wrote:
> Steven P. McNicoll > wrote:
> : Milwaukee to Knox is an overflight and Chicago approach doesn't do overflights.
>
> ... even VFR. It's one of the reasons that friends of mine don't use flight
> following. I find it annoying that even if you transition VFR above Bravo at, say,
> 10.5k, approach will try to vector you around if you talk to them. I think it would
> be better to encourage VFR advisories for everyone's safety, but most large airspaces
> discourage it.

Yes, when I went over the class B at 10500 they wanted me farther out over the
lake, and I complied. At that altitude I didn't mind being a few miles over the
water. They also pointed out plenty of large pieces of aluminum, so I was happy
to have their help looking out for traffic. I still did go over a part of the B
airspace, the northern part.

Dave

On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 16:28:25 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote:

>
> wrote in message
...
>> Steven P. McNicoll > wrote:
>> : Milwaukee to Knox is an overflight and Chicago approach doesn't do
>overflights.
>>
>> ... even VFR. It's one of the reasons that friends of mine don't
>use flight
>> following. I find it annoying that even if you transition VFR above Bravo
>at, say,
>> 10.5k, approach will try to vector you around if you talk to them. I
>think it would
>> be better to encourage VFR advisories for everyone's safety, but most
>large airspaces
>> discourage it.
>>
>
>Approach has no authority to vector you if you're VFR outside of Class B
>airspace.

True, but they will threaten to cancel your FF if you don't agree to
their vectors. Granted, FF doesn't make planes fly, but it is
comforting in the midst of the dense traffic found in Bravo airspace.

I agree with Cory. Rather than cancelling our FF, wouldn't everyone
be better off (and safer) keeping us on a squawk and on frequency?

On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 02:51:50 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote:

>
>"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> True, but they will threaten to cancel your FF if you don't agree to
>> their vectors. Granted, FF doesn't make planes fly, but it is
>> comforting in the midst of the dense traffic found in Bravo airspace.
>>
>
>So what you're saying is if you don't move to where he won't have to give
>you traffic advisories he'll stop giving you traffic advisories.

Roughly, yes.

On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 19:45:38 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote:

>
>"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
>> >
>> >So what you're saying is if you don't move to where he won't have to give
>> >you traffic advisories he'll stop giving you traffic advisories.
>> >
>>
>> Roughly, yes.
>>
>>
>
>So, then, there's no reason for you to move.

I don't follow the logic.