Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-82
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure; Airspace Structure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: The aircraft assigned was placarded FMS inoperative. While certainly not optimal for our flight to the northeast; MD-80's are certified to navigate with VORs and I viewed losing this tool as an inconvenience. Just about the only Controller who seemed aware of our limitations was the departure airport Tower; who gave us the heading listed on the departure. Everyone else was surprised that we were unable to accept direct clearances to intersections or VORs that were out of range. Specifically; when we approached within approximately five minutes of the ZZZ VOR (which for the last quarter of a century has been remarkable for its miserable function) we notified ATC we were unable to receive it and requested an amended clearance. [By the way; ZZZ VOR was on our flight plan and we saw no NOTAMs concerning it.] ATC gave us something we could work with; but a similar problem occurred later on the arrival. Again; as we approached within an estimated five minutes of ZZZ1 VOR; we notified ATC of no signal and that we were VOR only. They hadn't realized that; but; 'Oh; yes. I see that now.' We received another heading and made our way to the airport; finishing out the flight uneventfully. [There was a note on the flight plan which stated; 'Radar required between the intersection and ZZZ1 VOR due to VOR restrictions.' We didn't arrive over the intersection and it didn't say that the entire NAVAID was out of service. In any case; we expected that if ATC needed something special from us; they would let us know.] On the next leg back; we were again planned over the ZZZ VOR. This time we let the Controller know we could not accept it and; just for information; how long has it been out? 'Years'; was the reply. Controller after Controller seemed unaware of our equipment code; even though when asked if it was on their strip; they all admitted; 'yes'. My recommendation is that no MD-80 be dispatched to the northeast without a functioning FMS. Next; our flight planning software needs to be reviewed to find out why inoperative [and] un-NOTAMed NAVAIDs are included in flight routes with non-RNAV equipment. And; finally; we all need to realize that the day of non-RNAV backed VOR navigation is over. The entire system is simply no longer able to efficiently [or even safely] accommodate it.




Synopsis: An MD-80 crew dispatched with an inoperative FMC had to notify ATC about enroute navigation deficiencies near unusable NAVAIDs because controllers did not see the flight plan code indicating a lack of Advanced Navigation Equipment.