"normal" procedure for pop-up filing

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

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.

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.

"Chip Jones" wrote:

I've never understood why more pilots on VFR cross countries don't use
Flight Following. ...Almost every Center controller I know down here
would rather
be talking to all parties when making traffic calls to known aircraft.
The
unknown VFR guys represent a traffic wildcard and in my view increase
the
workload when issuing traffic to known aircraft, rather than
decreasing it.

Well, I gotta admit that sometimes I don't use FF because I don't want
to be bothered. Like when it's a brilliant, clear day and I would
rather listen to music and watch the world go by than work the radio.

No offense, Chip; I enjoy working with ATC. But 90% of my flying is
IFR, and I like taking a break from "the system" once in a while.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

I get FF whenever I fly VFR, but there are times when that may be a
hassle. If you are engaged in conversation with your pax, it is easy to
miss an ATC transmission. I've heard ATC chide pilots "if you want
flight following, you better listen to the radio".





"Chip Jones" wrote in
ink.net:


"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
paul kgyy wrote:
I was taught that, if I needed to file an IFR flight plan in the
middle of a trip, I should contact FSS first to file and get
clearance, then contact ATC. On the other hand, I hear frequent
references in rec.aviation to pilots who just contact ATC directly.
Does this depend on how busy ATC is - i.e. near Chicago contact FSS,
near Moline contact Moline approach?

It absolutely depends on how busy ATC is. Around here (New York), if
they're not busy, you can call them up cold and and make your
request. They'll take the important info (destination, aircraft
type, etc) and give you a route. Sometimes they'll say they're too
busy and tell you to go talk to FSS like you're supposed to.

What I find works best is if things are iffy, is to get VFR flight
following first. Once they've already got you in the system,
assigned a code, radar identified, etc, if you later tell them you
need to get a clearance, they're more likely to handle you directly.

If push comes to shove, if you tell them you need a clearance NOW,
they'll get you one. But the idea is to never let things degenerate
to the point where you have to start playing trump cards.

Actually Roy, ATC'll get you one *if* they can. ATC usually can,
especially under the circumstances you describe. However, the pilot
really doesn't have a "trump" card when it comes to pop-up IFR. You
need one on a busy frequency, you might be SOL for a while as ATC is
occupied with higher priority stuff. My point is that you are in no
legal position to demand IFR if you are already airborne flying VFR.

I totally agree with you about getting F/F making a pop-up easier to
get. Under VFR Flight Following, you already have almost all of the
ingredients in play that ATC needs to handle you IFR. Converting F/F
to IFR on a busy frequency is usually no more workload on the
controller other than issuing you a clearance and a good IFR altitude.
Because I already am providing you radar service, I can give you a
clearance with one transmission. Then, I either send you over to
Radio to file the full SAR stuff (souls on board etc) or else get you
to spit it all out on the taped frequency if I have room/time on the
bandwidth. If something happens to cause a need for SAR, Center can
pull the voice tape and access your information. In an emergency, we
can access the voice data in under five minutes.

I've never understood why more pilots on VFR cross countries don't use
Flight Following. Personally, I've never had to turn down VFR radar
service to any pilot no matter how busy I've been with IFR traffic
(and I'm plenty busy, often). Centers don't have to separate VFR's in
Class E, which is where most of our flight following happens. Thus,
there's no reason for ARTCC's not to provide the service, even when
the freq is non-stop with radio traffic. Almost every Center
controller I know down here would rather be talking to all parties
when making traffic calls to known aircraft. The unknown VFR guys
represent a traffic wildcard and in my view increase the workload when
issuing traffic to known aircraft, rather than decreasing it.

Chip, ZTL

Andrew Sarangan wrote:

I get FF whenever I fly VFR, but there are times when that may be a
hassle. If you are engaged in conversation with your pax, it is easy to
miss an ATC transmission. I've heard ATC chide pilots "if you want
flight following, you better listen to the radio".

That is the reason I didn't use it on my return trip this Saturday. My
eight year-old was along and wanted to talk about stuff and I had to
keep him somewhat quiet on the way out using FF. So I just monitored
Center on the return trip, but never called them up. That is probably
the only downside though to FF and I use it often when I'm not flying IFR.


Matt

What Howard said.

I've done both and had ATC both ask me to file with FSS and simply take
my pop-up request.

Everything seems to 'depend'.

It I arrive at my destination VFR with a cloud deck below, asking the
destination approach for an IFR clearance to get there will invariably
be granted.

If halfway thru a trip I ask Center or a non-destination approach for a
clearance, they will often ask me to file with FSS. Just pick a handy
intersection 15 mins out in front and file from it to my destination.

Happens less now. I generally file IFR unless there is a specific
reason to file VFR beyond CAVU. Why give up the extra eyes for
traffic,extra traffic separation standards, airspace management (MOA,
prohibited, restricteed obstacle avoidance), and TFR avoidance services
unless there is a clear advantage to not filing. Reduced low level
winds is sometimes my excuse - slow plane means winds have a larger effect.

And I can't afford to pass up the practice -

paul kgyy wrote:
I was taught that, if I needed to file an IFR flight plan in the middle
of a trip, I should contact FSS first to file and get clearance, then
contact ATC. On the other hand, I hear frequent references in
rec.aviation to pilots who just contact ATC directly. Does this depend
on how busy ATC is - i.e. near Chicago contact FSS, near Moline contact
Moline approach?

"Maule Driver" wrote in message
. com...
What Howard said.

I've done both and had ATC both ask me to file with FSS and simply take
my pop-up request.

Everything seems to 'depend'.

It I arrive at my destination VFR with a cloud deck below, asking the
destination approach for an IFR clearance to get there will invariably
be granted.

"Depends" probably depends on workload.

I've never had a problem in the vast mid-west, but have had problems trying
it nearer to Denver and their frantic pace.

Happens less now. I generally file IFR unless there is a specific reason to file VFR beyond CAVU. Why give up the extra eyes for traffic,extra traffic separation standards, airspace management (MOA, prohibited, restricteed obstacle avoidance), and TFR avoidance services unless there is a clear advantage to not filing.

Time, range, and convetion. VFR you can usually go direct. IFR you get
routed around willy nilly so you use more gas and time, and require
reserves to an alternate plus forty five minutes after a non-direct
flight. Sometimes this makes a one leg flight into two legs, and the
VFR option is better (even from a safety POV).

Not always. Sometimes.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Agreed. It depends. From where I base near KRDU, I can get cleared
direct towards almost anywhere except DC/Phillie/NY. Routing is almost
never a reason for me. Even direct thru Charlotte will usually get
cleared then amended - but same for VFR.

Coming back for Annapolis MD (DC ADIZ)last week I filed airways all the
way home but not long after clearing the PXT (where all the MOAs were
hot, the Potomac controller asked for my direct home. I didn't
understand at first and didn't give it. She cleared me direct on her
own initiative. Turned out she picked the exact point from which I
could go direct while missing the hot MOAs south of Richmond. Nice
work! That was a first.

The alternate thing is interesting. In VMC, I just file IFR anyway.
When I get close I'll either amend if I want to go further or cancel and
go to FF. Nothing wrong with planning for IFR fuel and flying VFR fuel
once there. Kind of good conservative planning. I'll do that next week
flying to Tampa. With 4.5 hours, I can and have made Tampa without a
stop but never plan it. I will file and get a clearance and see how it
works this time.

But all this is *very* geo dependent. YMMV


Jose wrote:
Happens less now. I generally file IFR unless there is a specific
reason to file VFR beyond CAVU. Why give up the extra eyes for
traffic,extra traffic separation standards, airspace management (MOA,
prohibited, restricteed obstacle avoidance), and TFR avoidance
services unless there is a clear advantage to not filing.

Time, range, and convetion. VFR you can usually go direct. IFR you get
routed around willy nilly so you use more gas and time, and require
reserves to an alternate plus forty five minutes after a non-direct
flight. Sometimes this makes a one leg flight into two legs, and the
VFR option is better (even from a safety POV).

Not always. Sometimes.

Jose