"normal" procedure for pop-up filing

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

Forget about the remarks, just use "VFR" as the requested altitude.

That will guarantee you get flight following?

Antonio

"Antoñio" wrote in message
ups.com...

That will guarantee you get flight following?


No, it will do what Ray wants, "pre-file your VFR flight plan with DUATS so
ATC already has a strip on you at initial call-up, just like with IFR."
Nothing can guarantee you get flight following.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Anto=F1io" wrote in message
ups.com...

That will guarantee you get flight following?


No, it will do what Ray wants, "pre-file your VFR flight plan with DUATS =
so
ATC already has a strip on you at initial call-up, just like with IFR."
Nothing can guarantee you get flight following.

I understood him as wanting a way to file in advance for flight
following.


Roy stated:

"By the same token, I've never understood why the FAA doesn't make it
easier to get flight following. You should be able to pre-file your
VFR flight plan with DUATS so ATC already has a strip on you at
initial call-up, just like with IFR. Then you wouldn't have to waste
so much time on the frequency with where you're going, aircraft type,
etc.

I've been told you can play tricks with DUAT, filing an IFR flight
plan and putting "VFR" in the remarks section, but you shouldn't have
to resort to subterfuge like that for what seems like such a simple
and logical thing. "

Your reply seemed to imply that he could obtain flight following by
putting "VFR" in the altitude box. I take it you were only saying that
this will generate a strip on him which, in turn, will make it easier
for him to request flight following?

Antonio

Antoñio wrote:


I've been told you can play tricks with DUAT, filing an IFR flight
plan and putting "VFR" in the remarks section, but you shouldn't have
to resort to subterfuge like that for what seems like such a simple
and logical thing. "

Your reply seemed to imply that he could obtain flight following by
putting "VFR" in the altitude box. I take it you were only saying that
this will generate a strip on him which, in turn, will make it easier
for him to request flight following?

It's not really subterfuge. The IFR box gets it automatically routed
to approach. This is because there's no indication that a VFR flight
plan ever needs to go to ATC...it would generate a lot of strips that
were never used if they did. It's the same whether the strip is filed
by DUAT or by the FSS briefer. If it goes to ATC it's because someone
ticked IFR in the first block.

"Antoñio" wrote in message
oups.com...

I understood him as wanting a way to file in advance for flight following.


So did I. This procedure does that.



Your reply seemed to imply that he could obtain flight following by
putting "VFR"
in the altitude box.


I don't think I implied that, I think I said that explicitly.



I take it you were only saying that this will generate a strip on him
which,
in turn, will make it easier for him to request flight following?


Yes, that's exactly what he wanted.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Anto=F1io" wrote in message
oups.com...

I understood him as wanting a way to file in advance for flight followi=
ng.


So did I. This procedure does that.



Your reply seemed to imply that he could obtain flight following by
putting "VFR"
in the altitude box.


I don't think I implied that, I think I said that explicitly.

You did not say it explicitly, as I recall. In fact, what you say is
still a bit contradictory since you cannot, in fact, get FF by filing
"VFR" in the altitude box. If I understand you correctly, this only
allows you to be put in the system which *subsequently* will allow you
to request FF easier.


I take it you were only saying that this will generate a strip on him
which,
in turn, will make it easier for him to request flight following?


Yes, that's exactly what he wanted.

No, he wanted to be able to directly file FF...which is not offered by
ATC.
You offered him a way to be more prepared to file FF; not file it
directly.

But, if we understand each other, why are you so confused? ;-)

Stephen, I know you are sometimes concise to the point of esoteric
obscurity so I offer this as a suggestion in communication:

Answer a question that offers a yes or no answer with a "yes" or a
"no". *Then* proceed with the cryptic, rhetorical,
fill-in-the-blank-yourself embellishments. It gives the reader a point
of reference and makes it so much easier for the partially stoned. ;-)

Ok? ( check only one: __yes __no )

Antonio

"Antoñio" wrote in message
oups.com...

You did not say it explicitly, as I recall. In fact, what you say is still
a bit
contradictory since you cannot, in fact, get FF by filing "VFR" in the
altitude box.


But you can, in fact, get flight following by filing "VFR" in the altitude
box.



If I understand you correctly, this only allows you to be put in the
system
which *subsequently* will allow you to request FF easier.


Now you're catchin' on!



No, he wanted to be able to directly file FF...which is not offered by
ATC.
You offered him a way to be more prepared to file FF; not file it
directly.


Filing through DUATS is filing directly. It appears you have no experience
with DUATS.



But, if we understand each other, why are you so confused? ;-)


I am not at all confused, I understand all there is to know about this
subject.



Stephen, I know you are sometimes concise to the point of esoteric
obscurity
so I offer this as a suggestion in communication:

Answer a question that offers a yes or no answer with a "yes" or a "no".
*Then* proceed with the cryptic, rhetorical, fill-in-the-blank-yourself
embellishments. It gives the reader a point of reference and makes it so
much easier for the partially stoned. ;-)

Ok? ( check only one: __yes __no )


What is your native language? How long have you been studying English?

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Anto=F1io" wrote in message
oups.com...

You did not say it explicitly, as I recall. In fact, what you say is st=
ill
a bit
contradictory since you cannot, in fact, get FF by filing "VFR" in the
altitude box.


But you can, in fact, get flight following by filing "VFR" in the altitude
box.

Ah yes. I see that is your assertion below. I did not know this and see
now that you clarify your statements *below*. However, I did notice you
have no CFR14 or 7110 quote for us. How come?

Filing through DUATS is filing directly. It appears you have no experien=
ce
with DUATS.

You are correct...I don't use DUATs. They upset my stomach. Though I
did try AWAX once. It was very uncomfortable!

But, if we understand each other, why are you so confused? ;-)


I am not at all confused, I understand all there is to know about this
subject.


Oh, I have no doubts that you think so. Perhaps one with such a perfect
knowledge might understand why us "lesser souls" would need
clarification (or proof) at times?

What is your native language? How long have you been studying English?

I resent you calling me a "native"...and I understand English as I
understand passive-agressive, megalomania quite well, thank you. ;-)

BTW here's something you don't seem to know: This is symbol that means
"I'm kidding with you"...... ;-)


Antonio

On Wed, 25 May 2005 10:54:28 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Antoñio" wrote in message
oups.com...

That will guarantee you get flight following?


No, it will do what Ray wants, "pre-file your VFR flight plan with DUATS so
ATC already has a strip on you at initial call-up, just like with IFR."
Nothing can guarantee you get flight following.


This is for IR pilots only, right? A non-IR pilot cannot file an IFR
flight plan, can they?

S Herman wrote:



This is for IR pilots only, right? A non-IR pilot cannot file an IFR
flight plan, can they?

Nothing prevents that. The only rules are that you can not operate
under IFR (or conditions less than VFR). There's no prohibition on
what flight plans you file. You can file to fly B-747's at the flight
levels if you really want.