How to fly the Flight Following

Gema Goeyardi

Gema Goeyardi

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Oct 7, 2016
Messages
14
Location
Van Nuys
Display Name
Display name:
Gema Goeyardi
Flying in controlled airspace offers many benefit to VFR pilots. As we know that mid-air collision sit at the top 3 reason of the aviation accident, then thinking about traffic awareness must be considered as an important aspect when flying.

As a student pilot who apply for a private pilot, you must very clear about airspace management and the VFR pilot responsibility to the traffic separation. Let say you are flying at Southern California around Van Nuys airport which is under Burbank Class C airspace.

Flying in Van Nuys is really challenging. It is one of the busiest general aviation airport in USA which sits under Charlie Airspace of Burbank and very near with Bravo airspace of Los Angeles. Therefore, it is a mandatory to be familiar with all airspace regulations and area

The second trouble is the traffic itself. Southern California offers you a great training experience with lot of general aviation traffics from small airplane to the jumbo jets. Hence the ATC provides a flight following service that could help you to avoid any troubles regarding traffics, alert about terrain, giving some vectors, and many more.


MORE READING.....
 
Gema Goeyardi said:
Flying in controlled airspace offers....
Click to expand...

All airspace in the US is controlled. Granted, the rules are more stringent between Class A and Class E, but there are rules (controls) for EVERY inch of airspace. Just like airports are towered or non-towered but they are controlled. (insert links to THOSE discussions here)
 
Yes, Golf included. It is documented and the rules are spelled out. The King's like to call it "Go for it" but nonetheless it is charted airspace with a specific set of rules.
 
I missed the question here.

Yes, flight following is an excellent service that ATC provides for VFR pilots.
 
rolivi said:
Yes, Golf included. It is documented and the rules are spelled out. The King's like to call it "Go for it" but nonetheless it is charted airspace with a specific set of rules.
Click to expand...
Thanks a lot for your enlightenment... Literally it is uncontrolled however, it is always be monitored. Is that you mean?

Nice discussion, thx a lot.
 
My understanding is that the definition of Controlled Airspace is "that airspace in which some or all of the aircraft contained therein may be under Air Traffic Control authority".

Under that definition there is most certainly airspace in the U.S. which is not Controlled Airspace.

It does not mean there are no rules.

Unless something has changed very recently.

Decent article here: http://www.boldmethod.com/learn-to-fly/airspace/class-g-airspace/
 
FastEddieB said:
My understanding is that the definition of Controlled Airspace is "that airspace in which some or all of the aircraft contained therein may be under Air Traffic Control authority".

Under that definition there is most certainly airspace in the U.S. which is not Controlled Airspace.

It does not mean there are no rules.

Unless something has changed very recently.
Click to expand...
I agree with this..

Uncontrolled and Unruled are different. So it could be uncontrolled but still has a rule...

What do you think?
 
FastEddieB said:
My understanding is that the definition of Controlled Airspace is "that airspace in which some or all of the aircraft contained therein may be under Air Traffic Control authority"
Click to expand...

Using this definition, "Uncontrolled Airspace is that airspace in which NO AIRCRAFT MAY BE under ATC authority"

Cue the music @roncachamp will be along to shortly to school me on the ATC view of this query. :)
 
rolivi said:
Using this definition, "Uncontrolled Airspace is that airspace in which NO AIRCRAFT MAY BE under ATC authority"

Cue the music @roncachamp will be along to shortly to school me on the ATC view of this query. :)
Click to expand...

You could be doing a surveillance approach in class G and still be under "ATC authority." ;)
 
FastEddieB said:
And that would be correct, right?
Click to expand...

It is the correct antithesis to the stated definition. But how does one know they are in a place where no aircraft may be under ATC authority?

If you're doing a GPS approach to a Class G airport are you under ATC authority? Do you have to close that flight plan on landing at said Uncontrolled place? Or do you cancel IFR when it's time to Go For It?
 
rolivi said:
It is the correct antithesis to the stated definition. But how does one know they are in a place where no aircraft may be under ATC authority?

If you're doing a GPS approach to a Class G airport are you under ATC authority? Do you have to close that flight plan on landing at said Uncontrolled place? Or do you cancel IFR when it's time to Go For It?
Click to expand...

My take is that once you leave Controlled Airspace, NO aircraft under ATC authority will be in that airspace.

Depart from non-towered airport in Class G and anyone can be in that airspace. In IMC there may legally be aircraft in that airspace sans clearance of any sort. If filed IFR, no clearance is required or assumed until entering Controlled Airspace. ATC has no authority until you enter Controlled Airspace of some description.
 
Last edited:
FastEddieB said:
ATC has no authority until you enter Controlled Airspace of some description.
Click to expand...

@FastEddieB -- You're focusing on the departure. I'm questioning the arrival.

If I'm arriving at a non-towered Class E airport on IFR I am under ATC authority until I cancel IFR en route OR cancel on the ground. How does this apply to class G arrivals?

I don't know the answer, but it seems I could actually be under ATC authority in such case.
 
On arrival, the moment you leave Controlled Airspace you are pretty much on your own.

You could encounter someone legally taking off in IMC - if rated and equipped, of course - who chose to take off and remain clear of Controlled Airspace, either until he could pick up a clearance, or even indefinitely.

Not saying that's necessarily smart, but it's legal and may fit someone's mission.
 
FAR 1.1
Controlled airspace means an airspace of defined dimensions within which air traffic control service is provided to IFR flights and to VFR flights in accordance with the airspace classification. Note: Controlled airspace is a generic term that coveres Class A, Class B, Class C, Class D, and Class E airspace.

Pilot Controller Glossary-CONTROLLED AIRSPACE, read it.

AIM 3-3-1.

It's pretty clear. Class G is uncontrolled airspace. It is regulated though. FAR 91.126. Far 91.155. There's probably more
 
rolivi said:
@FastEddieB -- You're focusing on the departure. I'm questioning the arrival.

If I'm arriving at a non-towered Class E airport on IFR I am under ATC authority until I cancel IFR en route OR cancel on the ground. How does this apply to class G arrivals?

I don't know the answer, but it seems I could actually be under ATC authority in such case.
Click to expand...

You're complying with the clearance for the approach but there isn't much "authority" involved in your example. Once you've been switched to CTAF, your radar service from ATC is over. Whatever happens in the G, or even the E is out of their hands at that point.
 
Last edited:
luvflyin said:
FAR 1.1
Controlled airspace means an airspace of defined dimensions within which air traffic control service is provided to IFR flights and to VFR flights in accordance with the airspace classification. Note: Controlled airspace is a generic term that coveres Class A, Class B, Class C, Class D, and Class E airspace.

Pilot Controller Glossary-CONTROLLED AIRSPACE, read it.

AIM 3-3-1.

It's pretty clear. Class G is uncontrolled airspace. It is regulated though. FAR 91.126. Far 91.155. There's probably more
Click to expand...

Thanks.

The definition I quoted was one I learned about 40 years ago, pre-alphabet soup. It apparently changed in wording a bit after the transition.
 
FastEddieB said:
Thanks.

The definition I quoted was one I learned about 40 years ago, pre-alphabet soup. It apparently changed in wording a bit after the transition.
Click to expand...

That they added the "Note" to the FAR 1 definition tells a story. It must cause a lot of controversy and questions. Just scanning through I didn't see any other "notes" added to a definition in FAR 1.1.
 
I don't get it. Is this free advertisement again? Why you feeding him, guys? Just mute the thread and move on, just like I do with other unsolicited commercial ads here. *shrug*
 
BigBadLou said:
I don't get it. Is this free advertisement again? Why you feeding him, guys? Just mute the thread and move on, just like I do with other unsolicited commercial ads here. *shrug*
Click to expand...

I didn't realize the OP's post was an excerpt from an article on his learn to fly website until I saw your post. In fact, I thought it was a genuine request for feedback from somebody who speaks English as a second language and was brave enough to post. Too bad.
 
BigBadLou said:
I don't get it. Is this free advertisement again? Why you feeding him, guys? Just mute the thread and move on, just like I do with other unsolicited commercial ads here. *shrug*
Click to expand...
If it's an ad for written material, which it seems to be, it's a TERRIBLE one.

A teacher must have command of the language. This guy doesn't.

Looking through the website, it looks like yet another foreign pilot mill, this one from Indonesia. They make some hard to believe claims like a 14 day private pilot program with no downtime except for medical reasons (not even MX or weather? Really?), with a 98% success rate.

Yes, VNY has a lot of VFR days, but the last time I was down there was definitely not a student pilot day. Winds gusting to 25 in opposite directions between Burbank and Whiteman, AIRMET TANGO for moderate turbulence and low level wind shear below 6000, my own observation of continuous light chop and occasional moderate, repeated by every airliner on approach to Burbank, and a couple of PIREPs for severe in Newhall Pass. There was a strong north wind blowing over the mountains.
 
Last edited:
I guess I jumped in late in response to a post and ever really read the OP.

Reading it now...

"As we know that mid-air collision sit at the top 3 reason of the aviation accident..."

Pretty sure "we" don't know that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top