VFR Flight Following -- What's going on here?

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:LATue.100867$nG6.96413@attbi_s22...
I disagree 'almost' 100% with Larry (and you) on this issue. Cowards??
Goodness gracious!

I worked for years at the Brewery with guys named Red, Whitey, Tex,
Butch,
Swanee, Bud, Slim, etc. That's how I knew them. In these newsgroups, as
long as you can match a moniker to a posting history, that's all that
really matters, IMHO.

There are always exceptions, of course. You, Newps, and Maule Driver all
come to mind as good, solid Usenet citizens, even though you choose to
remain (somewhat) anonymous.

Unfortunately, for every example of good, I can name three anonymous
evil-doers (I *love* that word!) -- or, worse, guys who appear to be using
their real names, but are actually using a real-LOOKING pen name -- who
are
really nasty, and contribute little to the conversation.


I can think of more than a few evil doers that use their real names.

For example, I remember one dude goes by the name of Honeck! :~)


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

"Newps" wrote in message
news


Matt Barrow wrote:




Will he know who you are?

Yep, he did all the work at the shop. He recently quit and now is the
manager at RPX.

Will he know what I mean if I say "Newps sent me!", or do I have to say,
"The approach controller over yonder in Billings with the slow 182..."?


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

Will he know what I mean if I say "Newps sent me!", or do I have to say,
"The approach controller over yonder in Billings with the slow 182..."?

Just do a low pass and intone into the microphone "I've been sent".

Jose
--
My other car is up my nose.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

For example, I remember one dude goes by the name of Honeck! :~)

Yeah, but no one could make up such a name. It's almost as goofy as
"General Grievous"...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:5F4ve.102678$nG6.66865@attbi_s22...
For example, I remember one dude goes by the name of Honeck! :~)

Yeah, but no one could make up such a name. It's almost as goofy as
"General Grievous"...

;-)

Not to mention "Biggus Dickus"!!

WAKE UP!! wrote:

But there are very good reasons to be anon online.

70-34-15-110.lmdaca.adelphia.net = 70.34.15.110

Outside of Los Angeles, California. Somebody might recognize the LMDACA
abbreviation to help narrow it down...

("Darrel Toepfer" wrote)
WAKE UP!! wrote:

But there are very good reasons to be anon online.

70-34-15-110.lmdaca.adelphia.net = 70.34.15.110

Outside of Los Angeles, California. Somebody might recognize the LMDACA
abbreviation to help narrow it down...


WAKE UP!! is VERY GOOD at what he does. I wouldn't mess with him!!! g

Thanks again WAKE UP!! for your assistance in that other matter!!!!!!!


Mont

WAKE UP!! is VERY GOOD at what he does. I wouldn't mess with him!!! g

I'll second that motion!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

I have gotten Flight Following without a transponder, but it was one of
those corner cases. Basically, the transponder was inoperative, but it
would have required a very long flight to go around the airspace that
required a transponder (a Class C up against a Mode C veil). So, we
contacted ATC, advised them of our transponder issue, and asked to
transition over the top of the Class C (transponder is required except
by prior arrangement... which was the purpose of asking). They RADAR
identified us, and followed our primary return. Indeed, they continued
the service until they lost RADAR contact quite a peice out from over
the Class C.

-Rob

Guy Elden Jr wrote:
Off topic, but related: Can a radar center offer flight following to a
plane not equipped with a transponder? I would guess no, but I'm curious.

I think that you can have an IFR clearance and at points along the
route not be in radar coverage. In those cases you get a much larger
zone of protected airspace around you, and you have to radio in your
position at compulsory reporting points.

As for flight following, I would think the value would be pretty much
useless. The whole point is to gain a second pair of eyes for you on
the ground with the assumption that you are still responsible for
separation from other aircraft. If the folks on the ground can't see
you on their scopes, then there's really no point to flight following.

--
Guy

Matt Barrow wrote:

Yep, he did all the work at the shop. He recently quit and now is the
manager at RPX.


Will he know what I mean if I say "Newps sent me!", or do I have to say,
"The approach controller over yonder in Billings with the slow 182..."?


Either one.