravis.com If you purchase a product through a link on our site, we may receive compensation.

Subscriber-only episodeClick the link to subscribe and listen now. The full length lesson for: RNAV Approach. If you already have a premium membership on wifiCFI then YOU SHOULD NOT SUBSCRIBE to this podcast membership as you are already receiving all exclusive content for free! It is included in your study courses.

Subscriber-only episodeClick the link to subscribe and listen now. The full length lesson for: RNAV Approach. If you already have a premium membership on wifiCFI then YOU SHOULD NOT SUBSCRIBE to this podcast membership as you are already receiving all exclusive content for free! It is included in your study courses.

Episode 293 Show Notes   Topic of the show: RH took a solo trip in the mighty Skyhawk from TRIAD to NYC to fly the Hudson Skyline route with Newark and LaGuardia Tower controllers!  Special thanks to N90, EWR, LGA, and all the radar controllers along the way.  Are you considering a trip to NYC to fly up the Hudson?  We try to explain the planning and navigation to make the trip fun and safe!  We also discuss RNAV vs. ILS approach clearances and training in the radar room.  This was a really fun episode and you won't want to miss it!   Timely Feedback: 1. Patron Sierra Mike sent some feedback about military flight training. 2. Patron Mike Delta shared some thoughts on reacting to stress and relying on training.   Feedback 1. Patron Alpha Delta asks about receiving an ILS clearance when setup for an RNAV which is identical. 2. SGAC Patron Kilo Juliet Papa Sierra asks about trainees monitoring their instructors.   Mentioned: link to NY SFRA training Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don't be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Keep the gunk and funk away from your most valuable pilot gear: https://pilotsaks.com/. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

Episode 279 Show Notes   Topic of the show: Lost Communications follow up!  We will discuss some of the mountain of feedback we received about our lost communication episode (OB278).  Have you done a systems deep dive in your aircraft to determine how you would determine what to do in the event of lost comms?  What tools can you bring with you on your next flight to add a layer of safety?  We also discuss turns on final to build space and minimum runway separation for arrivals.    Timely Feedback: 1. PATRON Echo Hotel shares thoughts on the lost communication scenario. 2. PATRON Charlie Kilo asks how far we can see a primary only target with no transponder. 3. SGAC PATRON Charlie Victor did a systems deep dive to prepare for lost communications. 4. PATRON Juliet Charlie has another classic rhyme to share with the OB community.   Feedback 1. PATRON Delta Papa asks what we would do in a crossing runway pinch? 2. PATRON “The Badger Pilot” shares a story of a recent encounter involving minimum runway separation.   Mentioned on the show: Reminder: we have opinions about certain items but we always want pilots to have the best information when flying in the real world.  Please don't let our opinions serve as a pass to break the rules.  When in doubt, clarify with ATC. https://opposingbases.libsyn.com/ob155-garbage-phraseology.  Skip to about 35 minutes in to hear our thoughts and opinions on straight-in phraseology.  And as always, refer to your CFII, DPE or FSDO for interpretations and applications of rules regarding approaches. Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don't be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Keep the gunk and funk away from your most valuable pilot gear: https://pilotsaks.com/. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

Episode 276 Show Notes (revised)   Topic of the show: On this week's show, RH and AG describe ways pilots can utilize the tools in their airplane to set up and fly a visual approach.  Can you follow the ILS glideslope or RNAV glideslope while you fly the visual approach?  Where is the fix ATC just cleared me to and why are they using it?  Find out some more tricks of the trade to be the best pilot you can!  We also discuss the use of “over” in ATC communication, takeoff clearance checklist items, and much, much more!  You don't want to miss this episode!   Timely Feedback: 1. PATRON Charlie Mike almost made the show schedule at SnF and uses tactical dehydration techniques now! 2. PATRON Papa Sierra shares the Australian background of CAVOK. 3. PATRON Charlie Victor shares some Navy insight into use of call signs.   Feedback 1. PATRON Juliet Whiskey shares a story of being in the ATC doghouse. 2. PATRON Bravo Yankee wants to know if we use a flow or checklist before clearing an aircraft for takeoff. 3. PATRON Juliet Whiskey sent audio about the use of “over”.   Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don't be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Keep the gunk and funk away from your most valuable pilot gear: https://pilotsaks.com/. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

Episode 253 Show Notes   Topic of the show: On this week's show, we will discuss some of the intricacies of filing an IFR flight plan to an airport without an instrument approach procedure.  What approach options exist?  Do you need an alternate airport?  And when you depart, what happens on the controller side of things when issuing your clearance?  We also discuss checkrides, atypical phraseology, and more of your awesome aviation feedback!    Timely Feedback: 1. Patron SC sent follow up to last week's episode topic. 2. Towers without FDIO can sometimes give you VFR codes.   Feedback Patron WM sent in a check ride story. Patron AD sent an audio question about phraseology he had never heard. Patron JM wants to know if they can change to a visual approach after starting an RNAV?   Mentioned: FOD Kills (links courtesy of SGAC Patron RB, thank you!) https://youtu.be/C-nALYF73hU https://youtu.be/8Oi8ZO-2Kvc   Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don't be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Keep the gunk and funk away from your most valuable pilot gear: https://pilotsaks.com/. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

233 What You Need to Know about Advisory Glide Slopes and Update on Cessna 208 Caravan Crash in Burley, ID + GA News Your Cirrus Specialist. Call me if you're thinking of buying a new Cirrus SR20 or SR22. Call 1-650-967-2500 for Cirrus purchase and training assistance, or to take my online seminar: So You Want to Fly or Buy a Cirrus. Join now as a member to support the show with a donation via PayPal or Patreon. Send us an email If you have a question you'd like answered on the show, let listeners hear you ask the question, by recording your listener question using your phone. Summary 233 Max talks about advisory glide slopes found on some RNAV approaches and what most pilots don't know about them. He also gives an update on the crash of a Cessna 208 Caravan that he talked about in episode 230, and how the advisory glide slope could have helped in that crash. We also hear from Marc Epner, who recently had an engine failure in his Cirrus SR22 and successfully landed in a field. News Stories Pilot Who Became Unconscious Mid-Flight Leaves Hospital Foreign pilots rush in as U.S. carriers struggle to staff up Landon Lucas, pilot known for emergency landing, survives NM crash NY State Supreme Court Keeps East Hampton Airport Public, for Now Near miss is actually a strike Pilot credentials will be investigated in fatal plane crash in Covington China Eastern Black Box Points to Intentional Nosedive Homeowner Backed for Threatening to Call Cops on HOA Over Airplane Pilots presumed dead in plane crash lost control in freak weather Man shines laser beam at helicopter believing it was a UFO Mentioned in the Show AIM: Avoid Flight in the Vicinity of Exhaust PlumesBurley, ID Plans to Move Airport, Lost FAA FundingBurley, ID FAA Recommends Shortening RunwayMarc Epner's Engine Out YouTube video SimpleFlight Radio podcast First commercial pilot with diabetes approved to fly Laser Eye Protection for Pilots Max's Books – Order online or call 800-247-6553 to order. Max Trescott's G3000 and G5000 Glass Cockpit HandbookMax Trescott's G1000 & Perspective Glass Cockpit Handbook If you love the show and want more, visit my Patreon page to see fun videos, breaking news, and other posts in the Posts section. And if you decide to make a small donation each month,  you can get some goodies! So You Want To Learn to Fly or Buy a Cirrus seminars Online Version of the Seminar Coming Soon – Register for Notification Check out our recommended ADS-B receivers, and order one for yourself. Yes, we'll make a couple of dollars if you do. Check out our recommended Aviation Headsets, and order one for yourself! Get the Free Aviation News Talk app for iOS or Android. Check out Max's Online Courses: G1000 VFR, G1000 IFR, and Flying WAAS & GPS Approaches. Find them all at: https://www.pilotlearning.com/ Social Media Like Aviation News Talk podcast on Facebook Follow Max on Instagram Follow Max on Twitter Listen to all Aviation News Talk podcasts on YouTube or YouTube Premium Max Trescott is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.

