Silly controller

Robert M. Gary wrote:
The other day I was doing a VFR practice approach into Tracy, CA when
the controller told me "reporting canceling IFR this freq, or on ground
via land line...". I told him "uh, ok canceling IFR, I didn't believe I
was IFR" (because I hadn't asked for or received an IFR clearance).
The controller told me that any aircraft on an approach clearance is
IFR for the purposes of the approach. I guess even controllers can be
students?

We are in the middle of that same thing now. Your approach control,
like ours, probably has a letter to airmen out there that says they will
provide service to the extent possible. What they probably did, like we
used to, is to tell you "radar service terminated, squawk VFR, freq
change approved." Our region has determined that that does not provide
the service the letter to airmen says we will. He probably didn't say
report cancelling IFR but rather to report completing the approach,
that's the region mandated phraseology. Another unwanted outcome of
this policy is at uncontrolled airports you can now only have one
aircraft on a practice approach at a time. We used to just terminate
the aircraft about 6-8 miles from the airport and then as long as the
next approach was at least three miles behind that one everything was
good. Now we can no longer have anybody on the approach behind the
first guy unless we say "practice approach approved, separation not
provided, maintain VFR." When we terminated the first guy that does not
relieve ATC from providing the required three miles and since by
definition you cannot provide radar service to somebody you terminate,
even though you can still see his target, you have to get the report of
completing the approach before allowing the next guy to get a clearance.