Flying non-RNAV jets in Europe

[Michael Hatutian 1073781]

I commonly enjoy flying non-RNAV jets, especially the FJS 727 and 732 in X-Plane. While there is an option to use the default FMS in these planes, I generally prefer, if possible, the challenge of flying using conventional navaids.

 

The VOR-based airway system is still pretty in-tact in the US. In Europe, a glance at Skyvector indicates mostly RNAV airways, and I believe there is a rule in Europe now that you cannot go above FL95 without some RNAV capability, is that correct? If so, lets say I still throw together some route using VORs. With IFPS validation and all that nowadays I know it wouldn't be a "valid" route and would bust various restrictions. Would Vatsim European controllers have a problem with this? I'd think they'd be pretty accommodating since we're just flying sims after all. I just figured I'd ask since I've never tried flying non-GPS-equipped planes outside of the US on Vatsim. Or is there some way to "properly" plan and file these kind of routes, besides the /W equipment suffix?

[Andreas Fuchs]

Yeah, just do it, but insert a remark that you are doing this on purpose and not because you don't know better. For example RMK/NON-RNAV VOR NAV ONLY

[Magnus Meese]

If you're equipped with and utilize INS, you're RNAV. If you want radials and QDR/QDMs, just file direct legs between your navaids or use a relevant non-RNAV airway, whichever you prefer. The [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umption on VATSIM is that your non-standard route has been accepted by the relevant ANSPs, and any required route change will be ATC's job.

 

The only problem historically on VATSIM is that you might face new controllers who hasn't got a clue what you're on about when you say you're IFR but unable to accept RNAV procedures. I don't think this is as prevailent now with the recent years' push for a higher level of real procedure adoption and knowledge throughout, but it's good to keep in mind that someone who's just started may need a PM with a quick explanation of what's going on. (Don't jump the gun though, some might be slightly offended that you distrust their awesome ATC-God skills! )

 

Edit: Quick note on INS nav: A lot of newer SIDs, STARs and other RNAV procedures (often denoted RNAV 1, P-RNAV, RNP, etc) cannot legally be programmed fix by fix, but must be loaded at once from a nav-database, i.e. FMS or GPS Nav unit. Therefore, INS is increasingly just an enroute nav tool, and while you can create a non-RNAV procedure in INS they are usually easier to just fly on raw data.

Edited July 16, 2019 at 09:27 PM by Guest

[Andreas Fuchs]

[Alexander Vasiliev 1227370]

I like to fly conventional stuff too. Cant see any problems to do so, there is just some limit of FL ... cant say right now the exact numbers, but basically low-level route allows to fly non-rnav, so approx. FL280 or less .... damn, cant remember exact number. What we need to check - the airspace restriction to non-rnav. Thats it.

Yes, we can add remark or equip. note we are sort of A type, but generally we just can set type of aircraft this way.

If ATC asks us to navigate somwhere we could navigate, we just say unable and explain the reason.

So yes, we can fly non-rnav, cant see any problems.