Join me as I discuss the alphabet soup of terminology surrounding the world of GPS/RNAV.  I know these terms can cause more than a little confusion for the new instrument pilot.  I'm hoping that this short explainer helps introduce the new instrument pilot.   Checkout Max Trescott's excellent podcast on the different kinds of RNAV approaches here:  Aviation News Talk EP146   Contact me at seth@vsl.aero with any of your feedback.  I would love to hear from you!  

Olá, seja muito bem-vindo ao StandardsCast EP #137 ATR. Neste episódio conversamos com Thiago Biesdorf (Coordenador de Flight Standards ATR) sobre as últimas novidades na frota ATR. Falamos sobre o uso do VNAV nas operações e abordamos todas as fases do voo onde sua utilização será possível, desde a decolagem até a descida e aproximação, quando o procedimento em uso for RNP ou RNAV, abordamos também um novo recurso com a chegada das mais novas aeronaves, o Reactive Windshear, suas características e os pontos de atenção para os nossos aviadores, e, por fim, comentamos sobre o SOP Revisão 08 que irá contemplar todas essas mudanças recentes e em breve estará disponível ao grupo. Link de acesso aos vídeos explicativos com o funcionamento completo do uso do VNAV em todas as fases do voo: • http://pvbps-sambavideos.akamaized.net/account/1069/1/2022-02-16/video/c2dd83f5132e98e3b463bcc061b1dc2f/c2dd83f5132e98e3b463bcc061b1dc2f_1080p.mp4 • http://pvbps-sambavideos.akamaized.net/account/1069/1/2022-02-16/video/f274d986ad145ed2a468045dda173f35/f274d986ad145ed2a468045dda173f35_1080p.mp4 Em caso de dúvidas, críticas ou sugestões, envie um e-mail para standardscast@voeazul.com.br. Este Podcast foi produzido pela Diretoria de Operações da Azul Linhas Aéreas. Em caso de divergência entre qualquer assunto técnico abordado e os documentos oficiais, os documentos prevalecerão. Todos os direitos reservados.

Episode 210 Show Notes   Topic of the show: The Terps Elf is back!  Another week of awesome feedback and aviation questions covering unlit towers, early descents from fuel savings land, fire fighting heroes, and non-RVSM airplanes above flight level 290.  You don't want to miss this episode!   Timely Feedback: 1. PATRON Delta Whiskey Sierra didn't think it was Abraham Lincoln on the tail of Alaska Airlines planes. 2. PATRON Hotel Tango Victor shares his thoughts on low level unlit tower NOTAMs. 3. Mike Delta shares a bird watching story. 4. Sierra Bravo shares a friendly tip on making ATC's day. Patron SI left feedback about center controller's knowledge of aircraft speed limitations.   Feedback PATRON Charlie Alpha highlights the heroic fire fighting pilots! Terps Elf shares input on a listener question about RNAV approaches.https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/procedures/ PATRON Mike Charlie asks for advice on avoiding early descents. Sierra Hotel asks about non radar towers and non RVSM equipped aircraft above FL290. Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don't be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Keep the gunk and funk away from your most valuable pilot gear: https://pilotsaks.com/. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

Episode 208 Show Notes   Topic of the show: AG and RH answer a listener question regarding the magic words to listen for in an approach clearance.  Are you being instructed to join the final approach course or are you being cleared for the approach?  Find out what to listen for and how to make sure you are on the same page as ATC.  This week is full of great questions, you don't want to miss it!   Timely Feedback: 1. Charlie Hotel sent fantastic audio about the snowflake icon on IAPs. 2. Alpha Foxtrot has evidence from a check ride that the snowflake icon matters. 3. Patron JJ sent audio about a wildlife encounter. 4. Patron SH has an idea why weather directions are so confusing.   Feedback Patron India Mike shares a wild fire TFR experience. Sierra Lima has added some verbiage to vectors and it seems to be welcomed by pilots. Mike Alpha Charlie shares a story of great ATC service.   Mentioned on the show: https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/Cold_Temp_Airports.pdf   Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don't be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Keep the gunk and funk away from your most valuable pilot gear: https://pilotsaks.com/. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

Episode 201 Show Notes   Topic of the show: VFR practice approaches and local pop-up IFR clearances are not the same thing and do not afford the pilot the same separation standards or cloud clearance latitude.  RH and AG discuss why a pilot must be clear in their request to ATC and have an understanding of why these two clearances are different.    Timely Feedback: 1. PATRON MEH sent kind words after flying home from Taco Truck Airport. Thank you! 2. PATRON DG couldn't make the show but sends their best. 3. PATRON JJ tried to remember to record audio but sent this message instead. Thank you! 4. Alpha Charlie started lessons with Opposing Bases as his pseudo ground school. 5. PATRON Mike Kilo sends tips on picking up IFR near ATC boundaries. PATRON Bravo Sierra has a new addiction and the product is very hard to find.   Feedback PATRON Papa Mike has a question about what we see when a pilot squawks VFR. PATRON Charlie Alpha Whiskey has a bird activity question. PATRON Juliet Mike has a question about suggested headings and metar wind direction. Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don't be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Keep the gunk and funk away from your most valuable pilot gear: https://pilotsaks.com/. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

Episode 199 Show Notes   Topic of the show: Wake turbulence is a flight hazard for all aircraft but especially dangerous for small, light airplanes.  Do non-pilot controllers understand the implications of squeeze plays with regard to wake turbulence encounters?  On this week's show we will break down arrival to departure wake turbulence minimums and how pilots can play a role in risk mitigation.    Timely Feedback: 1. PATRON Julie Echo Charlie shares some final thoughts on emergency operations and coordinations. 2. PATRON Charlie Hotel has a follow up on lost communications. 3. PATRON Juliet Juliet shares some final thoughts on flight following in near Bravo.   Feedback Juliet Foxtrot Sierra has a funny story about reviews/announcements. PATRON Delta Papa has a question about approach availability near a busy Bravo final. SGAC PATRON Juliet Sierra has a question about arrival gates. Sierra Foxtrot Charlie has a question about maneuvers during a visual approach.   200th Episode Live at TTA on October 23, 2021   Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don't be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Keep the gunk and funk away from your most valuable pilot gear: https://pilotsaks.com/. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

Episode 192 Show Notes   Topic of the show:  RH and AG heard from the listeners about techniques they use to resolve the RNAV vector to final issue with ATC.  We also discuss local flight following, emergency airspace, and clearances to unknown fixes.    Timely Feedback: 1. PATRON Mike Kilo sent audio about unmonitored navaids. 2. Dr. Kilo Bravo shares a medical opinion on the hypoxia case we spoke about. 3. PATRON Joe the Airbus Guy sent some awesome audio.   Feedback Long lost PATRON Captain Nick shares some audio about emergency airspace. PATRON Charlie Hotel shared audio about his painful push to talk button. PATRON Whiskey Oscar shared some audio about a local flight. PATRON Juliet Bravo has a question about a local pop up IFR. PATRON November Hotel asks about local flight following to and from same airport. PATRON Juliet Golf sheds light on a confusing clearance.   Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don't be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Keep the gunk and funk away from your most valuable pilot gear: https://pilotsaks.com/. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

Episode 191 Show Notes   Topic of the show: How much room below glideslope does a pilot have until they are too close to obstacles?  We hear from the Terps Elf about obstacle clearance on the ILS and the importance of maintaining your vertical path on the glideslope to avoid hitting the ground or obstacles.    Timely Feedback: 1. SGAC PATRON SE sent information about the dual transmitters. 2. PATRON Mike Zulu sent in a menagerie of older, lost feedback.   Feedback PATRON Papa Tango has a question about emergency tags. PATRON Juliet Mike sent vector to final feedback. Bravo Delta is back in the airplane after a long break! Juliet Kilo sent audio feedback.   Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don't be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Keep the gunk and funk away from your most valuable pilot gear: https://pilotsaks.com/. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

Episode 187 Show Notes   Topic of the show: When a pilot has the airport in sight, sometimes a visual approach clearance is delayed.  But when the controllers point out the airport and the pilot can't find the field, it can create problems for ATC.  Find out when super vision helps and when it hurts.  We also discuss law enforcement flights, hazardous missed approaches, and more of your awesome aviation questions.    Timely Feedback: PATRON Alpha Mike Bravo is curious about the recent TRIAD ATC situation. Sierra Papa has some feedback about “when able, cleared direct . . .” phraseology. SGAC PATRON Sierra Echo shares some tips on PDC and last minute flight plan changes.   Feedback SGAC PATRON MRM shares thoughts on the show. Welcome to Patreon! Hotel Bravo seeks some clarification on proper readbacks with altimeter settings. Tango Sierra is back in the saddle and doing their best to keep up! PATRON Charlie Alpha has a feedback catchup session: missed approaches and internal pep talks. Golf Hotel asks our thoughts on company policies that don't work with our plans. Tango Alpha has questions about being a good team player while performing emergency and law enforcement flights.   Mentioned on the show: (https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2019/aair/ao-2019-041/ ) Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don't be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Keep the gunk and funk away from your most valuable pilot gear: https://pilotsaks.com/. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

Episode 186 Show Notes   Topic of the show: A recent video on the internet sparked a conversation about Class Delta air traffic services, a pilot's responsibility to see and avoid other traffic, and the primary job of air traffic controllers.  In this week's episode, we will add our thoughts to the conversation.  A link to the video can be found in the show notes.   Timely Feedback: 1. SGAC Patron Darth Pilot responds to OB185 and vectors to final for an RNAV approach. 2. PATRON Sierra India (fellow controller) shares audio on what his center does everyday. 3. Romeo Alpha shares some audio about a random run in with ATC.   Feedback PATRON Echo Mike sent audio about facility changes and how it effects controllers. PATRON Juliet Echo Foxtrot asks about atrocious settings on the radar scope. PATRON Delta Hotel asks about non-ADSB radar identification and traffic alerts.   Mentioned on the show: AvWeb's Paul Bertorelli: https://youtu.be/FM3dmaC4z8E.  A reminder to our listeners: AG and RH do not speak on behalf of the FAA, Department of Transportation, or NATCA.  AG and RH are both rated flight instructors and air traffic controllers.  The hosts of this show express their own opinions.  The follow up blog can be found here. Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don't be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Keep the gunk and funk away from your most valuable pilot gear: https://pilotsaks.com/. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

Episode 185 Show Notes   Topic of the show: RH and AG discuss the importance of controllers having a basic understanding of the GPS/RNAV approach and vectors versus initial fix usage.  We discuss some easy tips for pilots and controllers to avoid confusion when executing RNAV approaches and issuing clearances.   All feedback episode!   Feedback *moved to OB186* PATRON Echo Charlie wants to know why he didn't get a “hold for release” clearance. PATRON Romeo Whiskey shares his solo story! Tango Mike asked about dual tower frequencies at busier airports. Juliet Bravo shares more fun facts about military solo operations. PATRON Tango Bravo asks about IFR route filing with fixes inside center airspace. PATRON Romoe November wants to know who is who and what is what in the TRACON. PATRON Echo Bravo want to learn about same runway separation.     No new question of the week Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don't be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Keep the gunk and funk away from your most valuable pilot gear: https://pilotsaks.com/. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

