Flight Following

[rob]

Quote: gsengle

That's why I called it a pet peeve  I don't expect other people to share my peeve.  But I do think the better your phraseology, the more likely you'll be trusted by the controller to be well behaved in what I'll call busy, high density airspaces (Like NYC where I fly way too often)

[John Pleisse]

I was always taught that when instructed to "ident" that one shouldn't reply verbally and that timely identing was your reply. Others say....give'm a quick Roger. Which is best?

[gsengle]

Quote: rob

 

What's funny to me is that most of the time, the folks sounding unprofessional on the radio are the ones who are professionals. I frequently get frustrated by the radio lingo used by guys flying the heavy stuff.  I think that ATC may or may not trust you based on what you say and how you say it, but they certainly discriminate based on what you're flying.

[bnicolette]

John, I don't say anything and just give the button a push.  Their looking/waiting for it and if it's working in your plane then they will get it.  If you're tied up at the moment?? and it's going to take you a minute, then I suppose it might be a good idea to say something?  At least then they know you heard them and will be fitting it into your schedule, but they expect to see it straight away.

[Hank]

The usual case when I am asked to ident is during initial call up, and it comes along with altimeter setting. I push the button and respond with something like "4DJ, 30.11, squawking 1234, ident."

I rarely ask for flight following or advisories or anything; I just dial up the nearby tower as I'm departing the pattern,

"Huntington, 4DJ is just off of Lawrence County, heading to Portsmouth at 3000"

and they come back with with a code and altimeter setting; sometimes they will ask me to stay out of Class D if they're working somebody in until after radar identification, but rarely after that. Often they will ask to verify altitude, especially if they have me 1 or 1½ miles out at 2200'.    That's almost as good as a request to slow down for traffic when I'm shooting an approach! Then the next plane headed to eat will call in at about the same place and 1500 - 1600 msl and I feel good again.

It's soooo nice to fly a Mooney!

[orangemtl]

Quote: PilotDerek

Ok, it seems nearly everyone uses it on a regular basis. Now here is another question. Would you still use it if they (Government) attach a user fee? Just for the record I do NOT support a user fees and have made my feelings known to my Senator and Congressmen. Again curious who would stop using it, or reduce the amount they use it.

[201er]

I don't know where this whole "taking the active phrase came from" especially cause I only hear it at uncontrolled airports. At towered airports I never hear anything about an active besides the ATIS. All ATC instructions and read backs involve saying the actual runway.

I always reply with ident but it usually includes a full host of information like altimeter, code, remain clear of bravo, etc.

And although I call it flight following when talking to other pilots, I have never requested "flight following, radar services, or advisories." Why waste time? I just state where I am and where I'm going: "New York Approach Mooney 4361H departed Linden one thousand for six thousand five hundred direct Kilo Lima Echo Xray." To which they'd respond "cleared into the bravo 6,500 on course, traffic 3 o'clock 5 miles 767." =)

What does surprise me though is that a lot of the time they'll come back and ask me aircraft type because I always say "mooney" in front of my N number anyway. I didn't spend this kind of effort to be called mister thank you very much. I say "Mooney M20J." But I wonder if it would be better to say "Mooney Mike Two Zero Juliet?" Meanwhile I'll find out from flight aware that some controllers feel generous and upgrade me to an M20R while others jip me and call it an M20C. Does type really matter though? They're all M20s you know.

[carusoam]

They're all m20s. But ATC gives us one identifier M20P (propeller).

Best regards,

-a-

[knute]

Quote: carusoam

They're all m20s. But ATC gives us one identifier M20P (propeller).

Best regards,

-a-

[201er]

Still shows my last major flight from September. I thought it was a factor of departing an airport with a clearance delivery (B/C/D).

[knute]

Quote: 201er

Still shows my last major flight from September. I thought it was a factor of departing an airport with a clearance delivery (B/C/D).

[scottfromiowa]

Yes Hank, I know...that's why I said "I look out the window and fly the correct VFR altitude".  Yes, the sky definitely IS bigger in rural midwest vs. out East regarding volume of traffic.  I have NO sense of security when I have "flight following".

Quote: Hank

[PilotDerek]

Quote: 201er

I don't know where this whole "taking the active phrase came from" especially cause I only hear it at uncontrolled airports. At towered airports I never hear anything about an active besides the ATIS. All ATC instructions and read backs involve saying the actual runway.

