"normal" procedure for pop-up filing

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

Is this an "official" FAA procedure or just something that most
controllers understand as an indication that FF will be requested?


Depends what you mean by "official", I suppose. I've never seen anything in
print about filing it through DUATS as I explained here, I just tried it one
day and it worked. The entry of VFR flight data into the NAS computer is
certainly "official", the procedure is described in the flight data
processing manual.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

Is this an "official" FAA procedure or just something that most
controllers understand as an indication that FF will be requested?



Depends what you mean by "official", I suppose. I've never seen anything in
print about filing it through DUATS as I explained here, I just tried it one
day and it worked. The entry of VFR flight data into the NAS computer is
certainly "official", the procedure is described in the flight data
processing manual.



I meant official in the sense that it was documented somewhere such that
most knowledgeable controllers would know what it mean when they saw it,
or that the computers would handle it properly. Sounds like the answer
is basically, yes.

Matt

"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.

"S Herman" wrote in message
...

This is for IR pilots only, right?


Nope.



A non-IR pilot cannot file an IFR flight plan, can they?


Any pilot can file one, but only an IFR pilot can accept an IFR clearance.
Even though you're filing an IFR flight plan through DUATS with this
procedure the controller isn't going to issue an IFR clearance. An IFR
flight plan is filed only to direct it to ATC, putting "VFR" as the
requested altitude tells the controller you're just seeking traffic
advisories.

"S Herman" wrote in message
...

So a non-IR pilot can file IFR, but cannot then execute that flight
plan, even if VFR conditions exist at all points of the flight?


Correct.



How do IR students practice approaches, etc. when they don't have the
CFII aboard? With a safety pilot?


Always with a safety pilot, usually under VFR.

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

In article . com, Michael wrote:
Roy,
You actually can get a squawk code for VFR flight following on the
ground sometimes. I have done it at BLM enroute to FRG. Called Bradley
on the ground and told them I was departing BLM to the north and wanted
to transition the Bravo....could they give me a code and pass me
thru..The Bradley controller took the info..called me back with radar
contact after I was airborne and then passed me thru the NY Bravo to
FRG no problems. I don't know if they will always do it..but what's the
harm in asking.

I'm sure Roy knows this, flying out of HPN. You can call clearance
delivery for a VFR class be clearance or a VFR squawk code.

I was surprised leaving CDW when I asked on ground frequency and they
told me they _didn't_ do that there.

Morris

S Herman wrote:


So a non-IR pilot can file IFR, but cannot then execute that flight
plan, even if VFR conditions exist at all points of the flight?


If that plan involves operating under IFR.

How do IR students practice approaches, etc. when they don't have the
CFII aboard? With a safety pilot?

They either:

1. Let a PIC who is instrument qualified allow them to operate under
IFR.
2. They requiest the practice approach under VFR.

"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