Dead Reckoning On May 21, 1927 Charles Lindbergh landed in Paris, France after a successful non-stop flight from the United States in the single-engined Spirit of St. Louis. As the aircraft was equipped with very basic instruments, Lindbergh used dead reckoning to navigate. Dead reckoning in the air is similar to dead reckoning on the sea, but slightly more complicated. The density of the air the aircraft moves through affects its performance as well as winds, weight, and power settings. The basic formula for DR is Distance = Speed x Time. An aircraft flying at 250 knots airspeed for 2 hours has flown 500 nautical miles through the air. The wind triangle is used to calculate the effects of wind on heading and airspeed to obtain a magnetic heading to steer and the speed over the ground (groundspeed). Printed tables, formulae, or an E6B flight computer are used to calculate the effects of air density on aircraft rate of climb, rate of fuel burn, and airspeed. A course line is drawn on the aeronautical chart along with estimated positions at fixed intervals (say every ½ hour). Visual observations of ground features are used to obtain fixes. By comparing the fix and the estimated position corrections are made to the aircraft's heading and groundspeed. Dead reckoning is on the curriculum for VFR (visual flight rules - or basic level) pilots worldwide. It is taught regardless of whether the aircraft has navigation aids such as GPS, ADF and VOR and is an ICAO Requirement. Many flying training schools will prevent a student from using electronic aids until they have mastered dead reckoning. Inertial navigation systems (INSes), which are nearly universal on more advanced aircraft, use dead reckoning internally. The INS provides reliable navigation capability under virtually any conditions, without the need for external navigation references, although it is still prone to slight errors. Transcontinental Airway System In 1923, the United States Congress funded a sequential lighted airway along the transcontinental airmail route. The lighted airway was proposed by National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), and deployed by the Department of Commerce. It was managed by the Bureau of Standards Aeronautical Branch. The first segment built was between Chicago and Cheyenne, Wyoming. It was situated in the middle of the airmail route to enable aircraft to depart from either coast in the daytime, and reach the lighted airway by nightfall. Lighted emergency airfields were also funded along the route every 15–20 miles. Construction pace was fast, and pilots wishing to become airmail pilots were first exposed to the harsh wintertime work with the crews building the first segments of the lighting system. By the end of the year, the public anticipated anchored lighted airways across the Atlantic, Pacific, and to China. The first nighttime airmail flights started on July 1, 1924. By eliminating the transfer of mail to rail cars at night, the coast to coast delivery time for airmail was reduced by two business days. Eventually, there were 284 beacons in service. With a June 1925 deadline, the 2,665 mile lighted airway was completed from New York to San Francisco. In 1927, the lighted airway was complete between New York City and Salt Lake City, Los Angeles to Las Vegas, Los Angeles to San Francisco, New York to Atlanta, and Chicago to Dallas, 4121 miles in total. In 1933, the Transcontinental Airway System totaled 1500 beacons, and 18000 miles. The lighted Airway Beacons were a substantial navigation aid in an era prior to the development of radio navigation. Their effectiveness was limited by visibility and weather conditions.Beacon 61B on a modern display tower, originally installed on route CAM-8 near Castle Rock, WA 24 inches (610 mm) diameter rotating beacons were mounted on 53-foot (16 m) high towers, and spaced ten miles apart. The spacing was closer in the mountains, and farther apart in the plains. The beacons were five million candlepower, and rotated six times a minute. "Ford beacons" (named after Ford Car headlights) were also used, placing four separate lights at different angles.Air ports used green beacons and airways used red beacons. The beacons flashed identification numbers in Morse code. The sequence was "WUVHRKDBGM", which prompted the mnemonic "When Undertaking Very Hard Routes Keep Directions By Good Methods".Engineers believed the variations of beacon height along hills and valleys would allow pilots to see beacons both above ground fog, and below cloud layers. Towers were built of numbered angle iron sections with concrete footings. Some facilities used concrete arrows pointing in the direction of towers. In areas where no connection to a power grid was available, a generator was housed in a small building. Some buildings also served as weather stations. Many arrow markings were removed during World War II, to prevent aiding enemy bombers in navigation, while 19 updated beacons still remain in service in Montana.   ADF An automatic direction finder (ADF) is a marine or aircraft radio-navigation instrument that automatically and continuously displays the relative bearing from the ship or aircraft to a suitable radio station. ADF receivers are normally tuned to aviation or marine NDBs (Non-Directional Beacon) operating in the LW band between 190 – 535 kHz. Like RDF (Radio Direction Finder) units, most ADF receivers can also receive medium wave (AM) broadcast stations, though as mentioned, these are less reliable for navigational purposes. The operator tunes the ADF receiver to the correct frequency and verifies the identity of the beacon by listening to the Morse code signal transmitted by the NDB. On marine ADF receivers, the motorized ferrite-bar antenna atop the unit (or remotely mounted on the masthead) would rotate and lock when reaching the null of the desired station. A centerline on the antenna unit moving atop a compass rose indicated in degrees the bearing of the station. On aviation ADFs, the unit automatically moves a compass-like pointer (RMI) to show the direction of the beacon. The pilot may use this pointer to home directly towards the beacon, or may also use the magnetic compass and calculate the direction from the beacon (the radial) at which their aircraft is located. Unlike the RDF, the ADF operates without direct intervention, and continuously displays the direction of the tuned beacon. Initially, all ADF receivers, both marine and aircraft versions, contained a rotating loop or ferrite loopstick aerial driven by a motor which was controlled by the receiver. Like the RDF, a sense antenna verified the correct direction from its 180-degree opposite. More modern aviation ADFs contain a small array of fixed aerials and use electronic sensors to deduce the direction using the strength and phase of the signals from each aerial. The electronic sensors listen for the trough that occurs when the antenna is at right angles to the signal, and provide the heading to the station using a direction indicator. In flight, the ADF's RMI or direction indicator will always point to the broadcast station regardless of aircraft heading. Dip error is introduced, however, when the aircraft is in a banked attitude, as the needle dips down in the direction of the turn. This is the result of the loop itself banking with the aircraft and therefore being at a different angle to the beacon. For ease of visualisation, it can be useful to consider a 90° banked turn, with the wings vertical. The bearing of the beacon as seen from the ADF aerial will now be unrelated to the direction of the aircraft to the beacon. VOR Very high frequency omni-directional range (VOR) is a type of short-range radio navigation system for aircraft, enabling aircraft with a receiving unit to determine its position and stay on course by receiving radio signals transmitted by a network of fixed ground radio beacons. It uses frequencies in the very high frequency (VHF) band from 108.00 to 117.95 MHz. Developed in the United States beginning in 1937 and deployed by 1946, VOR is the standard air navigational system in the world, used by both commercial and general aviation. In the year 2000 there were about 3,000 VOR stations operating around the world, including 1,033 in the US, reduced to 967 by 2013 (stations are being decommissioned with widespread adoption of GPS). A VOR ground station uses a phased antenna array to send a highly directional signal that rotates clockwise horizontally (as seen from above) 30 times a second. It also sends a 30 Hz reference signal on a subcarrier timed to be in phase with the directional antenna as the latter passes magnetic north. This reference signal is the same in all directions. The phase difference between the reference signal and the signal amplitude is the bearing from the VOR station to the receiver relative to magnetic north. This line of position is called the VOR "radial". The intersection of radials from two different VOR stations can be used to fix the position of the aircraft, as in earlier radio direction finding (RDF) systems. VOR stations are fairly short range: the signals are line-of-sight between transmitter and receiver and are useful for up to 200 miles. Each station broadcasts a VHF radio composite signal including the navigation signal, station's identifier and voice, if so equipped. The navigation signal allows the airborne receiving equipment to determine a bearing from the station to the aircraft (direction from the VOR station in relation to Magnetic North). The station's identifier is typically a three-letter string in Morse code. The voice signal, if used, is usually the station name, in-flight recorded advisories, or live flight service broadcasts. Area Navigation The continuing growth of aviation increases demands on airspace capacity, making area navigation desirable due to its improved operational efficiency. RNAV systems evolved in a manner similar to conventional ground-based routes and procedures. A specific RNAV system was identified and its performance was evaluated through a combination of analysis and flight testing. For land-based operations, the initial systems used very high frequency omnidirectional radio range (VOR) and distance measuring equipment (DME) for estimating position; for oceanic operations, inertial navigation systems (INS) were