"normal" procedure for pop-up filing

The alternate thing is interesting. In VMC, I just file IFR anyway. When I get close I'll either amend if I want to go further or cancel and go to FF. Nothing wrong with planning for IFR fuel and flying VFR fuel once there. Kind of good conservative planning. I'll do that next week flying to Tampa. With 4.5 hours, I can and have made Tampa without a stop but never plan it. I will file and get a clearance and see how it works this time.

Recently I was going from Florida to Cleveland with a stop just before
the mountains for fuel. While on the ground, a line of severe
thunderstorms passed by, and then I could go behind them. As there were
mountains and scattered embedded thunderstorms in the way, the IFR
routing would likely be wiggly, subject to revision, and would probably
not get me to Cleveland with an alternate and appropriate reserves. So
I'd need to stop again, and I would not be able to see the thunderheads
to avoid them.

But if I could slip out VFR, I could fly direct, avoid the nasty stuff
visually if it became an issue, and land with plenty of fuel at my
destination. I got flight following, advised them that I might nead a
clearance at some point, and did just that. Dodged a bit of weather
visually, climbed up to 12,000 feet while doing so, and approaching
Cleveland I got the ILS. Point two IMC in the logbook, one approach to
minimums, no convective surprises, plenty of outs, and no hassles.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
paul kgyy wrote:
I was taught that, if I needed to file an IFR flight plan in the middle
of a trip, I should contact FSS first to file and get clearance, then
contact ATC. On the other hand, I hear frequent references in
rec.aviation to pilots who just contact ATC directly. Does this depend
on how busy ATC is - i.e. near Chicago contact FSS, near Moline contact
Moline approach?

It absolutely depends on how busy ATC is. Around here (New York), if
they're not busy, you can call them up cold and and make your
request. They'll take the important info (destination, aircraft type,
etc) and give you a route. Sometimes they'll say they're too busy and
tell you to go talk to FSS like you're supposed to.

What I find works best is if things are iffy, is to get VFR flight
following first. Once they've already got you in the system, assigned
a code, radar identified, etc, if you later tell them you need to get
a clearance, they're more likely to handle you directly.

If push comes to shove, if you tell them you need a clearance NOW,
they'll get you one. But the idea is to never let things degenerate
to the point where you have to start playing trump cards.

Actually Roy, ATC'll get you one *if* they can. ATC usually can, especially
under the circumstances you describe. However, the pilot really doesn't
have a "trump" card when it comes to pop-up IFR. You need one on a busy
frequency, you might be SOL for a while as ATC is occupied with higher
priority stuff. My point is that you are in no legal position to demand IFR
if you are already airborne flying VFR.

I totally agree with you about getting F/F making a pop-up easier to get.
Under VFR Flight Following, you already have almost all of the ingredients
in play that ATC needs to handle you IFR. Converting F/F to IFR on a busy
frequency is usually no more workload on the controller other than issuing
you a clearance and a good IFR altitude. Because I already am providing you
radar service, I can give you a clearance with one transmission. Then, I
either send you over to Radio to file the full SAR stuff (souls on board
etc) or else get you to spit it all out on the taped frequency if I have
room/time on the bandwidth. If something happens to cause a need for SAR,
Center can pull the voice tape and access your information. In an
emergency, we can access the voice data in under five minutes.

I've never understood why more pilots on VFR cross countries don't use
Flight Following. Personally, I've never had to turn down VFR radar service
to any pilot no matter how busy I've been with IFR traffic (and I'm plenty
busy, often). Centers don't have to separate VFR's in Class E, which is
where most of our flight following happens. Thus, there's no reason for
ARTCC's not to provide the service, even when the freq is non-stop with
radio traffic. Almost every Center controller I know down here would rather
be talking to all parties when making traffic calls to known aircraft. The
unknown VFR guys represent a traffic wildcard and in my view increase the
workload when issuing traffic to known aircraft, rather than decreasing it.

Chip, ZTL

Jack wrote:

Why don't more people use flight following? It distracts them from
being
able to enjoy their satellite radio, Bob.

That is absolutely hilarious, as I did that once. However, ATC made
the decision easy for me since the next approach facility would not
accept my VFR handoff from the previous controller, nor would they
answer my VFR calls, yet their side of the frequency was quiet (at this
particular facility the ocntroller might work two frequencies, but he
transmits on both).

Oh well, I said to my intercom, I guess I will enjoy a few moments of
uninterrupted satellite radio. :-)

--
Peter

Chip Jones wrote:
I've never understood why more pilots on VFR cross countries don't use
Flight Following.

By the same token, I've never understood why the FAA doesn't make it
easier to get flight following. You should be able to pre-file your
VFR flight plan with DUATS so ATC already has a strip on you at
initial call-up, just like with IFR. Then you wouldn't have to waste
so much time on the frequency with where you're going, aircraft type,
etc.

I've been told you can play tricks with DUAT, filing an IFR flight
plan and putting "VFR" in the remarks section, but you shouldn't have
to resort to subterfuge like that for what seems like such a simple
and logical thing.

"paul kgyy" wrote:
I was taught that, if I needed to file an IFR flight plan in the
middle
of a trip, I should contact FSS first to file and get clearance, then
contact ATC. On the other hand, I hear frequent references in
rec.aviation to pilots who just contact ATC directly. Does this
depend
on how busy ATC is ...?

Yes.

It also depends on what segment of the trip you are flying. If I decide
I need an in flight clearance near the beginning of a long trip, I'll
call FSS. If I'm in or near the airspace of the ATC facility
controlling my destination's approaches, I'll get a pop-up, frequency
congestion permitting.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

"Chip Jones" wrote:

I've never understood why more pilots on VFR cross countries don't use
Flight Following. ...Almost every Center controller I know down here
would rather
be talking to all parties when making traffic calls to known aircraft.
The
unknown VFR guys represent a traffic wildcard and in my view increase
the
workload when issuing traffic to known aircraft, rather than
decreasing it.

Well, I gotta admit that sometimes I don't use FF because I don't want
to be bothered. Like when it's a brilliant, clear day and I would
rather listen to music and watch the world go by than work the radio.

No offense, Chip; I enjoy working with ATC. But 90% of my flying is
IFR, and I like taking a break from "the system" once in a while.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

I get FF whenever I fly VFR, but there are times when that may be a
hassle. If you are engaged in conversation with your pax, it is easy to
miss an ATC transmission. I've heard ATC chide pilots "if you want
flight following, you better listen to the radio".





"Chip Jones" wrote in
ink.net:


"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
paul kgyy wrote:
I was taught that, if I needed to file an IFR flight plan in the
middle of a trip, I should contact FSS first to file and get
clearance, then contact ATC. On the other hand, I hear frequent
references in rec.aviation to pilots who just contact ATC directly.
Does this depend on how busy ATC is - i.e. near Chicago contact FSS,
near Moline contact Moline approach?

It absolutely depends on how busy ATC is. Around here (New York), if
they're not busy, you can call them up cold and and make your
request. They'll take the important info (destination, aircraft
type, etc) and give you a route. Sometimes they'll say they're too
busy and tell you to go talk to FSS like you're supposed to.

What I find works best is if things are iffy, is to get VFR flight
following first. Once they've already got you in the system,
assigned a code, radar identified, etc, if you later tell them you
need to get a clearance, they're more likely to handle you directly.

If push comes to shove, if you tell them you need a clearance NOW,
they'll get you one. But the idea is to never let things degenerate
to the point where you have to start playing trump cards.

Actually Roy, ATC'll get you one *if* they can. ATC usually can,
especially under the circumstances you describe. However, the pilot
really doesn't have a "trump" card when it comes to pop-up IFR. You
need one on a busy frequency, you might be SOL for a while as ATC is
occupied with higher priority stuff. My point is that you are in no
legal position to demand IFR if you are already airborne flying VFR.

I totally agree with you about getting F/F making a pop-up easier to
get. Under VFR Flight Following, you already have almost all of the
ingredients in play that ATC needs to handle you IFR. Converting F/F
to IFR on a busy frequency is usually no more workload on the
controller other than issuing you a clearance and a good IFR altitude.
Because I already am providing you radar service, I can give you a
clearance with one transmission. Then, I either send you over to
Radio to file the full SAR stuff (souls on board etc) or else get you
to spit it all out on the taped frequency if I have room/time on the
bandwidth. If something happens to cause a need for SAR, Center can
pull the voice tape and access your information. In an emergency, we
can access the voice data in under five minutes.

I've never understood why more pilots on VFR cross countries don't use
Flight Following. Personally, I've never had to turn down VFR radar
service to any pilot no matter how busy I've been with IFR traffic
(and I'm plenty busy, often). Centers don't have to separate VFR's in
Class E, which is where most of our flight following happens. Thus,
there's no reason for ARTCC's not to provide the service, even when
the freq is non-stop with radio traffic. Almost every Center
controller I know down here would rather be talking to all parties
when making traffic calls to known aircraft. The unknown VFR guys
represent a traffic wildcard and in my view increase the workload when
issuing traffic to known aircraft, rather than decreasing it.

Chip, ZTL

Lots of good answers, especially regarding how easy it is to get a pop-up if
you already have flight following. I'll just add one more item - fly a route
you could fly IFR with the equipment you've got. For example, while my
handheld GPS can take me direct anywhere VFR - I'm screwed if I need an IFR
pop-up and I'm not on an airway in my VOR only equiped plane (/U). So I
pretty much always follow airways - just on the off chance I need to
"convert" my flight following to an IFR clearance.

-Brenor

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

By the same token, I've never understood why the FAA doesn't make it
easier to get flight following. You should be able to pre-file your
VFR flight plan with DUATS so ATC already has a strip on you at
initial call-up, just like with IFR. Then you wouldn't have to waste
so much time on the frequency with where you're going, aircraft type,
etc.

I've been told you can play tricks with DUAT, filing an IFR flight
plan and putting "VFR" in the remarks section, but you shouldn't have
to resort to subterfuge like that for what seems like such a simple
and logical thing.


Forget about the remarks, just use "VFR" as the requested altitude.

Just to add my $0.02: If I'm already getting FF and I suggest to the
controller that I want to go off frequency to talk to FSS to file IFR,
s/he always seems to say, "nah, we'll do it right here."

I always thought it was the reverse psychology in action. I've spent
too much time with sales people.

-- dave j
-- jacobowitz73 --at-- yahoo --dot-- com