IFR/Flight Following -- ATC Preferences?

John Doe wrote:

"Mitty" wrote in message
...
As of right now, 6 posts, none of which respond to the OP.

To clarify: I am asking the ATC guys a question. I am not interested in
readings from the FAR/AIM, other pilots' personal practices, OT advice, or
reading posts from people who are flaming each other. Thanks in advance.

Oh well excuse me Mr Picky.

I've got a grand idea for you then pal. How about you pick up the freak'n
phone and just call them instead of posting a shout to the world in a plea
for advice.

Damn, my news server didn't have Mitty's original post.

Hey, Mitty: Up yours, chief. You post to a public newsgroup, you are
going to get all kinds of replies. You no likey? Then stay away from
Usenet.


--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Victor J. Osborne, Jr." wrote:

ON topic: I wonder if my wanting to fly VFR w/o FF (i.e. no use of
services) is an attempt at getting use to user fee world (coming in my
opinion) If I don't use it, I MAY not have to pay for it.

Not sure how your post is any more on topic to this thread, Victor.

YOU didn't answer Mitty's question either and given the strict rules he is
attempting to apply to this thread, your experience doesn't qualify anyhow.

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

From what little we "know" from news reports and supermarket tabloids, he
was disoriented. There have been a number of cases in which a controller has
talked pilots/nonpilot passengers into gaining/regaining control of an
airplane that is in trouble. Neither you nor I know what the controller for
the sector he was in at the fatal moment would or could have done had he
been talking to ATC, but we know for sure that he was in a situation that he
could not handle on his own.

Bob Gardner

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Bob Gardner wrote:

Not the best attitude, in my opinion. As others have noted, ATC expansion
and paychecks depend on traffic counts, so by not using them you hit them
in the pocketbook. And you deprive yourself of a safety net that you pay
for every April.

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.

How so? Could the controller fly his airplane remotely? :-)

Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Bob Gardner wrote:

Not the best attitude, in my opinion. As others have noted, ATC expansion
and paychecks depend on traffic counts, so by not using them you hit them
in the pocketbook. And you deprive yourself of a safety net that you pay
for every April.

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.

How so? Could the controller fly his airplane remotely? :-)

Matt

From what little we "know" from news reports and supermarket tabloids, he
was disoriented. There have been a number of cases in which a controller has
talked pilots/nonpilot passengers into gaining/regaining control of an
airplane that is in trouble. Neither you nor I know what the controller for
the sector he was in at the fatal moment would or could have done had he
been talking to ATC, but we know for sure that he was in a situation that he
could not handle on his own.

Bob Gardner


"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Bob Gardner wrote:

Not the best attitude, in my opinion. As others have noted, ATC expansion
and paychecks depend on traffic counts, so by not using them you hit them
in the pocketbook. And you deprive yourself of a safety net that you pay
for every April.

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.

How so? Could the controller fly his airplane remotely? :-)

Matt

Victor J. Osborne, Jr. wrote:

Perhaps calm him and ask if he activated the AP? It's amazing what
brain/sensory overload can do to rational thinking.

Yes, it appears to cause you to top post rather than bottom post with
the rest of the civilized usenet. Civilized means prior to M$ and IE
exploder.


Matt

Bob Gardner wrote:
From what little we "know" from news reports and supermarket tabloids, he
was disoriented.

NTSB: "The pilot's failure to maintain control of the airplane during a
descent over water at night, which was a result of spatial disorientation.
Factors in the accident were haze, and the dark night "

Hilton

Tortuous reasoning. I may have to recline with a cold compress on my
forehead.

Bob Gardner

"Victor J. Osborne, Jr." wrote in message
...
No. Thank you for pointing out the obvious.

Folks we need t/b civil to each other. I was embarrassed recently when I
showed a friend how useful the info is on R.A.I. "Opps, never mind, he
has a problem w/ him." Oh, ya, They get a little off track sometimes."
Well, let me show the weather resources we have."

--

Thx, {|;-)

Victor J. (Jim) Osborne, Jr.
"Mitty" wrote in message
...
As of right now, 6 posts, none of which respond to the OP.

To clarify: I am asking the ATC guys a question. I am not interested in
readings from the FAR/AIM, other pilots' personal practices, OT advice,
or reading posts from people who are flaming each other. Thanks in
advance.

On 10/25/2005 10:39 AM, Mitty wrote the following:
Departing cross country out of the Minneapolis area in severe clear, I
will usually ask for either flight following or will file. I depart from
KMIC, which is under the 4000 foot shelf of the MSP bravo airspace.

For example, Friday I am going from KMIC to KGPZ, which is a couple
hundred miles to the north.

I am curious what TRACON and Center guys think:

Do you prefer to have me on a full IFR flight plan? (I always cancel
when I have the airport in sight if the destination is non-towered.)

Just advisories so you know who I am and what I am doing, but you don't
have to provide separation services?

Or do you not wish to hear at all? (Hopefully not, because I like being
in the system both for traffic info and in case of emergency.)

TIA

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in
t:


"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...

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.


How would have flight following made a difference? He didn't run into
an unseen airplane.



The NTSB report refers to a descent into the water caused by spatial
disorientation.

A simple Altitude Alert from a controller could have reminded him to look
at his altimiter and VSI and realize that he was pointed into the water
instead of into the Horizon, potentially yeilding different results.

Even if he didn't look, but just pulled or powered up, it could have been a
life saver.

From what I hear on the radio, flight following is often a lot more than
just traffic alerts...

I'm a pilot, not a controller, but around Chicago it's hard to get
flight following. So if in doubt I always file IFR. It's normal
flying into Chicago VFR that FF will be terminated at the point where
you need it most, around the edge of the Class B.

I don't think it matters what ATC prefers. You are the PIC. They are
there to provide service and it's up to you to decide on the level of
service you require for safe and efficient operation.