Regs regarding "VFR flight following?" (also: "need to vent")

I had an interesting experience the other day. To some degree I was testing
the theory that a local Class-C facility would invariably vector VFR aircraft outside
the lateral boundaries of their airspace. I've seen this at a few different airports
where I transition through with flight following, but underneath (or overtop) the
vertical limits.

Basically, about 15 miles east I called up approach at 2500' westbound. I was
going to fly underneath the class-C which extends 5-miles from the airport SFC to
5000', and 10-miles out from 3400-5000'. My on-course track would put me about 6
miles from the airport. Sure enough, they issued vectors and told me to stay outside
10 miles from the airport. I replied that I would stay outside the Class-C. They
*again* issued me vectors and said to stay outside 10 miles. I reponded, "NXXXX would
like to terminate radar services." I never received the "radar service terminated,
squawk 1200," so I inquired as to whether or not they acknowledged my request to
terminate. The controller replied, "I want you to stay with ME until west of the
airport, continue on present heading." To which, I replied, "NXXXX outside the
Charlie, 2500, on-course, as I was planning."

I thought this particularly aggressive and unnecessary, so I was going to try
to find the official regs as far as flight following goes. I'm convinced that's the
reason why a lot of VFR pilots never want to talk to ATC unless absolutely necessary.
I pretty much use flight following on any cross-country when I'm not IFR, but it
aggravates me when they vector VFR traffic when outside (especially above/below) their
airspace anyway.

-Cory


--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

wrote:
I had an interesting experience the other day. To some degree I was testing
the theory that a local Class-C facility would invariably vector VFR aircraft outside
the lateral boundaries of their airspace. I've seen this at a few different airports
where I transition through with flight following, but underneath (or overtop) the
vertical limits.

Basically, about 15 miles east I called up approach at 2500' westbound. I was
going to fly underneath the class-C which extends 5-miles from the airport SFC to
5000', and 10-miles out from 3400-5000'. My on-course track would put me about 6
miles from the airport. Sure enough, they issued vectors and told me to stay outside
10 miles from the airport. I replied that I would stay outside the Class-C. They
*again* issued me vectors and said to stay outside 10 miles. I reponded, "NXXXX would
like to terminate radar services." I never received the "radar service terminated,
squawk 1200," so I inquired as to whether or not they acknowledged my request to
terminate. The controller replied, "I want you to stay with ME until west of the
airport, continue on present heading." To which, I replied, "NXXXX outside the
Charlie, 2500, on-course, as I was planning."

I thought this particularly aggressive and unnecessary, so I was going to try
to find the official regs as far as flight following goes. I'm convinced that's the
reason why a lot of VFR pilots never want to talk to ATC unless absolutely necessary.
I pretty much use flight following on any cross-country when I'm not IFR, but it
aggravates me when they vector VFR traffic when outside (especially above/below) their
airspace anyway.

-Cory


--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

I think it is a case of your milage may vary with a given facility.

I fly through class C on flight following a lot and have never had
anything like that happen.

I do plan to usually either cross midfield (in which case I get a remain
at or above that amounts to about 1000' above pattern) or parallel to
the active offset enough to be out of the approach/departure area.

The closest to a vector I've ever got was to move a bit to the North
to avoid wake turbulance from a heavy on approach.

Now there is this one busy class D area where clueless yahoos that
don't seem to understand how much jet traffic there is get vectored
on a regular basis. But listening to the pilot/controller exchange
makes it obvious that the pilot is flying in rectal-cranial inversion
mode and the area seems to attract a lot of them so the controllers
have developed a hair trigger.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote in
:

I had an interesting experience the other day. To some degree I
was testing
the theory that a local Class-C facility would invariably vector VFR
aircraft outside the lateral boundaries of their airspace. I've seen
this at a few different airports where I transition through with
flight following, but underneath (or overtop) the vertical limits.

I have never had this in Charlie airspace in my five years of flying.

I thought this particularly aggressive and unnecessary, so I was
going to try
to find the official regs as far as flight following goes. I'm
convinced that's the reason why a lot of VFR pilots never want to talk
to ATC unless absolutely necessary. I pretty much use flight
following on any cross-country when I'm not IFR, but it aggravates me
when they vector VFR traffic when outside (especially above/below)
their airspace anyway.

My question is where were you in relationship to the airport? Were you
under an approach or departure path? Where you near an initial approach
fix for IFR traffic?

Seems to me, that you may have been a traffic conflict for the approach
phase of the airport near these fixes (if you were indeed near one) that
ATC had the need to on to you / vector you around the Charlie airspace.

Naturally,, every airport is different, but my experience with Charlie
airspace has been quite different then yours.

Allen

: I have never had this in Charlie airspace in my five years of flying.

It's not at all of them, just a few here and there. They do tend to be fairly
consistent on it though.

: My question is where were you in relationship to the airport? Were you
: under an approach or departure path? Where you near an initial approach
: fix for IFR traffic?

: Seems to me, that you may have been a traffic conflict for the approach
: phase of the airport near these fixes (if you were indeed near one) that
: ATC had the need to on to you / vector you around the Charlie airspace.

As Doc Brown in "Back to the Future" said, "You're just not thinking
4th-dimensionally." Told them I would stay clear the Charlie... no need to get
vectored around it IMO.

: Naturally,, every airport is different, but my experience with Charlie
: airspace has been quite different then yours.

Maybe so, but I've flown underneath the Bravo in Chicago at least a dozen
times. Now *THEY* have something to worry about, but don't make an issue of it.
They'll even provide radar services for you VFR if you don't sound like an idiot on
the radio and can communicate quickly and suscinctly enough. The guys working a
podunk Charlie shouldn't get themselves worked up over traffic 2 miles and 1000' under
their airspace limits. (In their defense though, I know that there are a lot of
bumpkin' pilots around here that might have troubles flying within that tolerance).

My thoughts are if there is a traffic conflict, than the FAA needs to expand
the boundaries of the Charlie to cover it.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

A Lieberma wrote:



My question is where were you in relationship to the airport? Were you
under an approach or departure path? Where you near an initial approach
fix for IFR traffic?

Irrelavant. He was below the class C which puts him well away from
traffic at those points.

Newps wrote in
:

Irrelavant. He was below the class C which puts him well away from
traffic at those points.

Not quite sure I agree with this.

Looking back on his post, he was OUTSIDE class C flying straight and level.
He didn't give his altitude, but if he was 2000 feet or higher, he could
have easily been in an approach fix altitude that is located outside
charlie airspace.

Case in point around my area. Wouldn't be a good idea to fly around the
JAN VOR that is located outside KJAN charlie airspace with is an initial
approach fix at 2000 feet for incoming IFR traffic.

I'd sure want to be squawking and talking in that area! Could make for a
very bad day for the arrival and enroute traffic if one wasn't talking.

Allen

I've had this happen over Milwaukee. Granted, it's a busy class C, but
the like to vector me 10 miles out over Lake Michigan, which I do NOT
like.

Paul kgyy wrote:

: I've had this happen over Milwaukee. Granted, it's a busy class C, but
: the like to vector me 10 miles out over Lake Michigan, which I do NOT
: like.

Funny you mention MKE... that's one of the Charlies that *always* does it
to me. I generally fly into Capitol (02C) just to the northeast of Waukesha coming
from Chicago. Again, I'm generally flying 1000' under their Charlie, about 2-3
miles from the inner SFC veil. *IF* I talk to them, they try to vector me to the
west to get outside the lateral boundaries. If they tried to run me over the lake,
it would be a definite "unable."

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

Funny you mention MKE... that's one of the Charlies that *always* does it
to me. I generally fly into Capitol (02C) just to the northeast of Waukesha coming
from Chicago. Again, I'm generally flying 1000' under their Charlie, about 2-3
miles from the inner SFC veil. *IF* I talk to them, they try to vector me to the
west to get outside the lateral boundaries. If they tried to run me over the lake,
it would be a definite "unable."

We fly in that area a lot. Coming from the Southwest, MKE will usually
not take a hand-off from Rockford Approach, which is always
aggravating.

If they DO take the hand-off (or if you're able to catch them on your
own, they usually won't vector you around if you stay to the south of
their airspace. If you head to the north (to Timmerman or Waukesha, for
example), they will vector you around as needed, but not excessively,
IMHO.

If you fly past them along the lake shore, however, they WILL try to
send you way out over the lake. I always tell them "unable", and with
one exception they have always let me stay in tight to shore. The one
exception resulted in being vectored all the way around Class C to the
west, which really sucked.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On 10/27/06 13:49, Jay Honeck wrote:
Funny you mention MKE... that's one of the Charlies that *always* does it
to me. I generally fly into Capitol (02C) just to the northeast of Waukesha coming
from Chicago. Again, I'm generally flying 1000' under their Charlie, about 2-3
miles from the inner SFC veil. *IF* I talk to them, they try to vector me to the
west to get outside the lateral boundaries. If they tried to run me over the lake,
it would be a definite "unable."

We fly in that area a lot. Coming from the Southwest, MKE will usually
not take a hand-off from Rockford Approach, which is always
aggravating.

If they DO take the hand-off (or if you're able to catch them on your
own, they usually won't vector you around if you stay to the south of
their airspace. If you head to the north (to Timmerman or Waukesha, for
example), they will vector you around as needed, but not excessively,
IMHO.

If you fly past them along the lake shore, however, they WILL try to
send you way out over the lake. I always tell them "unable", and with
one exception they have always let me stay in tight to shore. The one
exception resulted in being vectored all the way around Class C to the
west, which really sucked.

So was that a punishment for being unable to fly out over the lake?
.... I hope not ;-\

--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"




--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA