RMCN172RG
Pattern Altitude
I can't see why not it's an VFR flight plan. The IFR check box just contrls the routing and ability tio change to IFR of course.
Question about VFR flight following.
- Thread starter C. Kelley
- Start date
I can't see why not it's an VFR flight plan. The IFR check box just contrls the routing and ability tio change to IFR of course.
RMCN172RG
Pattern Altitude
There were two months this spring in IFR magazine where they wen't over this technique and some other ways to help get better support from ATC for pop clearances etc.
When I get home I'll post the months.
RMCN172RG
Pattern Altitude
He is not filing an IFR flight plan. He is filing a VFR flight plan with the IFR check box so it is routed to ATC not FSS.
TheVFR altitutude and the extra advisory in the comment VFR ADVISORIES insures that it is not an IFR flight plan.
Beleive me every controller you talk to on the flight will advise you to remain VFR.
RMCN172RG
Pattern Altitude
This was detailed in the IFR magazine articles and varies depending on the tool you use for filing. I think some program do not accept the VFR requires a numberic altititude so I file with numeric altitude and VFR ADVISORIES in the comment for clarity.
roncachamp
Final Approach
That can have the opposite effect. If your flight ends in terminal airspace the approach control facility won't have your numeric altitude on their strips, the altitude box will contain just "IFR". (That's a national standard, I'd like to find the guy that determined it should be that way and slap the snot outta him.)
MikePapa
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2009
- Messages
- 155
- Display Name
Display name:
MikePapa
Actually under this scenario he is filing an IFR flight plan, otherwise it would never get routed to ATC. He's just activating flight following instead of actually accepting an IFR clearance.
MikePapa
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2009
- Messages
- 155
- Display Name
Display name:
MikePapa
In some high density areas that are assigned several beacon code groups, don't they assign different codes for IFR vs VFR? In the DFW area, it seems like the first two numbers of the beacon code are always different between IFR and VFR.
roncachamp
Final Approach
The National Beacon Code Allocation Plan provides the 0100-0400 code blocks for internal use by terminal facilities. Flights that aren't entered into the Flight Data Processing computer would be assigned codes from these blocks. Flights that are entered in the computer would be assigned codes from the host ARTCC code lists.
MikePapa
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2009
- Messages
- 155
- Display Name
Display name:
MikePapa
IC. I thought there was some type of rhyme or reason to it. So it sounds like if you get a 0100-0400 code, it was entered by the controller on position, but if you get something else it was entered from a terminal off the center's computer.
roncachamp
Final Approach
Bingo.
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
No, he's filing an IFR flight plan. He's just not accepting an IFR clearance.
Since this procedure is not addressed in the books, there is no assurance of that.
Unless there's something in 7110.65 which I haven't found, there's no reason for one to believe that other than the hope that the controller understands what you're doing. Some may, some may not. Make sure you know what you're getting when you contact ATC!
C. Kelley
Pre-Flight
This sounds like something I may attempt on short XC departing the Class C here and terminating in Class D. I would like to receive advisories and be 'looked after' for the duration of flight. If I'm navigating on a XC I don't like to hear 'squawk VFR, freq. change approved'.
The main reason I was concerned with giving a detailed route for flight following was for SAR purposes. I usually gave regular position reports to FSS during my training XC's. It just gives me that nice warm fuzzy feeling I guess.
The main reason I was concerned with giving a detailed route for flight following was for SAR purposes. I usually gave regular position reports to FSS during my training XC's. It just gives me that nice warm fuzzy feeling I guess.
ScottM
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2005
- Messages
- 42,530
- Location
- Variable, but somewhere on earth
- Display Name
Display name:
iBazinga!
C. Kelley;488354If I'm navigating on a XC I don't like to hear 'squawk VFR said:
C. Kelley
Pre-Flight
I didn't think about asking ATC. I thought if they were cutting you loose there some reason they couldn't hand you off. I will definitely be doing that from now on.
ScottM
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2005
- Messages
- 42,530
- Location
- Variable, but somewhere on earth
- Display Name
Display name:
iBazinga!
They might have just been too busy to arrange a handoff. It never hurts to ask.
It is also a neat feature of your GPS to look up the nearest ATC facility, usually a ARTCC, when you get cut loose and give them a call. Another technique that I remember from VFR only days was to look at the low altitude enroute chart for a center freq.
If you give them a call they can usually accommodate you. Sometimes they may tell you to call someone else on another frequency, what they are doing is telling you who controls the airspace you are in. IOW they are helping.
roncachamp
Final Approach
Had you requested flight following?
C. Kelley
Pre-Flight
Yup. I always try to use all safety avenues available (if I know about them
)I think I'm over my tonsillitis and I have an itch to fly an XC now so I think I'm going to plan one KCSG direct KMGM tomorrow evening. I may give the trick a shot and see how it works. Also going to try out my early Christmas gift ICOM A24 handheld radio
.
ActiveAir
Pre-takeoff checklist
Wow, this seems like a bunch of extra work and possible confusion and aggitation for nothing. I use FF all the time (flights from CA to AZ, KS and IL), and when it's not direct or obvious, I tell them my intended route. No big deal.
I don't see the advantage of all this extra work for everyone. If atc isn't sure what I'm doing, they ask, I answer. No paperwork, no extra time creatively filing, etc. If I plan to fly circles around something, I tell them. Why create more work with a plan I may or may not stick to?
What am I missing? If I'm concerned they may drop me (rare), then I'll file a vfr flight plan (if I haven't done it already for a long x/c).
K.I.S.S. - Keep It Simple S..... FF won't just drop you because you're not going direct.
I don't see the advantage of all this extra work for everyone. If atc isn't sure what I'm doing, they ask, I answer. No paperwork, no extra time creatively filing, etc. If I plan to fly circles around something, I tell them. Why create more work with a plan I may or may not stick to?
What am I missing? If I'm concerned they may drop me (rare), then I'll file a vfr flight plan (if I haven't done it already for a long x/c).
K.I.S.S. - Keep It Simple S..... FF won't just drop you because you're not going direct.
RMCN172RG
Pattern Altitude
If you check VFR on the flight plan form it is routed to FSS. So each sector needs to pass your information on manually.
If you check IFR with a VFR altitude the VFR flight plan is sent to all the ATC facilities. Insures the handoff as there is no manual work required. Just like an IFR flight plan.
If weather starts to look bad you can file IFR in the air quickly as your route and all ATC centers already have the flight route information.
It makes ATC's job easier for handling you with flight following between centers.
gismo
Touchdown! Greaser!
Or a controller has to enter an abbreviated flight plan into the computer for you. Might happen, might not depending on their workload.
Ray, Steven has stated that just putting an altitude ending in '5' in the altitude block isn't totally sufficient to alert ATC that you're actually VFR looking for flight following. The correct entry would be either just "VFR" or "VFR" followed by the two or three digit VFR altitude you intend to use, e.g. "VFR45" for VFR at 4500 MSL. No doubt the +500 altitude has been working for you, but Steven's recommendation seems to be acceptable to DUAT(s) and is likely what actually ends up in the flight plan.
azure
Final Approach
Very interesting discussion! I had never heard about this. Now occasionally I overfly Canada en route between MI and OH and there it is necessary to be on an active flight plan which could be either VFR or IFR, as well as in two-way communications with ATC and a squawk code. Is there any reason this wouldn't be a valid way to set up a flight plan for Canadian overflight? The reason I ask is that departing, say, 3W2 northbound, without some maneuvering I'd already be over in Canadian airspace before I had time to contact FSS to open the plan AND Detroit Approach to get a squawk code. It sounds like with this method, DTW Approach would already have my plan and would activate it automatically when assigning me the code. Only having to raise Approach for both purposes would make things a bit simpler. So I'm wondering whether this would be enough, or whether an "active VFR plan" for overflight purposes has to be in the FSS system rather than just ATC?
RMCN172RG
Pattern Altitude
I know I'm a lazy typist. Some FP software won''t let you enter the VFR so that's where the note on VFR ADVISORIES comes in as well.
The article in IFR Magizine is in April 2009 by Kent D. Nicholson titled "A NEW POP-UP TRICK"
I don't know if it is available on-line?
RMCN172RG
Pattern Altitude
I use it out of PHN all the time heading south.
ActiveAir
Pre-takeoff checklist
Although I'm a low time guy (250 hrs., with four trips of over 1100nm in a single day's time each) and an IR, I haven't had any issues with FF hand-offs.
I would think that center would wonder why you didn't just file VFR and ask for FF or just file IFR. With this method, I think as Capt Ron suggested, you may get boxed in as an IFR or at the very least have to explain what you're intentions are. Might save a couple minutes if you have to file in the air for unforecast weather.
Last edited:
roncachamp
Final Approach
I've attached a screenshot of a flight plan input on DUAT and the strip it produced. Any controller that doesn't understand the pilot's intentions has no business in an ATC facility.
Attachments
MikePapa
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2009
- Messages
- 155
- Display Name
Display name:
MikePapa
It could just as easily be a request to depart IFR and fly VFR-on-top, yes?
roncachamp
Final Approach
No. A request for VFR-on-top would have "OTP" in the altitude box.
MikePapa
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2009
- Messages
- 155
- Display Name
Display name:
MikePapa
IC. Good to know if I'm filing for such via DUATS.
Very nice demo. Thanks.
I'm still not sure this method has any particular advantage. What are your views on that?
roncachamp
Final Approach
It's a method without a downside. A customer-oriented controller can easily enter it himself, but some controllers are rather lazy.
Last edited:
RMCN172RG
Pattern Altitude
I can think a few Centers that routinely ignore VFR aircraft as much as they can. I suspect it is a method for keeping the workload down.
Is there anything to prevent them from just ignoring the flight plans that come to them with "VFR" in the altitude block? From what I've heard about controllers in the Chicago area, that sounds like the likely result there.
I've also noticed that around Thansgiving, LA Center controllers start declining to work VFR flights due to workload, and I don't know whether this method would do anything to reduce the number of times they decline the handoff of a VFR aircraft.
azure
Final Approach
And a few Approach controllers who delight in announcing "N12345, exiting my airspace, squawk 1200, frequency change approved". Once I got up the moxie to ask Saginaw on first contact if they could arrange a handoff when the time came, and the controller's reply was "Sorry, we don't have handoff capabilities". I couldn't believe he actually said that! I wish there had been LiveATC back then, I would have paid the subscription price just to have that on disk.
I doubt if a filed flight plan in their system would make any difference to them (VFR).
Ray, do you have any experience opening flight plans filed this way with Detroit Approach? I'm based at VLL now, but when I used to fly out of PHN and 76G, I remember that Selfridge was able to open ordinary FSS-filed VFR flight plans too, and usually quite willing unless they were very busy.
C. Kelley
Pre-Flight
I flew a XC from KCSG-KPDK-KCSG...through ATL Class B right over KATL in the corridor. Anyways, I filed VFR and requested FF. It was the first time I had ever been on FF and not been let got by ATC. This is the first time I have had FF since I have moved back down south from NY.
right over KATL in the corridor. Anyways, I filed VFR and requested FF. It was the first time I had ever been on FF and not been let got by ATC. This is the first time I have had FF since I have moved back down south from NY.
I flew a XC from KCSG-KPDK-KCSG...through ATL Class B
So, did you check the IFR box when you filed the flight plan?
C. Kelley
Pre-Flight
I didn't only because I didn't want my first attempt at this to be during my first romp through Class B. I think on my next XC to a smaller Class C I am going to give it a shot.
gprellwitz
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2005
- Messages
- 12,774
- Location
- Romeoville, IL
- Display Name
Display name:
Grant Prellwitz
I will say that on the way up to Sidnaw a couple of weeks ago, Chicago actually gave us flight following. It's nice to be able to report something positive.
RMCN172RG
Pattern Altitude
I'm always contacting Selfridge first so not directly. I've never had a probllem with Detroit either out of PHN or PTK. CINCI seems to be a black hole though.
azure
Final Approach
Thanks. Well, weather permitting, I'll have a chance to try this new technique out this weekend. I'm planning a day trip on Saturday to CMH. After going back and forth a few times I've decided to go around the DTW Bravo on the east side, direct YQG direct CMH, as long as there's no ceiling to keep me from climbing high enough to feel comfortable going over Lake Erie. That means overflying Canada so I'll need to be on a flight plan anyway. This should be interesting!
azure
Final Approach
Well weather permitted, actually more than permitted, it was one of the best CAVU days I've ever flown on! Bottom line, I had no problems whatever with this technique except that the briefer with whom I filed (actually refiled, due to a two hour delay getting started, long story) tried to tell me that the way to do this was to file VFR. I said no, I want ATC to have my flight plan in their system in order to not have to bother with frequency changes to activate the plan with FSS. He reluctantly accepted my filed plan and that was that. A minor glitch occurred whereby I barely raised Detroit Approach in time for them to coordinate transit through the KDET Class D. However he did have my flight plan in his system and I was never cut loose by anyone, I was in fact handed off smoothly at every step of the way, Detroit to Toledo to Mansfield to Columbus, and ditto in reverse for the return trip. Plus, I was cleared into the DTW Bravo in both directions, though on the way down I had to stay below the shelf until about 5 nm north of Grosse Ile, basically abeam KDTW before I could get higher. It was hands down the best experience I've ever had with VFR flight following and I felt a lot like I was being treated as if I was IFR.
I'm still unsure whether filing this way really does maximize the likelihood of keeping radar advisories all the way through handoffs. Ray's reasoning does make sense to me, that if they have your flight plan in their system and your entire route and intentions are visible to them, their job of coordinating handoffs should be that much easier. But as outstanding as my experience today was, I realise that it's but a single data point. And a senior club member I asked about this opined that it would make no difference at all because "as a VFR pilot, you're a 3rd class citizen", and granted, ATC provides radar advisories on an "as able" basis.
One question: does the first controller have a special role in arranging advisories for your entire route or does he/she only work the handoff with the next facility (e.g. Detroit Approach coordinates with Toledo), and then ditto down the line (Toledo with Mansfield, etc.)?
I'm still unsure whether filing this way really does maximize the likelihood of keeping radar advisories all the way through handoffs. Ray's reasoning does make sense to me, that if they have your flight plan in their system and your entire route and intentions are visible to them, their job of coordinating handoffs should be that much easier. But as outstanding as my experience today was, I realise that it's but a single data point. And a senior club member I asked about this opined that it would make no difference at all because "as a VFR pilot, you're a 3rd class citizen", and granted, ATC provides radar advisories on an "as able" basis.
One question: does the first controller have a special role in arranging advisories for your entire route or does he/she only work the handoff with the next facility (e.g. Detroit Approach coordinates with Toledo), and then ditto down the line (Toledo with Mansfield, etc.)?
Last edited: