Request flight following or no?

[denverpilot]

Having had radar advisories (there's no such thing as flight following anymore and it hasn't been called that in over a decade but everyone still says it) save my ass, I use it.

The comment about picking your own callsign out of the chatter is correct. If you're busy, you get to where you do that.

Busy is not "I want to talk to the passengers", that's third or fourth or fifth down the list of important things to do in an airplane. If you want that, go out in the boonies away from other traffic and cancel advisories.

Also working on an instrument rating will get you real good at dealing with the radio chatter. Once you're used to flying in the system, the radio stuff just becomes second nature. You don't even notice it.

Advisories are for you and other aircraft. The controller could just as easily stay home and make a nice steak on the grill and have a beer for all they care. Traffic is just what they do when they're at work. They're also there in case you have a serious problem or emergency of course.

 

[Palmpilot]

...(there's no such thing as flight following anymore and it hasn't been called that in over a decade but everyone still says it)...

From the current Pilot/Controller Glossary:

RADAR FLIGHT FOLLOWING− The observation
of the progress of radar identified aircraft, whose
primary navigation is being provided by the pilot,
wherein the controller retains and correlates the
aircraft identity with the appropriate target or target
symbol displayed on the radar scope.
(See RADAR CONTACT.)
(See RADAR SERVICE.)
(Refer to AIM.)

​

 

[bobmrg]

Thanks, @SixPapaCharlie for re-posting this. I vaguely recall reading it shortly after joining POA. I took a recent flight with an instructor for some practice. After leaving the home Class D, we're in KC ARTCC's airspace and several smaller airports are around the area. Knowing there were a number of fly-ins and poker runs happening that morning, I thought it might be a good idea to get traffic advisories. We didn't, however, under the assumption that the center controllers didn't want to mess with a VFR target essentially turning in place. It's nice to be refreshed and reminded that's not the case at all.

I also heard from local pilots a while back that OKC Approach prefers not to provide advisories to aircraft simply practicing maneuvers outside the actual Class C boundaries (but within the 20 mile contact radius). I now realize that info may be false.

Unreliable source. Call the TRACON and ask them directly.

Bob Gardner

 

[denverpilot]

From the current Pilot/Controller Glossary:

RADAR FLIGHT FOLLOWING− The observation
of the progress of radar identified aircraft, whose
primary navigation is being provided by the pilot,
wherein the controller retains and correlates the
aircraft identity with the appropriate target or target
symbol displayed on the radar scope.
(See RADAR CONTACT.)
(See RADAR SERVICE.)
(Refer to AIM.)

​

Standard lazy writers and inconsistencies in the documents. "Flight Following" was changed in the AIM long ago. Most pilots go to the AIM long before they ever pick up and read a P/CG, and will probably never notice what the P/CG says.

 

[Palmpilot]

Standard lazy writers and inconsistencies in the documents. "Flight Following" was changed in the AIM long ago. Most pilots go to the AIM long before they ever pick up and read a P/CG, and will probably never notice what the P/CG says.

There are many references to flight following in the AIM itself.

 

[denverpilot]

There are many references to flight following in the AIM itself.

I guess they've decided not to have that fight anymore. I remember when they were eradicating it and replacing it with "VFR radar advisories" everywhere.

The story back then was that some lawyer at FAA was worried that "following" implied the controller was always watching VFR aircraft so they didn't have to see and avoid, or some such other rumor mill (or real but unconfirmable) stupidity.