There is an RNAV waypoint named STYCK co-located at what appears to be the exact location of the LOA VOR (coordinates match precisely as well). Why would the creation of a waypoint be necessary if IFR GPS/RNAV units/databases can take both VOR names and waypoints? Why not just use the VOR name that has existed there for over 50 years? Such a thing is regularly done in IFR SIDs and STARs when loading them into a GPS/FMS.


1 Answer 1


In the US, the FAA has done this alot, as in their long term plan to phase out a lot of the VORs. Doing that, they're preemptively just adding a Fix for procedures on top of the VOR so they don't have to update all the procedures when the VOR is decommissioned.

  • $\begingroup$ Agreed. Any reference? $\endgroup$
    – Pugz
    Commented Aug 13, 2017 at 22:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ No references, just discussion with the people who go around designing the RNAV arrivals, when we were designing some for LIT. $\endgroup$
    – slookabill
    Commented Aug 13, 2017 at 22:53
  • $\begingroup$ phase out a lot of the VORs - in that case, they'd have to phase out a lot of the small Cessna aircraft also - or what are those going to navigate with ? XD $\endgroup$
    – TheEagle
    Commented Feb 1, 2022 at 22:20
  • $\begingroup$ Programmer, there aren't a lot of non-GPS Cessnas out there, anymore. GPS is cheap and fits into a small space. Pilots of such aircraft usually take a hand-held GPS along, although these units are not certified for flying approaches. $\endgroup$
    – atc_ceedee
    Commented Feb 4, 2022 at 15:41

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .