![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com... One semi-interesting observation: This isn't true in the Washington ADIZ. There, a VFR ADIZ flight plan IS opened by ATC, after first filing with flight service. That's because the ADIZ flight plan isn't a VFR flight plan. Funny that some things actually work better under the ADIZ. Not really. The most you can say is that things aren't as bad under the ADIZ as they could be. Pete |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Paul Tomblin wrote:
Post 9/11, you still have to be on a flight plan of some sort to cross the border, and now you have to be talking to ATC as well. Where does that latter requirement come from? It's news to me, and Toronto Terminal isn't usually interested in talking to VFR arrivals. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Paul Tomblin wrote:
In a previous article, (andrew m. boardman) said: Paul Tomblin wrote: Post 9/11, you still have to be on a flight plan of some sort to cross the border, and now you have to be talking to ATC as well. Where does that latter requirement come from? It's news to me, and Toronto Terminal isn't usually interested in talking to VFR arrivals. FDC NOTAM 2/5319 [...] Oops. Thanks for the reminder. I'd like to think I knew about that the last time it was relevant to me and have simply forgotten since. (A couple of years ago I started dealing with this sort of thing strictly IFR. Somewhat lazy, perhaps, but it removes many hassles. Especially with the DC ADIZ, which can be an utter disaster VFR.) Mind you, Toronto Terminal still didn't want to deal with me VFR (making KIAG-CYTZ hops a couple of years ago), but the important thing for 2/5319 is talking to US ATC, which was never an issue. [I previously posted another instantiation of this, but had a weird newsreader glitch and it seems to have vanished. My apologies if it turns up twice.] |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 31 May 2006 19:19:32 +0000 (UTC), (Paul
Tomblin) wrote: In a previous article, (andrew m. boardman) said: Paul Tomblin wrote: Post 9/11, you still have to be on a flight plan of some sort to cross the border, and now you have to be talking to ATC as well. Where does that latter requirement come from? It's news to me, and Toronto Terminal isn't usually interested in talking to VFR arrivals. FDC NOTAM 2/5319 "PART 2 OF 8 .. SPECIAL NOTICE .. OPERATIONS TO/FROM LOCATIONS OUTSIDE THE U.S. PART II. U.S., MEXICAN OR CANADIAN REGISTERED AIRCRAFT CONDUCTING IFR/VFR OPERATIONS TO/FROM LOCATIONS OUTSIDE THE TERRITORIAL AIRSPACE OF THE U.S. NO PERSON MAY OPERATE AN AIRCRAFT UNDER VFR OR IFR TO OR FROM THE TERRITORIAL AIRSPACE OF THE U.S. EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BELOW: A. PART 91 VFR OPERATIONS ARE AUTHORIZED FOR AIRCRAFT WITH A MAXIMUM CERTIFICATED TAKEOFF GROSS WEIGHT OF 95,000 POUNDS OR LESS, BETWEEN THE COUNTRIES OF THE U.S., CANADA, AND MEXICO, PROVIDED ALL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE MET: 1. THE AIRCRAFT IS REGISTERED IN THE U.S., CANADA OR MEXICO. 2. THE FLIGHT CREW AND ONLY KNOWN PASSENGERS ARE ON BOARD. 3. THE PILOT FILES AND ACTIVATES A FLIGHT PLAN. 4. THE PILOT IS IN COMMUNICATION WITH THE GOVERNING ATC FACILITY AT THE TIME OF THE BOUNDARY CROSSING. 5. THE AIRCRAFT IS SQUAWKING AN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL ASSIGNED DISCRETE BEACON CODE. 6. THE PILOT COMPLIES WITH ALL U.S. CUSTOMS NOTIFICATIONS AND COMPLIES WITH REQUIREMENTS TO LAND AT AIRPORTS IN THE U.S., CANADA OR MEXICO DESIGNATED AS PORTS OF ENTRY. END PART 2 OF 8" I draw your attention to part 4 and 5. But you seem to forget that the whole section refers to flights TO/FROM foreign LOCATIONS. Passing through Canadian airspace when both origin and destination are in the US is not covered by this whole section. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Boy, Denny, you really need to brush up on what a VFR Flight Plan is, and
