On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 10:45 -0500, John Denker wrote: > Bottom line: > -- When specifying pointlike positions, radials are rays i.e. half-lines > radiating /from/ the station. > -- When specifying course lines, radials are full lines.
OK, which is it? My initial *correction* was to 1) in this quote: > > First, some background information. Suppose we are up in the air, > > 10 nm west of KXYZ airfield (which is colocated with the XYZ > vortac). > > 1) If we were inbound to the field, I would report our position > > as 10 nm west, inbound on the 090 radial. > > 2) If we were outbound from the field, I would report our position > > as 10 nm out on the 270 radial. You indicate in this quote that for both cases 1) and 2) you "report our position as". So applying your own *bottom line* to the stated goal of reporting your position, 2) is the correct position independent of your course/heading. Position never depends on your course. The VOR/OBS/CDI don't know anything about your heading or course. 1) is at best ambiguous since by your own *bottom line*, you are reporting your position as on the 090 radial which contradicts the less specific position report "10 nm west". The "inbound" statement should communicate your approximate magnetic course, but since you have reported two totally contradictory positions, your course is unknown from this report. The controller should ask for clarification. Happy New Year and please close this flight plan, Dave -- Dave Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
