Weird headings

Archive Flight Planning
1

I recently inputted the trip KSFM - ENE - LEB - MPV - KMPV and it gives very weird heading results compared to those given by the AOPA online planner. For example, between the VORs ENE & LEB, the magnetic course given by AOPA is 298 but on flightaware this is around 261 degrees (which I guess is magnetic heading using wind data given the slight fluctuations every time I input the plan). The numbers from AOPA and flightaware seem very different and I wondered if this is a bug? Otherwise, I’m very confused!

Best,

Chris

2

As the navlog says we’re providing the (magnetic) heading to expect, while it sounds like AOPA is providing the magnetic course.

3

The AOPA planner gives both magnetic course and magnetic heading and the differences are only ever a couple of degrees and not 30 degrees as shown by the Flightaware planner. Having spoken to several more pilots this definitely seems like a bug. The heading from ENE to LEB should be around 300 degrees after magnetic correction and in yesterday’s winds, the course change should not have been a difference of 30 degrees let alone in the wrong direction!

Chris

4

What’d AOPA provide as the magnetic heading?

5

Currently, AOPA gives the magnetic course from ENE to LEB as 298 and magnetic heading of 297 degrees whereas Flightaware gives 264 degrees!

6

Any luck on finding out why the headings given in the navlog are so wildly out with real-world magnetic heading? Has anyone else discovered the problem too?

7

I am new today to the flight planning software here, and in my first experiment I saw a bogus heading. Route KGOO RANGO OCTAD KBDN, 18:00 PDT today, altitude 140, KTAS 210 (which is bogus too for the COL3, but that’s another story); leg from RANGO to OCTAD, heading given as 8 (eight degrees) with winds 247@17. Two independent sources give the course as 343…341. With westerly winds the heading cannot be 8.

8

Hmm, looking into it.

9

I’ve got an idea- follow along on your sectional OR file IFR and fly the airways. OR better yet plot a course, figure out winds aloft, and your WCA. stop being lazy. Then do time, speed and distancr calculations. it’s called aviating!!
Pilots today drive me nuts. they want everything spoon fed. of they just use GPS.

10

We think the issue is only related to display. The distance/time/fuel should be correct, but the conversion from vectors to angles is likely the issue.

11

Too funny. If I file airways down my way, every ATC handoff I get is do you wish direct to destination or just say “approved direct destination”. The one time my GPS did go down, ATC offered me a 100 mile vector to home. I ain’t dumb, I took them up on it as the airways added 30 minutes to my flight.

I’ll take the lazy way of GPS direct :open_mouth: myself. Less error prone by virtual of less waypoints.

12

it’s easy to get direct when you’re the only traffic at 5000. a little different at FL350

13

Just to follow up, this has been resolved and the displayed headings should be correct.