employed. Airspace and obstacle clearance criteria were developed based on the performance of available equipment, and specifications for requirements were based on available capabilities. Such prescriptive requirements resulted in delays to the introduction of new RNAV system capabilities and higher costs for maintaining appropriate certification. To avoid such prescriptive specifications of requirements, an alternative method for defining equipment requirements has been introduced. This enables the specification of performance requirements, independent of available equipment capabilities, and is termed performance-based navigation (PBN). Thus, RNAV is now one of the navigation techniques of PBN; currently the only other is required navigation performance (RNP). RNP systems add on-board performance monitoring and alerting to the navigation capabilities of RNAV. As a result of decisions made in the industry in the 1990s, most modern systems are RNP. Many RNAV systems, while offering very high accuracy and possessing many of the functions provided by RNP systems, are not able to provide assurance of their performance. Recognising this, and to avoid operators incurring unnecessary expense, where the airspace requirement does not necessitate the use of an RNP system, many new as well as existing navigation requirements will continue to specify RNAV rather than RNP systems. It is therefore expected that RNAV and RNP operations will co-exist for many years. However, RNP systems provide improvements in the integrity of operation, permitting possibly closer route spacing, and can provide sufficient integrity to allow only the RNP systems to be used for navigation in a specific airspace. The use of RNP systems may therefore offer significant safety, operational and efficiency benefits. While RNAV and RNP applications will co-exist for a number of years, it is expected that there will be a gradual transition to RNP applications as the proportion of aircraft equipped with RNP systems increases and the cost of transition reduces. INS Inertial navigation is a self-contained navigation technique in which measurements provided by accelerometers and gyroscopes are used to track the position and orientation of an object relative to a known starting point, orientation and velocity. Inertial measurement units (IMUs) typically contain three orthogonal rate-gyroscopes and three orthogonal accelerometers, measuring angular velocity and linear acceleration respectively. By processing signals from these devices it is possible to track the position and orientation of a device. Inertial navigation is used in a wide range of applications including the navigation of aircraft, tactical and strategic missiles, spacecraft, submarines and ships. It is also embedded in some mobile phones for purposes of mobile phone location and tracking  Recent advances in the construction of microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) have made it possible to manufacture small and light inertial navigation systems. These advances have widened the range of possible applications to include areas such as human and animal motion capture. An inertial navigation system includes at least a computer and a platform or module containing accelerometers, gyroscopes, or other motion-sensing devices. The INS is initially provided with its position and velocity from another source (a human operator, a GPS satellite receiver, etc.) accompanied with the initial orientation and thereafter computes its own updated position and velocity by integrating information received from the motion sensors. The advantage of an INS is that it requires no external references in order to determine its position, orientation, or velocity once it has been initialized. An INS can detect a change in its geographic position (a move east or north, for example), a change in its velocity (speed and direction of movement) and a change in its orientation (rotation about an axis). It does this by measuring the linear acceleration and angular velocity applied to the system. Since it requires no external reference (after initialization), it is immune to jamming and deception. Inertial navigation systems are used in many different moving objects. However, their cost and complexity place constraints on the environments in which they are practical for use. Gyroscopes measure the angular velocity of the sensor frame with respect to the inertial reference frame. By using the original orientation of the system in the inertial reference frame as the initial condition and integrating the angular velocity, the system's current orientation is known at all times. This can be thought of as the ability of a blindfolded passenger in a car to feel the car turn left and right or tilt up and down as the car ascends or descends hills. Based on this information alone, the passenger knows what direction the car is facing but not how fast or slow it is moving, or whether it is sliding sideways. Accelerometers measure the linear acceleration of the moving vehicle in the sensor or body frame, but in directions that can only be measured relative to the moving system (since the accelerometers are fixed to the system and rotate with the system, but are not aware of their own orientation). This can be thought of as the ability of a blindfolded passenger in a car to feel himself pressed back into his seat as the vehicle accelerates forward or pulled forward as it slows down; and feel himself pressed down into his seat as the vehicle accelerates up a hill or rise up out of their seat as the car passes over the crest of a hill and begins to descend. Based on this information alone, he knows how the vehicle is accelerating relative to itself, that is, whether it is accelerating forward, backward, left, right, up (toward the car's ceiling), or down (toward the car's floor) measured relative to the car, but not the direction relative to the Earth, since he did not know what direction the car was facing relative to the Earth when they felt the accelerations. However, by tracking both the current angular velocity of the system and the current linear acceleration of the system measured relative to the moving system, it is possible to determine the linear acceleration of the system in the inertial reference frame. Performing integration on the inertial accelerations (using the original velocity as the initial conditions) using the correct kinematic equations yields the inertial velocities of the system and integration again (using the original position as the initial condition) yields the inertial position. In our example, if the blindfolded passenger knew how the car was pointed and what its velocity was before he was blindfolded and if he is able to keep track of both how the car has turned and how it has accelerated and decelerated since, then he can accurately know the current orientation, position, and velocity of the car at any time. Global Positioning System The Global Positioning System (GPS), originally Navstar GPS, is a satellite-based radionavigation system owned by the United States government and operated by the United States Space Force. It is one of the global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) that provides geolocation and time information to a GPS receiver anywhere on or near the Earth where there is an unobstructed line of sight to four or more GPS satellites. Obstacles such as mountains and buildings block the relatively weak GPS signals. The GPS does not require the user to transmit any data, and it operates independently of any telephonic or internet reception, though these technologies can enhance the usefulness of the GPS positioning information. The GPS provides critical positioning capabilities to military, civil, and commercial users around the world. The United States government created the system, maintains it, and makes it freely accessible to anyone with a GPS receiver. The GPS project was started by the U.S. Department of Defense in 1973, with the first prototype spacecraft launched in 1978 and the full constellation of 24 satellites operational in 1993. Originally limited to use by the United States military, civilian use was allowed from the 1980s following an executive order from President Ronald Reagan after the Korean Air Lines Flight 007 incident. Advances in technology and new demands on the existing system have now led to efforts to modernize the GPS and implement the next generation of GPS Block IIIA satellites and Next Generation Operational Control System (OCX). Announcements from Vice President Al Gore and the Clinton Administration in 1998 initiated these changes, which were authorized by the U.S. Congress in 2000. During the 1990s, GPS quality was degraded by the United States government in a program called "Selective Availability"; this was discontinued on May 1, 2000 by a law signed by President Bill Clinton. The GPS service is provided by the United States government, which can selectively deny access to the system, as happened to the Indian military in 1999 during the Kargil War, or degrade the service at any time. As a result, several countries have developed or are in the process of setting up other global or regional satellite navigation systems. The Russian Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS) was developed contemporaneously with GPS, but suffered from incomplete coverage of the globe until the mid-2000s. GLONASS can be added to GPS devices, making more satellites available and enabling positions to be fixed more quickly and accurately, to within two meters (6.6 ft). China's BeiDou Navigation Satellite System began global services in 2018, and finished its full deployment in 2020. There are also the European Union Galileo positioning system, and India's NavIC. Japan's Quasi-Zenith Satellite System (QZSS) is a GPS satellite-based augmentation system to enhance GPS's accuracy in Asia-Oceania, with satellite navigation independent of GPS scheduled for 2023. When selective availability was lifted in 2000, GPS had about a five-meter (16 ft) accuracy. GPS receivers that use the L5 band can have much higher accuracy, pinpointing to within 30 centimeters (11.8 in). As of May 2021, 16 GPS satellites are broadcasting L5 signals, and the signals are considered pre-operational, scheduled to reach 24 satellites by approximately 2027.

28 November, 2016. The aircraft was an Avro RJ85, registration CP-2933, serial number E.2348, which first flew in 1999. After service with other airlines and a period in storage between 2010 and 2013, it was acquired by LaMia, a Venezuelan-owned airline operating out of Bolivia. The captain was 36-year-old Miguel Quiroga, who had been a former Bolivian Air Force (FAB) pilot and had previously flown for EcoJet, which also operated the Avro RJ85. He joined LaMia in 2013 and at the time of the accident he was one of the airline's co-owners as well as a flight instructor. Quiroga had logged a total of 6,692 flight hours, including 3,417 hours on the Avro RJ85. The first officer was 47-year-old Fernando Goytia, who had also been a former FAB pilot. He received his type rating on the Avro RJ85 five months before the accident and had had 6,923 flight hours, with 1,474 of them on the Avro RJ85. Another pilot was 29-year-old Sisy Arias, who was undergoing training and was an observer in the cockpit. She had been interviewed by TV before the flight. The party flew with a different airline from São Paulo to Santa Cruz, where it boarded the LaMia aircraft. The refuelling stop at Cobija was cancelled following a late departure from Santa Cruz. The aircraft was carrying 73 passengers and 4 crew members on a flight from Viru Viru International Airport, in the Bolivian city of Santa Cruz de la Sierra, to José María Córdova International Airport, serving Medellín in Colombia, and located in nearby Rionegro. Among the passengers were 22 players of the Brazilian Associação Chapecoense de Futebol club, 23 staff, 21 journalists and 2 guests. The team was travelling to play their away leg of the Final for the 2016 Copa Sudamericana in Medellín against Atlético Nacional. Chapecoense's initial request to charter LaMia for the whole journey from São Paulo to Medellín was refused by the National Civil Aviation Agency of Brazil because the limited scope of freedom of the air agreements between the two countries, under International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) rules, would have required the use of a Brazilian or Colombian airline for such a service. The club opted to retain LaMia and arranged a flight with Boliviana de Aviación from São Paulo to Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia, where it was to board the LaMia flight. LaMia had previously transported other teams for international competitions, including Chapecoense and the Argentina national team, which had flown on the same aircraft two weeks before. The flight from São Paulo landed at Santa Cruz at 16:50 local time. The RJ85 operating LaMia flight 2933 departed Santa Cruz at 18:18 local time. A Chapecoense team member's request to have a video game retrieved from his luggage in the aircraft's cargo delayed departure. The original flight plan included an intermediate refueling stop at the Cobija–Captain Aníbal Arab Airport, near Bolivia's border with Brazil; however, the flight's late departure meant the aircraft would not arrive at Cobija prior to the airport's closing time. An officer of Bolivia's Administración de Aeropuertos y Servicios Auxiliares a la Navegación Aérea (AASANA – Airports and Air Navigation Services Administration) at Santa Cruz de la Sierra reportedly rejected the crew's flight plan for a direct flight to Medellín several times despite pressure to approve it, because of the aircraft's range being almost the same as the flight distance. The flight plan was approved by another AASANA officer. The distance between Santa Cruz and Medellín airports is 1,598 nautical miles (2,959 km; 1,839 mi). A fuel stop in Cobija would have broken the flight into two segments: an initial segment of 514 nautical miles (952 km; 592 mi) to Cobija followed by a flight of 1,101 nautical miles (2,039 km; 1,267 mi) to Medellín, a total of 1,615 nautical miles (2,991 km; 1,859 mi).Bogotá's airport is 1,486 nautical miles (2,752 km; 1,710 mi) from Santa Cruz's airport and 116 nautical miles (215 km; 133 mi) from Medellín's. The flight crew anticipated a fuel consumption of 8,858kg for their planned route of 1,611nmi (including 200kg for taxiing). After refueling at Santa Cruz, CP2933 had 9,073kg on board. ICAO regulations would have required them to carry a total fuel load of 12,052kg, to allow for holding, diversion and other contingencies. The RJ85's fuel tanks have a capacity of 9,362kg. At around 21:16, approximately 180nmi from their destination, the aircraft displayed a low fuel warning. At this point they were 77nmi from Bogotá, but the crew took no steps to divert there, nor to inform ATC of the situation. The RJ85 continued on course and began its descent towards Medellín at 21:30. Another aircraft had been diverted to Medellín from its planned route (from Bogotá to San Andres) by its crew because of a suspected fuel leak. Medellín air traffic controllers gave that aircraft priority to land and at 21:43 the LaMia RJ85's crew was instructed to enter a racetrack-shaped holding pattern at the Rionegro VHF omnidirectional range (VOR) radio navigation beacon and wait with three other aircraft for its turn to land. The crew requested and were given authorisation to hold at an area navigation (RNAV) waypoint named GEMLI, about 5.4 nautical miles (10 km; 6 mi) south of the Rionegro VOR. While waiting for the other aircraft to land, during the last 15 minutes of its flight, the RJ85 completed two laps of the holding pattern. This added approximately 54 nautical miles (100 km; 62 mi) to its flight path. At 21:49, the crew requested priority for landing because of unspecified "problems with fuel", and were told to expect an approach clearance in "approximately seven minutes". Minutes later, at 21:52, they declared a fuel emergency and requested immediate descent clearance and "vectors" for approach. At 21:53, with the aircraft nearing the end of its second lap of the holding pattern, engines 3 and 4 (the two engines on the right wing) flamed out due to fuel exhaustion; engines 1 and 2 flamed out two minutes later, at which point the flight data recorder (FDR) stopped operating. Shortly before 22:00 local time on 28 November (03:00 UTC, 29 November), the pilot of the LaMia aircraft reported an electrical failure and fuel exhaustion while flying in Colombian airspace between the municipalities of La Ceja and La Unión. After the LaMia crew reported the RJ85's electrical and fuel problems, an air traffic controller radioed that the aircraft was 0.1 nautical miles (190 m; 200 yd) from the Rionegro VOR, but its altitude data were no longer being received. The crew replied that the aircraft was at an altitude of 9,000 feet (2,700 m); the procedure for an aircraft approaching to land at José María Córdova International Airport states it must be at an altitude of at least 10,000 feet (3,000 m) when passing over the Rionegro VOR. Air traffic control radar stopped detecting the aircraft at 21:55 local time as it descended among the mountains south of the airport. At 21:59 the aircraft hit the crest of a ridge on a mountain known as Cerro Gordo at an altitude of 2,600 metres (8,500 ft) while flying in a northwesterly direction, with the wreckage of the rear of the aircraft on the southern side of the crest and other wreckage coming to rest on the northern side of the crest adjacent to the Rionegro VOR transmitter facility, which is in line with runway 01 at José María Córdova International Airport and about 18 kilometres (9.7 nmi; 11 mi) from the southern end. Profile of the flight's last 15 minutes Helicopters from the Colombian Air Force were initially unable to get to the site because of heavy fog in the area, while first aid workers arrived two hours after the crash to find debris strewn across an area about 100 metres (330 ft) in diameter. It was not until 02:00 on 29 November that the first survivor arrived at a hospital: Alan Ruschel, one of the Chapecoense team members. Six people were found alive in the wreckage. The last survivor to be found was footballer Neto who was discovered at 05:40. Chapecoense backup goalkeeper Jakson Follmann underwent a potentially life-saving leg amputation. 71 of the 77 occupants died as a result of the crash. The number of dead was initially thought to be 75, but it was later revealed that four people had not boarded the aircraft. Colombian Air Force personnel extracted the bodies of 71 victims from the wreckage and took them to an air force base. They were then taken to the Instituto de Medicina Legal in Medellín for identification. The Grupo de Investigación de Accidentes Aéreos (GRIAA) investigation group of Colombia's Unidad Administrativa Especial de Aeronáutica Civil (UAEAC or Aerocivil – Special Administrative Unit of Civil Aeronautics) began investigating the accident and requested assistance from BAE Systems (the successor company to British Aerospace, the aircraft’s manufacturer) and the British Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) as the investigative body of the state of the manufacturer. A team of three AAIB accident investigators was deployed. They were joined by investigators from Bolivia's national aviation authority, the Dirección General de Aeronáutica Civil (DGAC – General Directorate of Civil Aviation). In all, twenty-three specialists were deployed on the investigation; in addition to ten Colombian investigators and those from Bolivia and the United Kingdom, Brazil and the United States contributed personnel to the investigation. On the afternoon of 29 November the UAEAC reported that both flight recorders – the flight data recorder (FDR) and cockpit voice recorder (CVR) – had been recovered undamaged. Evidence very quickly emerged to suggest that the aircraft had run out of fuel: the flight attendant who survived the accident reported that the captain's final words were "there is no fuel", and transmissions to that effect from the pilots to ATC were overheard by crews of other aircraft, and recorded in the control tower. Shortly after the crash, the person leading the investigation stated that there was "no evidence of fuel in the aircraft" and the aircraft did not catch fire when it crashed. Analysis of the FDR showed all four engines flamed out a few minutes before the crash. The investigation found that LaMia had consistently operated its fleet without the legally required endurance fuel load, and had simply been lucky to avoid any of the delays that the mandated fuel load were meant to allow for. An investigative report by Spanish-language American media company Univision, using data from the Flightradar24 website, claimed that the airline had broken the fuel and loading regulations of the International Civil Aviation Organization on 8 of its 23 previous flights since 22 August. This included two direct flights from Medellín to Santa Cruz: one on 29 October transporting Atlético Nacional to the away leg of their Copa Sudamericana semifinal, and a flight without passengers on 4 November. The report claimed the eight flights would have used at least some of the aircraft's mandatory fuel reserves (a variable fuel quantity to allow for an additional 45 minutes of flying time), concluding the company was accustomed to operating flights at the limit of the RJ85's endurance. On 27 April 2018, the investigators, led by Aerocivil, released the final investigative report for the crash of Flight 2933, listing the following causal factors: The airline inappropriately planned the flight without considering the necessary amount of fuel that would be needed to fly to an alternate airport, fuel reserves, contingencies, or the required minimum fuel to land; The four engines shut down in sequence as a result of fuel exhaustion; Poor decision making by LaMia employees "as a result of processes that failed to ensure operational security"; Poor decision making by the flight crew, who continued the flight on extremely limited fuel despite being aware of the low fuel levels aboard the aircraft and who did not take corrective actions to land the aircraft and refuel. Additional contributing factors cited by the investigators were: Deploying the landing gear early; "Latent deficiencies" in the planning and execution of non-regular flights related to the insufficient supply of fuel; Specific deficiencies in the planning of the flight by LaMia; "Lack of supervision and operational control" by LaMia, which did not supervise the planning of the flight or its execution, nor did it provide advice to the flight crew; Failure to request priority or declare an emergency by the flight crew, particularly when fuel exhaustion became imminent; these actions would have allowed air traffic services to provide the necessary attention; Failure by the airline to follow the fuel management rules that the Bolivian DGAC had approved in certifying the company; Delays in CP-2933's approach to the runway resulting from its late declaration of priority and of fuel emergency, added to dense traffic in the Ríonegro VOR area. The CVR had recorded the pilots discussing their fuel state and possible fuel stops en route, but they were so accustomed to operating with minimal fuel that they decided against a fuel stop when ATC happened to assign them an adjustment in their route which saved a few minutes of flight time. For unknown reasons, the CVR stopped recording an hour and forty minutes before the FDR, when the aircraft was still about 550 nautical miles (1,020 km; 630 mi) away from the crash site at the Rionegro VOR. Aviation analyst John Nance and GRIAA investigators Julian Echeverri and Miguel Camacho would later suggest that the most probable explanation is that the flight's captain, who was also a part owner of LaMia, pulled the circuit breaker on the CVR to prevent a record of the subsequent discussions, knowing that the flight did not have the appropriate fuel load. The aircraft was estimated to be overloaded by nearly 400 kilograms (880 lb). Due to restrictions imposed by the aircraft not being compliant with reduced vertical separation minima (RVSM) regulations, the submitted flight plan, with a nominated cruising flight level (FL) higher than 280 (approximately 28,000 feet (8,500 m) in altitude), was in violation of protocols. The flight plan, which was filed with AASANA, included a cruising altitude of FL300 (approximately 30,000 feet (9,100 m)). The flight plan was sent for review to Colombian and Brazilian authorities as well, in accordance with regional regulations. A week after the crash, Bolivian police detained the general director of LaMia on various charges, including involuntary manslaughter. His son, who worked for the DGAC, was detained for allegedly using his influence to have the aircraft given an operational clearance. A prosecutor involved with the case told reporters that "the prosecution has collected statements and evidence showing the participation of the accused in the crimes of misusing influence, conduct incompatible with public office and a breach of duties." An arrest warrant was issued for the employee of AASANA in Santa Cruz who had refused to approve Flight 2933's flight plan - it was later approved by another official. She fled the country seeking political asylum in Brazil, claiming that after the crash she had been pressured by her superiors to alter a report she had made before the aircraft took off and that she feared that Bolivia would not give her a fair trial. A warrant was also issued for the arrest of another of LaMia's co-owners, but he still had not been located four weeks after the crash.

In this episode I talk about how my instrument checkride went. (I FAILED!)I talk about the oral portion (which I passed), the types of questions I was asked, what helped me to study, the pre-flight portion, the flight portion that I passed and where everything went wrong.Part 2 will come as soon as my next check ride is scheduled and taken.

AC Health was established in 2015 as a wholly owned subsidiary of Ayala Corp (AC PH). Although the entity contributes less than an estimated 5% of AC's RNAV, AC Health is a hidden gem in AC's portfolio as it is positioned in the fast growing healthcare sector with exposure in drugstores, medicine delivery, clinics, hospitals and tele-health services. In this episode of Captains Speak, Maybank Kim Eng hosts AC Health's Chief Digital Officer Christian Besler and its Strategy & External Affairs associate, Dr Nikki Bautista, on the company's business strategy.

Instrument approaches have evolved greatly over the years.  From the old VOR/DME approaches to ILS, and RNAV GPS approaches. With each new type of approach came more precision. GPS and WAAS-based instrument approaches have changed the way we fly. These approaches are very precise and have decreased our reliance on ground-based navigation facilities.  But what happens if they fail?San Carlos Flight Center invites Assistant Chief Pilot Brian Eliot to discuss what to do when you are flying an RNAV approach, and encounter an RNAV or WAAS failure. These RNAV approaches are easier to fly and more precise than the traditional approaches. With WAAS and GPS services available 99.99% of the time, it is hard to think about what would happen if they were to fail. Sometimes failures do happen, and it is crucial that we know how to handle them.Join us, as Brian discusses what to do and how to train for these rare occurrences. You will then be prepared to handle this outage like a pro.

Olá, seja muito bem-vindo ao StandardsCast EP #13 A320neo. Nesse episódio conversamos com Pedro Raposo e Bárbara Alday (coordenador e assistente de Flight Standards da frota, respectivamente) sobre uma série de novidades de certificação da frota: BARO/VNAV, RNAV 10, ILS CAT II e iPad como EFB. Falamos sobre detalhes técnicos da certificação e sobre aspectos operacionais desses procedimentos no nosso dia a dia. Em caso de dúvidas, críticas ou sugestões, envie um e-mail para standardscast@voeazul.com.br. Este Podcast foi produzido pela Diretoria de Operações da Azul Linhas Aéreas. Em caso de divergência entre qualquer assunto técnico abordado e os documentos oficiais, os documentos prevalecerão. Todos os direitos reservados.

Olá, seja muito bem-vindo ao StandardsCast B737 EP. 1. Neste episódio recebemos o coordenador de Flight Standards do equipamento, Pablo Dezontini para falar sobre curiosidades da operação cargueira, que vão desde a apresentação para as programações de voo, divisão de tarefas na aeronave, acompanhamento do carregamento, principais rotas operadas, quantidade de carga transportada por voo e anualmente e muito mais. Aproveitamos esse episódio para desmistificar algumas informações relacionadas ao B737 cargueiro, como operação RNAV, BARO-VNAV e muito mais. Em caso de dúvidas, críticas ou sugestões, envie um e-mail para standardscast@voeazul.com.br. Este Podcast foi produzido pela Diretoria de Operações da Azul Linhas Aéreas. Em caso de divergência entre qualquer assunto técnico abordado e os documentos oficiais, os documentos prevalecerão. Todos os direitos reservados.

Episode 139 Show Notes   Topic of the show: This week on Opposing Bases, we discuss a listener’s story when he busted Bravo accidentally.  Why did it happen? What did they do to solve the issue with ATC?  What can we learn from his story?  This and more feedback and questions from the listeners.    Timely Feedback: PATRON Mike Kilo shares his thoughts on the show and the names of his cats. PATRON Charlie Alpha is sad AG didn’t sing the ATC Sak jingle. PATRON Tango Whiskey’s brush with fame in the TRIAD airspace.     Feedback PATRON Charlie Alpha asks about conflicting departures and missed approaches. PATRON Foxtrot Kilo shared some information about fatigue and degrading performance. PATRON Mike Kilo shares his thoughts on TAA RNAV clearances. Tango Sierra shares an update on his airport and final B747 flights. Check it out: https://www.bne.com.au/blog/behind-scenes/runway-begins Tango Mike asks about RNAV vs GNSS equipped planes. PATRON Local Mike Bravo shares a story about flight following. Charlie Bravo asks about transponder codes.   Question of the Week/Month Do you have a story you’d like to share regarding fatigue?  It could be with work, driving, flying, anything.  Did your decision making skills suffer from a lack of sleep?  Would you repeat the incident knowing what you know now?  Tell us by clicking this link. Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don’t be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

Episode 132 Show Notes   Topic of the show:  This week, RH and AG discuss the differences between approach types in terms of pilot and controller workload and difficulty.   What is our favorite type of approach and why?  And of course, more of your awesome questions!   Timely Feedback: Delta Yankee has timely feedback about the closely spaced parallel approaches and visual conditions. PATRON Delta Bravo shares a lesson in Bay Area reporting points near Valley Airport and the Pruneyard!   Feedback PATRON Bravo Sierra asks about the timing of filing an IFR flight plan. PATRON Oscar Charlie has a potpourri of untimely feedback. PATRON Echo Hotel asks about procedure during poor radio coverage transitions. PATRON Sierra Hotel sent a link and asks us to interpret this helicopter procedure. Tango Sierra asks about rejecting transponder codes. PATRON Romeo Lima Hotel sent in this great link. They read our minds!   Question of the Week/Month What can we learn from the Class Bravo airspace violator exchange we’ve all heard by now?  Where can the pilot improve and how do you think the controller handled the issue?     Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can support  our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website.  Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don’t be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com.  Third party audio provided by liveatc.net.  Friends of the show and maker of bags to protect your ATC headset from dust and germs: ATCSaks.com. Legal Notice  The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications.

RNAV ApproachWatch the video versions at www.wificfi.comwifiCFI by Axiom AviationSupport the show (http://www.wificfi.com)

136 Flying the Cirrus Vision Jet, Landing at O’Hare, and Challenging IFR Departures + GA News Your Cirrus Specialist. Call me if you're thinking of buying a new Cirrus SR20 or SR22. Call 1-650-967-2500 for Cirrus purchase and training assistance, or to take my online seminar: So You Want to Fly or Buy a Cirrus. Please help support the show with a donation via PayPal or Patreon. Send us an email If you have a question you'd like answered on the show, let listeners hear you ask the question, by recording your listener question using your phone. Summary136 Max flew 75 hours in the Vision Jet in the past five weeks, and he talks about those experiences, including landing at Chicago O’Hare. He also talks about a complicated IFR departure from Brackett Field that felt like it was from the 1950s, and he argues for updating some Obstacle Departure Procedures to make them easier to fly with new modern RNAV capable glass cockpits. News Stories FAA Releases Advisory Circular Covering ADS-B Ops Mexico Delays ADS-B Mandate Until 2022 Survey Seeks Pilot Input on FAA Tests Garmin launches electronic ‘steam’ instruments Mooney furloughs employees again, walks back holiday pay Toyota invests millions in Joby eVTOL New initiative launches to offer long term aircraft rentals to student pilots ForeFlight founder, astronaut among Texas Aviation Hall of Fame Class of 2020 FAA releases NOTAM for Super Bowl traffic Cell Phone Departs Mooney Over Open Desert: Guess What Happens Next Pilot blames accident on his dog Mentioned in the ShowJim’s Shelter Cove Video C-130 Aircraft Incident UpdatePilot and two spectators killed in Guatemala airshow crashKobe Bryant Dies in Helicopter CrashWhy insurance rates are increasing 10 to 100 percent A lesson for Life – Air Facts Journal Downwind Or Downhill? Pilots, OTC Drugs Can Be Interactively Bad FAA Aviation Safety: Pilots and Medication If you love the show and want more, visit my Patreon page to see fun videos, breaking news, and other posts in the Posts section. And if you decide to make a small donation each month,  you can get some goodies! So You Want To Learn to Fly or Buy a Cirrus seminars Online Version of the Seminar Coming Soon - Register for Notification Check out our recommended ADS-B receivers, and order one for yourself. Yes, we'll make a couple of dollars if you do. Check out our recommended Aviation Headsets, and order one for yourself! Get the Free Aviation News Talk app for iOS or Android. Check out Max's Online Courses: G1000 VFR, G1000 IFR, and Flying WAAS & GPS Approaches. Find them all at: https://www.pilotlearning.com/ Social Media Follow Max on Instagram Follow Max on Twitter Follow Max on YouTube Listen to all Aviation News Talk podcasts on YouTube or YouTube Premium Max Trescott is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.

The US airspace system is undergoing massive changes in the wake of RNAV and GPS. Learn about the high-altitude redesign (HAR), non-restrictive routing (NRR), RNAV routes, and other projects underway to redesign the highways in the sky.

After an unanticipated en route stop-over throws a curve to an experienced crew, they fall victim to an error of omission that could have been disastrous. Leaving Denver International Airport for their homeward leg, they trip up on what has become an alarmingly common problem: pilots not briefing for altitude restrictions on standard instrument departures, or SIDs. Fortunately, an alert controller catches the error in time to avoid an imminent traffic conflict. The Gulfstream pilot in this episode owned up to his mistake. This is a larger systemic problem than you might think, a team of aviation experts concurs. Topics the episode will cover: RNAV approach and departure procedures/SIDs & STARs Altitude restrictions "Climb/Descend Via" terminology

What information do controllers use to vector and clear aircraft for instrument approaches?  Position, Turn, Altitude, Clearance . . . how do they know the script to read for all 18 airports in TRIAD airspace?  AG and RH discuss the logistics of ILS approaches, visual approaches, and non-precision RNAV approaches.  Have a great week and thanks for listening!  Visit our website at OpposingBases.com You can now support our show using Patreon or visiting our support page on the website. Keep the feedback coming, it drives the show! Don’t be shy, use the “Send Audio to AG and RH” button on the website and record an audio message. Or you can send us comments or questions to feedback@opposingbases.com. Find us on twitter @opposing_bases.  Music by audionautix.com. Legal Notice The hosts of Opposing Bases Air Traffic Talk podcast are speaking on behalf of Opposing Bases, LLC.  Opposing Bases, LLC does not represent the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  All opinions expressed in the show are for entertainment purposes only.  There is no nexus between Opposing Bases, LLC and the FAA or NATCA.  All episodes are the property of Opposing Bases, LLC and shall not be recorded or transcribed without express written consent.  For official guidance on laws and regulations, refer to your local Flight Standards District Office or Certified Flight Instructor.  Opposing Bases, LLC offers this podcast to promote aviation safety and enhance the knowledge of its listeners but makes no guarantees to listeners regarding accuracy or legal applications. Support the show

Thanks for downloading the Plane Safety Podcast with Pilot Pip. In this episode we're joined by regular co-host, Captain Al.  We catch up on our latest news as we change airlines and aircraft.... plenty to talk about. And we're answering (belatedly !!) all your Squawkbox feedback questions, including discussions on rostering, drunk passengers, performance, RNAV and more. If you want to contact the show then please visit www.planesafetypodcast.com or email feedback@planesafetypodcast.com   Thanks for listening. Pip

Misidentifying airports and landing at the wrong runway has plagued pilots for generations. Typically, the two airports are within 10 miles of each other and have similar runway orientations. But the wrong runway may be significantly shorter. From NTSB: Without adequate preparation, robust monitoring, and cross-checking of position using all available resources, flight crews may misidentify a nearby airport that they see during the approach to their destination airport. The risk of an accident increases because the runway at the wrong airport may not be long enough to accommodate the landing airplane, and other aircraft operating at the airport may also be unaware of potential conflicting traffic. Air traffic controllers may not detect a wrong airport landing in time to intervene because of other workload or radar coverage limitations. Related incidents The following incidents involving air carriers landing at the wrong airport occurred within 2 months of each other: On January 12, 2014, about 1810 local time, a Boeing 737-7H4, Southwest Airlines flight 4013, landed at the wrong airport in Branson, Missouri, in night visual meteorological conditions (VMC). The airplane was scheduled to fly from Chicago Midway International Airport, Chicago, Illinois, to Branson Airport. Instead, the flight crew mistakenly landed the airplane at M. Graham Clark Downtown Airport, Branson, Missouri. The flight crew reported that they were flying direct to a fix for an area navigation (RNAV) approach. They advised the air traffic controller that they had the airport in sight; they were then cleared for the visual approach. Although the correct destination airport was depicted on their cockpit displays, the flight crew reported flying to the airport that they visually identified as their destination; once the airport was in sight, they did not reference their cockpit displays. The airplane stopped at the end of the 3,738-ft runway after a hard application of the brakes. (DCA14IA037) On November 21, 2013, about 2120 local time, a Boeing 747-400LCF (Dreamlifter) landed at the wrong airport in Wichita, Kansas, in night VMC. The airplane was being operated as a cargo flight from John F. Kennedy International Airport, Jamaica, New York, to McConnell Air Force Base, Wichita, Kansas. Instead, the flight crew mistakenly landed the airplane at Colonel James Jabara Airport, Wichita, Kansas. The flight crew indicated that during their approach to the airport, they saw runway lights that they misidentified as McConnell Air Force Base. The flight was cleared for the RNAV GPS 19L approach, and the flight crew saw Jabara but misidentified it as McConnell. The flight crew then completed the flight by visual reference to the Jabara runway. Once on the ground at Jabara, the flight crew was uncertain of the airplane’s location until confirmed by the McConnell Air Force Base tower controller. The Jabara runway is 6,101 ft long, whereas McConnell runways are 12,000 ft long. What can flight crews do? Adhere to standard operating procedures (SOPs), verify the airplane’s position relative to the destination airport, and use available cockpit instrumentation to verify that you are landing at the correct airport. Maintain extra vigilance when identifying the destination airport at night and when landing at an airport with others in close proximity. Be familiar with and include in your approach briefing the destination airport’s layout and relationship to other ground features; available lighting such as visual glideslope indicators, approach light systems, and runway lighting; and instrument approaches. Use the most precise navigational aids available in conjunction with a visual approach when verifying the destination airport. Confirm that you have correctly identified the destination airport before reporting the airport or runway is in sight.  

Thanks for downloading the Plane Safety Podcast with Pilot Pip. In this episode we're talking about Performance Based Navigation, RNP & RNAV. If you'd like to donate to my London Marathon Walk appeal, raising money for the Thames Valley Air Ambulance then please click here If you would like to contact the show please email feedback@planesafetypodcast.com You can also find us on Twitter @psafetypodcast and on Facebook. Thanks for listening.

In this aviation podcast we review the ins and outs of linear scaling of your CDI on the GPS when operating under IFR. Know your technology and Fly Your Best!

In an airspace increasingly composed of RNAV fixes and the routes they define, the FAA has introduced new phraseology for the delivery of IFR clearances: … Continued

We shoot the RNAV 36 approach at Flint, Michigan's Bishop International Airport (KFNT).  Lots of audio from the cockpit on this one.  We'll start on the ground at Pontiac (KPTK), take off, get handed off a few times, and then shoot the approach using GPS.  Lots of interaction with the controllers and we explain what's going on all the way through.  Check out the show notes at www.airspeedonline.blogspot.com for a link to the approach plate so you can follow along.