Report when 7 miles south of VOR...

[docmirror]

This isn't a question of whether it COULD be done, it's a question of whether it SHOULD be done. Heck, I can figure and report my position, accurate to within three meters of any random point on earth, given a few minutes -- but there's no point in it.

The controller could have, and should have, requested a position report with modern navigational tools in mind. Requesting the distance from some random VOR is silly, in today's airspace.

ATC first requested a location from a VOR, so they knew he had that equip, whether an actual receiver with OBS or derived from GPS. I don't see any problem with them using the VOR as a reference. It is after all, a common aviation-related navaid. And the VOR was not random, it was well within the service volume and relative location of the flight path. Now, if ATC had said to give the location from the Cowboy VOR, that might be a bit goofy, but they chose a navaid the OP was already tuned in to, all that was needed was a bit of DR or buttonology.

 

[Jay Honeck]

ATC first requested a location from a VOR, so they knew he had that equip, whether an actual receiver with OBS or derived from GPS. I don't see any problem with them using the VOR as a reference. It is after all, a common aviation-related navaid. And the VOR was not random, it was well within the service volume and relative location of the flight path. Now, if ATC had said to give the location from the Cowboy VOR, that might be a bit goofy, but they chose a navaid the OP was already tuned in to, all that was needed was a bit of DR or buttonology.

Well, dammit, now you made me go back and reread the OP. I missed the part where he was already dialed into that VOR. Mea culpa -- that's a whole different situation than some random VOR.

I agree, if you're already dialed into it, per ATC instructions, asking for distance isn't a silly or unfair request. "Never mind.". lol

 

[MAKG1]

The key here is once the 'instruction' is given, you gotta comply(at some point) without telling them to get bent.

No, you don't.

I told a Tower controller (nicely) to stuff it yesterday when he had me turn base in front of traffic a mile behind on a straight-in. With my usual 1/2 mile base, that would put him right up my tailpipe. So I said no and told him why. I got resequenced behind the straight-in. Fine with me.

 

[Velocity173]

If a request as you say, is the pilot free to ignore the reporting, and go do some acro, spin training, tractor hunting? Or alternately - is it ok to tell ATC to cancel FF?

Sure, he can request to cancel FF. I'm sure the controller would have had no problem with that either. Since the OP said the controller was non radar they're pretty much useless for his purpose anyway. Probably why the controller wanted him to report 7 miles so she could transfer radio communication to Jamestown tower.

Personally, if they told me they were non radar I would changed freqs. Kinda defeats the main purpose of FF.

 

[docmirror]

No, you don't.

I told a Tower controller (nicely) to stuff it yesterday when he had me turn base in front of traffic a mile behind on a straight-in. With my usual 1/2 mile base, that would put him right up my tailpipe. So I said no and told him why. I got resequenced behind the straight-in. Fine with me.

I'd like to hear the tape if you don't mind. Cuz, what you are describing has nothing to do with the OPs situation. Now, if you landed without clearance, I would be impressed. But, you asked for resequence and you got it for separation anxiety. Tower could have told you to continue your pattern, and made the other plane do a 360, or turn and rejoin, etc. He didn't, he accommodated your request. No one doubts you can say unable for a good reason, but you can't just ignore tower, which is what my very first post in this thread intimated, followed up by my other post clarifying. In the case of the OP, if the pilot had not responded to the instruction and gone and done his own thing, that could be a deviation.

I don't have to like the situation, but once you step on ATC field, and play with ATC ball, you better play by their rules. You played by their rules, so like I said, show me where you landed without a clearance, or just turned your radio off, then you got me.

 

[MAKG1]

I'd like to hear the tape if you don't mind. Cuz, what you are describing has nothing to do with the OPs situation. Now, if you landed without clearance, I would be impressed. But, you asked for resequence and you got it for separation anxiety. Tower could have told you to continue your pattern, and made the other plane do a 360, or turn and rejoin, etc. He didn't, he accommodated your request. No one doubts you can say unable for a good reason, but you can't just ignore tower, which is what my very first post in this thread intimated, followed up by my other post clarifying. In the case of the OP, if the pilot had not responded to the instruction and gone and done his own thing, that could be a deviation.

I don't have to like the situation, but once you step on ATC field, and play with ATC ball, you better play by their rules. You played by their rules, so like I said, show me where you landed without a clearance, or just turned your radio off, then you got me.

Well, you can go search for it if you want. I find liveatc to be badly hit or miss and rather time consuming to search. It took place at KPAO on 118.6 at somewhere around 0200Z (early evening local) yesterday. Tail number was 9ZL, and I went around the pattern half a dozen times.

Tower did tell me to continue my pattern. It was too close to converging traffic, so I said no. I might have complied if they had moved the other plane first. I'm PIC, not Tower. They respected that.

As for relevance, it clearly demonstrates that you can say no to ATC. Want another example? This one won't be in the archives as it was too long ago, but I refused a transition instruction from San Jose (Class C) due to clouds at that altitude. They gave me another. Added 5 miles to my trip, but it was safe and worked fine.

ATC is not anywhere near as hard to deal with as you make it out to be. Especially on flight following, they are watching your six. They don't just yank you around for fun, as that increases their workload.

There is some possibility I might have busted neighboring airspace, but I doubt it. There is another Class D that they usually have extension agreements into. In any case, no one complained. If they did, not turning in front of other traffic is a pretty clear 91.3 issue.

 

[docmirror]

ATC is not hard to get along with, and I'm sure I never said that. However, you don't get to ignore them. This was the thrust of my statement in this thread from the start. My first post expressed my personal opinion about how to deal with ATC, which I later wanted to clarify that this could get the new pilot OP in trouble. I assure you, if you tell ATC that you are cancelling FF after they have given you an instruction you may face negative consequence. You could request cancelling FF, but if ATC comes back and says remain on this freq, and report 7 miles S of xxx VOR, you are not free to do as you wish, and get around to it when you feel like it. There is something in the FARs about complying with instructions in a timely manner.

As much as I would like to think otherwise, if you don't do what they tell you to do, or make alternate arrangements(continue downwind), you are going to face the music. This is the major reason I leave my radio in the off position for most flights.

 

[aviator430]

ATC is not hard to get along with, and I'm sure I never said that. However, you don't get to ignore them. This was the thrust of my statement in this thread from the start. My first post expressed my personal opinion about how to deal with ATC, which I later wanted to clarify that this could get the new pilot OP in trouble. I assure you, if you tell ATC that you are cancelling FF after they have given you an instruction you may face negative consequence. You could request cancelling FF, but if ATC comes back and says remain on this freq, and report 7 miles S of xxx VOR, you are not free to do as you wish, and get around to it when you feel like it. There is something in the FARs about complying with instructions in a timely manner.

As much as I would like to think otherwise, if you don't do what they tell you to do, or make alternate arrangements(continue downwind), you are going to face the music. This is the major reason I leave my radio in the off position for most flights.

This is quite ridiculous. You're never going to be violated for cancelling flight following after being asked to report somewhere. ATC does not give that much of a damn.

ATC: "N1234, amendment to your routing per XYZ Approach letter of agreement: Fly heading 080, when able proceed direct FIXXX. Depart FIXXX heading 120, vector to XYZ."

N1234: "Cancel IFR, we'll go direct VFR, cancel flight following."

Perfectly legal.

 

[somorris]

I fly with an old Garmin 196. I could easily scroll the little arrow up to the VOR and track my progress (distance/bearing to). Do the new fancy 430's etc., not have a simple capability like that?

I don't see the big problem here. The controller was trying to help the OP and needed his input in order to do that.

 

[docmirror]

This is quite ridiculous. You're never going to be violated for cancelling flight following after being asked to report somewhere. ATC does not give that much of a damn.

ATC: "N1234, amendment to your routing per XYZ Approach letter of agreement: Fly heading 080, when able proceed direct FIXXX. Depart FIXXX heading 120, vector to XYZ."

N1234: "Cancel IFR, we'll go direct VFR, cancel flight following."

Perfectly legal.

Cancel IFR? Boy, you really have gone where no man has gone before.

 

[txflyer]

Nearest/VOR/JHW/Direct>/enter/enter ..

Done.

gpsSUPERMAN UP UP AND AWAY!!!

 

[Henning]

Flying back from IDI-IAG-IDI on my first XC flight as a newly-minted pilot, Erie approach hit me with a task I wasn't sure how to deal with. I was on flight following and had been passed from Buffalo, to Cleveland and then to Erie. Evidently Erie didn't have radar capabilities and had an aircraft descending from 8000 as I was flying south. Erie asked me to dial in the Jamestown VOR, which I did, and I reported that I was on the 90-degree radial from the VOR.

She then asked me to report when I was 7 miles south of the VOR, which was a new one on me. In my 60 hours of flying, I hadn't done this yet. All I could think to do was look at my GPS counting the miles down to my destination of IDI and when it decreased by seven miles I was going to give her a shout. She came back and said no need shortly thereafter and that the descending traffic was no longer an issue.

So my question is...was there an easy way to determine when I would be seven miles south of when I reported being on the 90-degree radial? I'll accept being flamed if I had a brain fart and should've known how, but even now this newbie doesn't know what he should have done differently...

Thanks everyone...

What was your course line? If you had flown on course and set the OBS to 180 From and crossed it, how far south of the VOR would you have been?