IFR/Flight Following -- ATC Preferences?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in
ink.net:

The point is those things are unrelated to flight following.

The original point was that had he had flight following, he might have
survived. You are assuming that the OP meant that a controller would have
alerted him. I interpret it that had he been listening to the frequency, he
might have been more aware of his surroundings and situation and taken
appropriate action.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in
ink.net:

And if he'd been asleep a wakeup call may have saved him, but I don't
think a low altitude alert would have relieved him of vertigo.

BTW: How do yo know he had vertigo? Prove it.

I remember a specific instance during my VFR training that an
instructor warned me to be careful about coming down too fast because it
would cause an alerts with ATC...

Class B?

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Matt Whiting wrote in
:

I think Steven's point though is that they can't fly the airplane for
the pilot, which was essentially the original suggestion.

While I agree with the point that you are making here on Steve's behalf, I
don't think the original suggestion was that ATC can fly the plane for the
pilot, nor that your point is indeed Steve's.

Bob's original comment was, "JFK, Jr. was not required by regulation to use
flight following...but the outcome of his flight might have been
drastically different had he done so."

Steve then asked, "How would have flight following made a difference? He
didn't run into an unseen airplane." The implication being that the only
benefit of flight following is traffic alerts. When I brought up very
specific examples of benefits that one can get while getting flight
following, he dismissed it as unrelated to the flight following and
suggests that simply listening on the frequency is all that is necessary.

The original point - a suggestion that one can improve his/her safety by
using flight following - is completely lost in Steve's trial-lawyer
tactics. The fact remains, however, that even Steve concedes that simply
listening to the proper frequency can improve situational awareness, and as
such the original point is actually supported by Steve's own arguments.

I'm just trying to have a friendly conversation. If I wanted my words to be
picked apart like the Talmud, I would have become a lawyer or a Rabbi.

"Judah" wrote in message
.. .

The original point was that had he had flight following, he might have
survived. You are assuming that the OP meant that a controller would have
alerted him. I interpret it that had he been listening to the frequency,
he
might have been more aware of his surroundings and situation and taken
appropriate action.


So flight following can prevent spatial disorientation?

"Judah" wrote in message
. ..

BTW: How do yo know he had vertigo? Prove it.


There is no proof, that was the conclusion of the NTSB.

"Jose" wrote in message
. ..

Class B?

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
. ..

Class B?


A rapid descent at low altitude can generate an MSAW alarm but VFR aircraft
are generally assigned a code from a block that is MSAW inhibited.

Steven Mc Nicoll quoted me...

"Jose" wrote in message
. ..


Class B?

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

But =your= comment did not make it through the system.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Dave Butler" wrote in message
news:1130445527.239974@sj-nntpcache-3...

...or above Bravo. Lots of traffic up there, though.

FF above the Bravo is good, approach wants to be talking to you, and they
can't tell you to go away.



Why does approach want to be talking to you above Bravo?

My remark was based on personal experience. They didn't explicitly say "we want
to talk to you", but I inferred that from the tone of the conversation. Maybe it
was Center and not Approach, I'm not sure any more. Who owns the airspace above
the Chicago bravo?

Anyway, guessing at their motivation, I thought it was because there was a lot
of aluminum up there and they'd rather be talking to my moving speed bump and
know my intentions rather than guessing.

What's your opinion?

Dave