isn't. There is NO CONNECTION between a VFR Plan and Flight Following. Perhaps it's also time for you to do a BFR -- if your grasp on procedures is that shaky, your flying skills are also probably not up to scratch. On 25 May 2006 05:20:30 -0700, "Denny" wrote: Well, we did the flight from Saginaw to Cleveland and back... As promised I did file VFR and I will never, never, never, pinch me, n e v e r, do that again... What a ghastly experience... And this is from a fella who has been flying the ATC system for over 40 years - but hasn't filed a VFR flight plan within that time frame (that I can remember).. Anyway, Out on the ramp I phoned and got the Lansing FSS... Rattled off the usual flight plan info... Waited for the usual CRAFT response and then gotcha #1 rose up... (I should have known right then!) She didn't read back the plan!!! "OK, it's filed... Hayuv a nice day.", she chirped... Slight pause on my part (the deer in the headlights look, my son, DL, later dryly mentioned) as I was well into the role of mentor and smoothly showing my son how it is done by a pro I thought .... "Uhhh, I didn't get a squawk." "Oh, I can't give you a squawk, ATC will assign that when you open your flight plan." Well, OK I can live with that, and I know where I'm going, I hope she remembered... So we saddled up and turned lose those thumpin 150 HP engines on Fat Albert... Airborne I coach DL through the mechanics of contacting the nearest ATC and asking for the flight plan to be opened... Gotcha #2 grins at us... Saginaw approach says they "don't" open VFR flight plans... (Note, they didn't say can't, just don't - can you spell 'controllers union versus the privatized FSS'?) "You will have to talk to FSS.", click and silence... Well, OK Martha Jane, I DO know how to talk to FSS... So we dial up FSS and after a few calls get the nice lady... "Oh, your flight plan is opened."... So, back to Mr. Wonderful at Saginaw Approach... highly condensed "57 Pop is back with you and the VFR flight plan to Cleveland is opened." "OK, I can give you flight followingheh, heh, heh Squawk 'snookered', maintain 3500, blah, blah, blah...".... picture me with sour expression So, a few miles later we get told, "Leaving my airspace, radar services terminated, squawk VFR.. You may be able to contact Flint." click... silence... Wearily I call Flint Approach... "Who are you, where are you, how high are you (by now I wish)... And while he didn't say, why are you bothering me, the attitude was there... The instant you say VFR flight plan, the temperature in the voice drops 10 degrees... The Coupe De Grass came on the return leg North lots of grubby details condensed After Cleveland Approach pinged me to FSS and they ponged me back, Cleveland finally, grudgingly, gave me a squawk,then waited until I just touched Canadian Airspace and with a gloat in the voice says: drum roll you all know what's coming "Leaving my airspace, return to VFR, have a nice day.", click! At that point I became annoyed and bluntly told ATC, "Wait a minute Jack... I am in international airspace and you don't just dump me." "Well, you can try contacting Detroit." Knowing full well that I am out of range for Detroit So, we spent the next 15+ miles calling Detroit... When I finally reached them it was the three stooges who-what-why-go away routine all over... This morning I called the Great Lakes FSDO and spoke to an OPS specialist... At first she gave me the party line... "tsk, tsk, I don't know how that could happen, after all a VFR flight plan and flight following are different programs." After a bit she warmed up and finally told me, "Well Lockheed Martin took over FSS and everything is changing and we don't know what ATC is doing or why." So, there you have it folks... File VFR and you become a scab walking into the middle of a sit down strike... Beats me... I have been banging around airports for over 60 years and flying the ATC system for over 40 years, and I don't have a clue what to do... denny |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jay Somerset " wrote Perhaps it's also time for you to do a BFR -- if your grasp on procedures is that shaky, your flying skills are also probably not up to scratch. Having a bad day, Jay? That is quite a leap, accusing him of having poor flying skills, because he was doing something (flying across the border) that he does not do frequently. A giant leap. -- Jim in NC |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 25 May 2006 18:21:46 -0400, "Morgans"
