5
$\begingroup$

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.

$\endgroup$
6
$\begingroup$

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.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Agreed. Any reference? $\endgroup$ – Pugz Aug 13 '17 at 22:15
  • $\begingroup$ No references, just discussion with the people who go around designing the RNAV arrivals, when we were designing some for LIT. $\endgroup$ – slookabill Aug 13 '17 at 22:53

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.