 

 

I was taught from day one to say "taking active", my CFI also taught me to request flight following. I have used the phrase "taking active" with a couple different instructors and also heard it from other pilots all over Southern Cali and never heard someone say that was improper. I'm curious now if it was in the Sporty's videos or King video's I saw. I will have to look. I think that as long as everyone understands what you are doing, it doesn't matter. Saying "taking active rnwy 26" or "departing rnwy 26" tells me you are using rnwy 26. To be honest saying "departing rnwy 26" makes me think you are already heading down the runway not getting into position for takeoff. Better communicate something then nothing at all, which I have also seen.

[Gone]

You folks remember "Position and Hold?"  That too is now gone (at least in Canada) and replaced by the ICAO agreed phrase: "Lining up."

Coming soon to an ATC unit near you.

[201er]

Quote: PilotDerek

[Ncbosshoss]

Quote: edgargravel

You folks remember "Position and Hold?"  That too is now gone (at least in Canada) and replaced by the ICAO agreed phrase: "Lining up."

Coming soon to an ATC unit near you.

[fantom]

Quote: knute

[GeorgePerry]

I prefer to fly IFR everywhere I go as long as I can get cleared "mostly" direct...If controllers start jerking me around giving me vectors to make room for the "big boy's" either IFR or VFR under advisories, I cancel, stop talking to them, go VFR direct, and let them work around me.  See and avoid still works pretty well and it's alot quicker than flying a SID or STAR.

Charlotte/Douglas CLT controllers on the East coast are notorious for doing this.  They vector GA aircraft miles off course to keep them well clear of Class B airspace...

[jax88]

As expressed, it would depend upon the cost.  I recently added traffic to my cockpit, but as previously mentioned, I like having every tool available when flying, and flight following would still be desirable.

[Hank]

George--

CLT does that to everyone, VFR and IFR alike. I filed from Barnwell, SC [near Savannah] back to WV at 10,000 to clear the hills in western NC; Greenville kept me at 7000, in the soup, updrafts, downpours, etc; my eventual block clearance carried me to 8600 where intermittent blue was visible. I asked for my filed 10K, and they responded if I went above 7000 [despite my 7-9 block] they would have to vector me around CLT. But it was smooth and clear the rest of the way home, and I don't think the vector was more than 10º. Below me was cloudy and dark, with visible buildups, and I was happy to be in smooth air and no longer asking for frequent weather updates ahead of me.

Why it's a big deal, I dunno, maybe CLT just has a big head? Clear, smooth and 10º is much better than dark, alternating rain/heavy rain, turbulence and updrafts . . . Nothing like summer weather! Why Greenville didn't give me an option, and then tried to talk me out of clear weather, I also don't understand. Do controllers think we LIKE being bounced around in the dark while rain drums on the plane around us?

Some folks were VFR down low, and everybody was asking for precipitation updates and vectors, even the VFR guys, and ATC was keeping them below the 8500-9000' tops from fear of Charlotte. It just doesn't make sense. I'll never forget that trip home, it was my wife's first trip in the clouds! And my first post-checkride IFR trip . . .  And yes, she still rides with me.  :-)

[gsengle]

Quote: PilotDerek

[Shadrach]

Quote: gsengle

[jlunseth]

Wow, this seems to be much ado about a tiny few words.  At an uncontrolled airport, I say "Clear of the active, runway xy."  Sometimes I also say " and taxiing to the ramp" and sometimes I am occupied with checklist things and just don't get the taxiing part out, or the airport is so small there is no place else I could be if I am not on the runway, other than taxiing to the ramp. 

I don't simply say "Clear of runway xy" because for one thing, if someone had not heard my earlier announcements, they would not necessarily know I had just landed on runway xy.  It could be that I was taxiing on xy to get to the intersecting runway yz, or just taxied across xy for some reason.  To me, and I think to most pilots, when someone says "clear of the active" at an uncontrolled airport, it means I just landed on that runway and am now clear of it.  It was "active" while I was using it, tower or no.  AIM may not say so, but that is the usage among pilots

I do think you need to say which runway.  "Clear of the active 13."  That way, approaching aircraft know which runway you have exited and where to look for you.  You exited 13 and not 27.     

[PilotDerek]

Quote: gsengle

g

[fantom]

"Any traffic in the pattern (or area), please advise".