The flight crew of an MD80 flying in ZDV airspace is concerned that the distance between navigation ...

Attributes
ACN	419034
Time
Date	199810
Day	Sat
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : fqf
State Reference	CO
Altitude	msl bound lower : 33000 msl bound upper : 33000
Environment
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zdv
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	MD-80 Super 80
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	cruise other
Route In Use	enroute : direct
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
ASRS Report	419034
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact none taken : insufficient time
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Chart Or Publication
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

Flight from dfw to yyc was rted on route xx. This route goes from falcon VOR to billings VOR. This is a segment distance of 407 mi without any jet airway nor any brown direct routing. How is this legal? How do I navigation in the event of no radio and unable to hear a ZDV vector? What is the reference for this legality? Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: after the analyst conferred with ARTCC, the reporter was called in order to counsel with him regarding the legality of route over area where there is inadequate VOR coverage. Reporter was informed that as long as the aircraft is in ARTCC radar coverage it was not necessary to have a specific or direct route line on a map drawn for him. If he had navigation radio failure he would be in contact with ARTCC for navigation information. If all radios failed, he would be flying by dead reckoning, the same as if he was flying a specific airway. ARTCC stated the reference for this was 7110.65L 4-4-1. Reporter's company was given this question, but at the time of this writing, there has been no company reply to him.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: THE FLC OF AN MD80 FLYING IN ZDV AIRSPACE IS CONCERNED THAT THE DISTANCE BTWN NAV FIXES IS TOO GREAT FOR THEIR NAV CAPABILITY AND BELIEVES IT NOT TO BE A LEGAL ROUTING.

Narrative: FLT FROM DFW TO YYC WAS RTED ON RTE XX. THIS RTE GOES FROM FALCON VOR TO BILLINGS VOR. THIS IS A SEGMENT DISTANCE OF 407 MI WITHOUT ANY JET AIRWAY NOR ANY BROWN DIRECT ROUTING. HOW IS THIS LEGAL? HOW DO I NAV IN THE EVENT OF NO RADIO AND UNABLE TO HEAR A ZDV VECTOR? WHAT IS THE REF FOR THIS LEGALITY? CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: AFTER THE ANALYST CONFERRED WITH ARTCC, THE RPTR WAS CALLED IN ORDER TO COUNSEL WITH HIM REGARDING THE LEGALITY OF RTE OVER AREA WHERE THERE IS INADEQUATE VOR COVERAGE. RPTR WAS INFORMED THAT AS LONG AS THE ACFT IS IN ARTCC RADAR COVERAGE IT WAS NOT NECESSARY TO HAVE A SPECIFIC OR DIRECT RTE LINE ON A MAP DRAWN FOR HIM. IF HE HAD NAV RADIO FAILURE HE WOULD BE IN CONTACT WITH ARTCC FOR NAV INFO. IF ALL RADIOS FAILED, HE WOULD BE FLYING BY DEAD RECKONING, THE SAME AS IF HE WAS FLYING A SPECIFIC AIRWAY. ARTCC STATED THE REF FOR THIS WAS 7110.65L 4-4-1. RPTR'S COMPANY WAS GIVEN THIS QUESTION, BUT AT THE TIME OF THIS WRITING, THERE HAS BEEN NO COMPANY REPLY TO HIM.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.

The flight crew of an MD80 flying in ZDV airspace is concerned that the distance between navigation fixes is too great for their navigation capability and believes it not to be a legal routing.