John...

I SOMEWHAT agree with you... I CHOOSE to use flight following the
majority of the time when I get airborne, especially anything that is
more than local touch and go pattern work... and I agree that radar
services are a wonderful aid: They have alerted me to 2 POTENTIAL Near
Mid Air situations well before I could have seen the aircraft in
question (merging targets, same altitude, I requested suggested vectors
in both situations). BUT, VFR radar services are on a time and workload
permitting basis. Just because they(ATC)are talking to me doesnt mean
they will call ALL pertinent traffic. There have been many times that
I've seen traffic they(ATC)later called or didnt call at all.

I do believe the use of Radar Services is under-taught and
under-utilized. I can attest to my primary flying partner not doing it
out of laziness but out of discomfort: He just doesnt feel comfortable
with ATC. He flys solely out of uncontrolled strips, and got his ticket
10 years ago, sat out for 8 years, then has just recently returned to
flying. He's a passable pilot but he's intimidated by ATC. Hardly lazy.

My first instructor introduced me to flight following on my first flight
with him. He was just a private pilot, and future brother-in-law at the
time when we took a long XC to visit kin and so it was something I
became very comfortable and proficient with as we did
"pre-instructional" flying.

I agree that many instructors dont seem to emphasize flight following. I
have taken many a newly minted PP or even other students along for
"flying junkie jaunts" and my use of radar services has been their first
exposure to the service. Its a wonderful tool, but I would have to agree
with others: "mandatory" is just an opinion, and one has to be careful
not to become overly dependent on an "as able" service to provide
separation for them.

Blue Skies,
Dave


John Harlow wrote:

C J Campbell wrote:

Both pilots are well known and respected in the Puget Sound area.
Amazing that the pilot of the 170 was able to fly his plane at all:


"...neither aircraft had requested or were receiving air route traffic
control radar
services at the time of the collision."

What a shame.

I never, ever fly without at least trying to get traffic advisories, and
it's very rare I don't get it. As a student, because NONE of my instructors
ever did, I didn't think to much about it (they are the pros, don't you
know?). Now, I consider anyone who is to lazy to get flight following as
someone too foolish to fly with.

Are there still instructors out there who still opt out of this (what I
consider mandatory) flying aid?