wrote: "Jay Somerset " wrote Perhaps it's also time for you to do a BFR -- if your grasp on procedures is that shaky, your flying skills are also probably not up to scratch. Having a bad day, Jay? That is quite a leap, accusing him of having poor flying skills, because he was doing something (flying across the border) that he does not do frequently. A giant leap. Not much of a leap at all. If one is significanty deficient on one area, the probablility of being similarily deficient in a closely related area is quite high. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 26 May 2006 19:58:54 -0400, Jay Somerset
wrote: On Thu, 25 May 2006 18:21:46 -0400, "Morgans" wrote: "Jay Somerset " wrote Perhaps it's also time for you to do a BFR -- if your grasp on procedures is that shaky, your flying skills are also probably not up to scratch. Having a bad day, Jay? That is quite a leap, accusing him of having poor flying skills, because he was doing something (flying across the border) that he does not do frequently. A giant leap. Not much of a leap at all. If one is significanty deficient on one area, the probablility of being similarily deficient in a closely related area is quite high. The change was in the system,not in the pilot. Over the years I had come to expect receive similar treatment from the system whether VFR or IFR. Only on more recent flights have I seen a major difference. Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Roger" wrote in message
... The change was in the system,not in the pilot. Over the years I had come to expect receive similar treatment from the system whether VFR or IFR. Only on more recent flights have I seen a major difference. From which system? Canada or US? And over how many years? Granted, my first flight into Canada was "only" 15 years ago. But even then, the US system did not generally involve ATC being willing to deal with VFR flight plans. Doing so required them to negotiate with the FSS directly (as opposed to dealing with an IFR flight plan that was already transmitted to their computers), and was an additional work item they never wanted to deal with. The only time I was able to get ATC to close a VFR flight plan for me was when the US Customs agent that was supposed to meet me had overslept and I was left sitting in my airplane for 30 minutes until the guy finally showed up and let me and my passengers out of the airplane. I was unable to reach the FSS on their local RCO frequency while sitting on the ground (guess it wasn't that local) and ATC thankfully was willing to talk to the FSS and have them close my VFR flight plan, as well as phone Customs to try to figure out why my scheduled Customs agent wasn't present. Canada on the other hand has always been willing to deal with VFR and IFR flight plans in the same way. As far as I know, they *are* handled the same way for them, without the FSS-disconnect that exists in the US for VFR flight plans. Canada ATC has always closed my inbound flight plan for me, and opened my outbound flight plan for me. I have even filed a VFR flight plan through the Canada ATC once when I had a mechanical issue and I was stuck out on the airport ramp when the plane was finally ready to go. I could've walked back into the terminal and phoned, but they let me file on the ground control frequency through them. As an aside (not related to your comment about "over the years", obviously), I have not made an international flight since before 9/11/2001, so I don't have first-hand information about how the new flight plan requirements work. But I haven't read anything to suggest they are a LOT different from the way they used to be, and haven't seen anything to suggest that US ATC is now handling VFR flight plans in the same way that they handle IFR flight plans. Someone flying internationally and expecting US ATC to open and close their VFR flight plans just hasn't done their homework. Pete |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training | Immanuel Goldstein | Piloting | 365 | March 16th 06 01:15 AM |
Mini-500 Accident Analysis | Dennis Fetters | Rotorcraft | 16 | September 3rd 05 11:35 AM |
Must the PLANE be IFR-equipped to fly over17,500? | john smith | Home Built | 11 | August 27th 04 02:29 AM |
ADV: CPA Mountain Flying Course 2004 Dates | [email protected] | Piloting | 0 | February 13th 04 04:30 AM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |