Changing VFR Altitude While Getting Radar Services

While 95% of this deals with traffic separation (ATC's primary role), a portion of it deals with other stuff, such as "Did Pilot Joe just have a heart attack" and "why is Pilot Joe doing XYZ". If you are flying heading 090 in cruise, on FF, and then fly 100 to get around a puffy cloud, that is fine. If you suddenly, without communicating, fly 180 and do some orbits to take a pic of that pretty lake, even VFR FF, ATC is gonna ask whats up. If you make a 1000 foot altitude change, ATC will probably ask whats up. Etc

Why? Why would the controller care why an airplane receiving only flight following began flying in circles?

If you want (and are using) ATC services, then you can't do stuff "on your own" because you are no longer "on your own", you are with ATC. It is ATC and YOU, together.

Together for what? We're talking about flight following here, ATC has no responsibility for separation.

I could care less about the argument claiming "but I am VFR", if you decided to have a guy at an ATC facility, on the other side of the microphone, provide flight following, then you need to work with him and not against him.

Flight following consists of traffic advisories and, if needed, safety alerts. You work with the controller by listening attentively, acknowledging transmissions, and reporting traffic in sight if you've not been told it's no longer a factor. The FAA makes it very clear that how a traffic conflict is resolved is the pilot's decision, not the controller's.


From Order JO 7110.65V Air Traffic Control:


2−1−6. SAFETY ALERT

Issue a safety alert to an aircraft if you are aware the aircraft is in a position/altitude that, in your judgment, places it in unsafe proximity to terrain, obstructions, or other aircraft. Once the pilot informs you action is being taken to resolve the situation, you may discontinue the issuance of further alerts. Do not assume that because someone else has responsibility for the aircraft that the unsafe situation has been observed and the safety alert issued; inform the appropriate controller.

NOTE−
1.
The issuance of a safety alert is a first priority (see para 2−1−2, Duty Priority) once the controller observes and recognizes a situation of unsafe aircraft proximity to terrain, obstacles, or other aircraft. Conditions, such as workload, traffic volume, the quality/limitations of the radar system, and the available lead time to react are factors in determining whether it is reasonable for the controller to observe and recognize such situations. While a controller cannot see immediately the development of every situation where a safety alert must be issued, the controller must remain vigilant for such situations and issue a safety alert when the situation is recognized.

2. Recognition of situations of unsafe proximity may result from MSAW/E−MSAW/LAAS, automatic altitude readouts, Conflict/Mode C Intruder Alert, observations on a PAR scope, or pilot reports.

3. Once the alert is issued, it is solely the pilot’s prerogative to determine what course of action, if any, will be taken.

a. Terrain/Obstruction Alert. Immediately issue/ initiate an alert to an aircraft if you are aware the aircraft is at an altitude that, in your judgment, places it in unsafe proximity to terrain and/or obstructions. Issue the alert as follows:

PHRASEOLOGY−
LOW ALTITUDE ALERT (call sign),

CHECK YOUR ALTITUDE IMMEDIATELY.

and, if the aircraft is not yet on final approach,

THE (as appropriate) MEA/MVA/MOCA/MIA IN YOUR AREA IS (altitude),

REFERENCE−
P/CG Term − Final Approach − IFR


b. Aircraft Conflict/Mode C Intruder Alert. Immediately issue/initiate an alert to an aircraft if you are aware of another aircraft at an altitude that you believe places them in unsafe proximity. If feasible, offer the pilot an alternate course of action. When an alternate course of action is given, end the transmission with the word “immediately.”

PHRASEOLOGY−
TRAFFIC ALERT (call sign) (position of aircraft) ADVISE YOU TURN LEFT/RIGHT (heading),

and/or

CLIMB/DESCEND (specific altitude if appropriate) IMMEDIATELY.

EXAMPLE−
“Traffic Alert, Cessna Three Four Juliet, advise you turn left immediately.”

or

“Traffic Alert, Cessna Three−Four Juliet, advise you turn left and climb immediately.”

REFERENCE−
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 5−14−1, Conflict Alert (CA) and Mode C
Intruder (MCI) Alert.
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 5−14−2, En Route Minimum Safe Altitude
Warning (E−MSAW).
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 5−15−6, CA/MCI.
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 5−2−23, Altitude Filters.



2−1−21. TRAFFIC ADVISORIES

Unless an aircraft is operating within Class A airspace or omission is requested by the pilot, issue traffic advisories to all aircraft (IFR or VFR) on your frequency when, in your judgment, their proximity may diminish to less than the applicable separation minima. Where no separation minima applies, such as for VFR aircraft outside of Class B/Class C airspace, or a TRSA, issue traffic advisories to those aircraft on your frequency when in your judgment their proximity warrants it. Provide this service as follows:

a. To radar identified aircraft:

1. Azimuth from aircraft in terms of the 12−hour clock, or

2. When rapidly maneuvering aircraft prevent accurate issuance of traffic as in 1 above, specify the direction from an aircraft’s position in terms of the eight cardinal compass points (N, NE, E, SE, S, SW, W, and NW). This method must be terminated at the pilot’s request.

3. Distance from aircraft in miles.

4. Direction in which traffic is proceeding and/or relative movement of traffic.

NOTE−
Relative movement includes closing, converging, parallel same direction, opposite direction, diverging, overtaking, crossing left to right, crossing right to left.


5. If known, type of aircraft and altitude.

REFERENCE−
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 2−4−21, Description of Aircraft Types.

PHRASEOLOGY−
TRAFFIC, (number) O’CLOCK,

or when appropriate,

(direction) (number) MILES, (direction)−BOUND and/or (relative movement),

and if known,

(type of aircraft and altitude).

or

When appropriate,

(type of aircraft and relative position), (number of feet) FEET ABOVE/BELOW YOU.

If altitude is unknown,

ALTITUDE UNKNOWN.

EXAMPLE−
“Traffic, eleven o’clock, one zero miles, southbound,
converging, Boeing Seven Twenty Seven, one seven
thousand.”
“Traffic, twelve o’clock, one five miles, opposite direction,
altitude unknown.”
“Traffic, ten o’clock, one two miles, southeast bound,
one thousand feet below you.”


6. When requested by the pilot, issue radar vectors to assist in avoiding the traffic, provided the aircraft to be vectored is within your area of jurisdiction or coordination has been effected with the sector/facility in whose area the aircraft is operating.

7. If unable to provide vector service, inform the pilot.

REFERENCE−
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 2−1−18, Operational Requests.


8. Inform the pilot of the following when traffic you have issued is not reported in sight:

(a) The traffic is no factor.

(b) The traffic is no longer depicted on radar.

PHRASEOLOGY−
TRAFFIC NO FACTOR/NO LONGER OBSERVED,

or

(number) O’CLOCK TRAFFIC NO FACTOR/NO LONGER OBSERVED,

or

(direction) TRAFFIC NO FACTOR/NO LONGER OBSERVED.


b. To aircraft that are not radar identified:

1. Distance and direction from fix.

2. Direction in which traffic is proceeding.

3. If known, type of aircraft and altitude.

4. ETA over the fix the aircraft is approaching, if appropriate.

PHRASEOLOGY−
TRAFFIC, (number) MILES/MINUTES (direction) OF (airport or fix), (direction)−BOUND,

and if known,

(type of aircraft and altitude),
ESTIMATED (fix) (time),

or

TRAFFIC, NUMEROUS AIRCRAFT VICINITY (location).

If altitude is unknown,

ALTITUDE UNKNOWN.

EXAMPLE−
“Traffic, one zero miles east of Forsythe V−O−R,
Southbound, M−D Eighty, descending to one six
thousand.”
“Traffic, reported one zero miles west of Downey V−O−R,
northbound, Apache, altitude unknown, estimated Joliet
V−O−R one three one five.”
“Traffic, eight minutes west of Chicago Heights V−O−R,
westbound, Mooney, eight thousand, estimated Joliet
V−O−R two zero three five.”
“Traffic, numerous aircraft, vicinity of Delia airport.”


c. For aircraft displaying Mode C, not radar identified, issue indicated altitude.

EXAMPLE−
“Traffic, one o’clock, six miles, eastbound, altitude indicates six thousand five hundred.”

REFERENCE−
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 3−1−6, Traffic Information.
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 7−2−1, Visual Separation.
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 7−6−10, VFR Departure Information.


Put the shoe on the other foot. What would you, the Pilot prefer ? ATC suddenly, out of nowhere, tells you "Cherokee 123, squawk 1200, FF is terminated, good day" or "Cherokee 123, tell you what, in 20 miles, my radar can't see you anymore, plan on squawking 1200 and I won't be able to provide FF at that point"

Which one is preferred ?

This, at that 20 mile point; "Cherokee 123, radar contact lost, squawk 1200, good day."
 
I see nothing in the regulation or the letter which says you can by any means opt not to obey an instruction once received, only that once an ATC instruction is received, you must obey it unless/until ATC says otherwise.

Like Mark and B350ATP said, it's pretty simple. Once you choose to be part of the system, you play by the rules until properly relieved of the obligation you chose to accept. If you don't want to play by the rules, don't enter the game, but then don't expect to receive the benefits of playing.

So if receiving flight following while VFR and ATC assigns a heading that would require you to enter Class B airspace you'd have to decide which rule you were going to violate?
 
Why? Why would the controller care why an airplane receiving only flight following began flying in circles?

This is the deal we sometimes find ourselves in. You do something while on FF and you get a call; "bugsmasher 12345, say intentions". Or; "Bugsmasher 12345, maintain minimum 4500' until advised". Or' "Bugsmasher 12345, blah-blah-blah", where 'blah' is not what we want to do.

Such is the nature of asymmetric comms, once that instruction is given, you are well and truly stuck with it. I'm all for flying when, where, how, and why I want, and if I could do so, and get actual, honest, leave me alone kind of "flight following" where ATC gave advise, and not instruction, I'd be a happy FF camper. But - you know, and I know, and I know you know, and you know, that I know you know, that this is not the case. They issue non-emer instructions to VFR pilots all the time usually to make their task of separation of controlled traffic easier. It is the nature of the beast that they don't want a bugsmasher fouling up their nice clean flow into/out of the controlled airspace(B, C, etc). NTTAWWT, I would do the same. But for the fact that the VFR guy is on FF, they would need to move heavy tin to avoid an RA, or for spacing.
 
Nope -- the Chief Counsel already addressed that one in another letter.
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...10/doremire - (2010) legal interpretation.pdf

So a pilot does not have to follow an instruction that would cause him to violate a regulation, but he must adhere to an instruction that violates an order.

spockfascinating.jpg
 
This is the deal we sometimes find ourselves in. You do something while on FF and you get a call; "bugsmasher 12345, say intentions". Or; "Bugsmasher 12345, maintain minimum 4500' until advised". Or' "Bugsmasher 12345, blah-blah-blah", where 'blah' is not what we want to do.

Such is the nature of asymmetric comms, once that instruction is given, you are well and truly stuck with it. I'm all for flying when, where, how, and why I want, and if I could do so, and get actual, honest, leave me alone kind of "flight following" where ATC gave advise, and not instruction, I'd be a happy FF camper. But - you know, and I know, and I know you know, and you know, that I know you know, that this is not the case. They issue non-emer instructions to VFR pilots all the time usually to make their task of separation of controlled traffic easier. It is the nature of the beast that they don't want a bugsmasher fouling up their nice clean flow into/out of the controlled airspace(B, C, etc). NTTAWWT, I would do the same. But for the fact that the VFR guy is on FF, they would need to move heavy tin to avoid an RA, or for spacing.

You should have read all of that message before responding. Your understanding of flight following, while quite common, is incorrect.
 
I'm done responding to Steven's questions, the answers to which I'm pretty sure he already knows. If anyone else is confused about the requirements of 91.123, I'll be happy to help.
 
You should have read all of that message before responding. Your understanding of flight following, while quite common, is incorrect.

Oh I read it all. And it makes perfect sense to me as well. Which is why I rarely participate, because our understanding of the process is not flawed, it's the implementation which is flawed.

If you don't think ACT gives VFR pilots restrictive instructions all over the country every day, you are living in a dream world. As I said, if it worked like the P/C JO says it should work, then we'd all be copacetic. But - clearly it does not, and we get to hash this same thing out every few months. Aided by Ron's quotations showing that the chief counsel in each and every case backs up ATC, where they are not following the JO!
 
The question was whether once you receive an instruction you can eliminate the requirement to obey that instructing by terminating flight following, and the answer is "no". However, if there was no ATC instruction, then it really doesn't matter and you can terminate at will.

Thanks.
 
I see nothing in the regulation or the letter which says you can by any means opt not to obey an instruction once received, only that once an ATC instruction is received, you must obey it unless/until ATC says otherwise.

Like Mark and B350ATP said, it's pretty simple. Once you choose to be part of the system, you play by the rules until properly relieved of the obligation you chose to accept. If you don't want to play by the rules, don't enter the game, but then don't expect to receive the benefits of playing.

Sure, I agree with that but the OP was wondering if they could terminate on their own out of the blue. I didn't see anything in his original question about terminating to avoid complying with an instruction already issued.
 
If you don't think ACT gives VFR pilots restrictive instructions all over the country every day, you are living in a dream world. As I said, if it worked like the P/C JO says it should work, then we'd all be copacetic. But - clearly it does not, and we get to hash this same thing out every few months. Aided by Ron's quotations showing that the chief counsel in each and every case backs up ATC, where they are not following the JO!

What in the wide, wide world of sports gave you the idea that I might not be aware controllers don't always adhere to the ATC order? This is probably THE most common controller error.
 
There's no requirement to "ask" for an altitude change except for those very rare instances where ATC might instruct you to maintain a certain altitude or range of altitudes (usually limited to inside Class B or C but can happen in other places as well.

At times, ATC will ask you to "advise before any change of altitude," in which case you do so because you have been instructed to do so.

You'll get differing opinions on whether to advise ATC any time you are going to change altitudes. Mine is simple: If I am asking ATC to help me spot potentially conflicting traffic, the least I can do is let them know what I'm doing before I do it. So inform ATC of altitude changes.

Your change of course and altitude scenario? Well, ATC already has some idea where you are going since you've already asked for Flight Following to the destination. So a simple "Approach [or Center], Skyhawk 1234X is descending to 4500"" is enough. There should be no reason for difficulty getting that in - you don't wait for the last second, do you?

Agree.
 
Put the shoe on the other foot. What would you, the Pilot prefer ? ATC suddenly, out of nowhere, tells you "Cherokee 123, squawk 1200, FF is terminated, good day" or "Cherokee 123, tell you what, in 20 miles, my radar can't see you anymore, plan on squawking 1200 and I won't be able to provide FF at that point"

Which one is preferred ?
Funny you should say that. On our recent trip to Key West we had the following conversation just as we were entering the north edge of the Everglades around lake Okeechobee.

ATC: 426HL contact Miami at 123.45
ME: 123.45 roger.
Me: Miami approach 426HL at 6500
ATC: 426HL radar services terminated, squawk VFR

wtf????? The channel wasn't that busy at the time (as far as we could tell).
 
Put the shoe on the other foot. What would you, the Pilot prefer ? ATC suddenly, out of nowhere, tells you "Cherokee 123, squawk 1200, FF is terminated, good day"

Ever flown through Rockford, IL airspace?

I've mentioned this many times here...about five years ago when I was working in Wisconsin, flying back and forth every week, I heard this one or twice a week from Rockford approach.

They'd simply drop you instead of handing you off. Nice guys, those Rockford controllers.
 
Last edited:
Funny you should say that. On our recent trip to Key West we had the following conversation just as we were entering the north edge of the Everglades around lake Okeechobee.

ATC: 426HL contact Miami at 123.45
ME: 123.45 roger.
Me: Miami approach 426HL at 6500
ATC: 426HL radar services terminated, squawk VFR

wtf????? The channel wasn't that busy at the time (as far as we could tell).


Been there, done that..... Well exactly "not that"...

When dropped like a hot potato I will usually set the transponder to standby instantly and let the controller guess where the hell I am at and where I am going.....

Two people can play that mind game...;)....:yes:
 
My points reflect a professional approach/relationship when working with ATC. Yes separation under VFR is pilots responsibility.

A stand by my comments.
 
What in the wide, wide world of sports gave you the idea that I might not be aware controllers don't always adhere to the ATC order? This is probably THE most common controller error.

Then I guess we've located the area of misunderstanding. Following in logical progression, when the controller fails to adhere to the book, and it results in a deal, it isn't the controller that gets whacked, it's the guy in said bugsmasher.
 
Then I guess we've located the area of misunderstanding. Following in logical progression, when the controller fails to adhere to the book, and it results in a deal, it isn't the controller that gets whacked, it's the guy in said bugsmasher.

A "deal" results when there is less than the minimum required separation. Where there is no minimum required separation there can be no deal.
 
My points reflect a professional approach/relationship when working with ATC. Yes separation under VFR is pilots responsibility.

A stand by my comments.

Do you feel controllers that perform their duties contrary to the requirements of the ATC order are acting in a professional manner?
 
A "deal" results when there is less than the minimum required separation. Where there is no minimum required separation there can be no deal.

Which is what can happen when a controller issues an 'instruction', i.e. 'maintain at or below 4500 for separation' to a FF aircraft, they chose not to follow it, climb into the path of big iron and loss of separation occurs. See, you really are starting to get this. :cheerswine:
 
Which is what can happen when a controller issues an 'instruction', i.e. 'maintain at or below 4500 for separation' to a FF aircraft, they chose not to follow it, climb into the path of big iron and loss of separation occurs. See, you really are starting to get this. :cheerswine:

We're talking about flight following. There is no minimum separation so there can be no loss of separation.
 
Which is what can happen when a controller issues an 'instruction', i.e. 'maintain at or below 4500 for separation' to a FF aircraft, they chose not to follow it, climb into the path of big iron and loss of separation occurs. See, you really are starting to get this. :cheerswine:

I think Steven is referring to the Chief Counsel letter or following a controller's instructions in class E while operating VFR. If you're in class E there is no "deal."
 
Well, alrighty then. Lets call it a near miss, or RA, or whatever code word you want. Doesn't matter to me, the results are what matter, and they are basically the same. Pilot gets burned, ATC skates, and all is right with the world.

The clear fact is controllers issue instructions to FF aircraft for purposes of separation with other traffic. That other traffic is quite often big iron. GA pilot fails to abide, and they get too close. Let's not focus on the vocab, lets focus on the result of misuse of FF.
 
Do you feel controllers that perform their duties contrary to the requirements of the ATC order are acting in a professional manner?

OK, now you lost me. Where did I say that or what is this in reference to ?
 
Back to the original question about altitude changes while VFR...

AIM 4-1-15. Radar Traffic Information Service
b. Provisions of the Service
2. When receiving VFR radar advisory service, pilots should monitor the assigned frequency at all times. This is to preclude controllers' concern for radio failure or emergency assistance to aircraft under the controller's jurisdiction. VFR radar advisory service does not include vectors away from conflicting traffic unless requested by the pilot. When advisory service is no longer desired, advise the controller before changing frequencies and then change your transponder code to 1200, if applicable. Pilots should also inform the controller when changing VFR cruising altitude. Except in programs where radar service is automatically terminated, the controller will advise the aircraft when radar is terminated.​
 
Back to the original question about altitude changes while VFR...
AIM 4-1-15. Radar Traffic Information Service
b. Provisions of the Service
2. When receiving VFR radar advisory service, pilots should monitor the assigned frequency at all times. This is to preclude controllers' concern for radio failure or emergency assistance to aircraft under the controller's jurisdiction. VFR radar advisory service does not include vectors away from conflicting traffic unless requested by the pilot. When advisory service is no longer desired, advise the controller before changing frequencies and then change your transponder code to 1200, if applicable. Pilots should also inform the controller when changing VFR cruising altitude. Except in programs where radar service is automatically terminated, the controller will advise the aircraft when radar is terminated.​

Correct
 
Nope -- the Chief Counsel already addressed that one in another letter.
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...10/doremire - (2010) legal interpretation.pdf

"Second, you pose that if the pilot elects to turn to avoid the Class B airspace, did the pilot violate § 91. 123(a)(b) and/or 91.111(a). If the pilot only received the vector for traffic from ATC, the pilot did not receive a clearance or instruction from ATC. Therefore, any maneuvering by the pilot is not a violation of § 91.123. However in maneuvering the aircraft, the pilot must comply with § 91.111(a) and not operate the aircraft so close to another aircraft as to create a collision hazard."


I think Steven is referring to the Chief Counsel letter or following a controller's instructions in class E while operating VFR. If you're in class E there is no "deal."

Which if I understand this correctly, is why a vector for traffic, isn't considered an ATC "instruction" ?

I use Flight Following on practically every flight (I'm based at Republic KFRG), even when going up to the practice area. So I'm really enjoying this discussion. Thanks guys:yes:
 
Last edited:
OK, now you lost me. Where did I say that or what is this in reference to ?

You wrote; "I could care less about the argument claiming 'but I am VFR', if you decided to have a guy at an ATC facility, on the other side of the microphone, provide flight following, then you need to work with him and not against him." You also wrote, "My points reflect a professional approach/relationship when working with ATC." Controllers who assign headings to VFR aircraft operating outside of TRSAs, outside of Class C airspace (including the Outer Area), or outside of Class B airspace are operating in violation of the ATC order. Do you feel those controllers are taking a professional approach?
 
Back to the original question about altitude changes while VFR...

AIM 4-1-15. Radar Traffic Information Service
b. Provisions of the Service
2. When receiving VFR radar advisory service, pilots should monitor the assigned frequency at all times. This is to preclude controllers' concern for radio failure or emergency assistance to aircraft under the controller's jurisdiction. VFR radar advisory service does not include vectors away from conflicting traffic unless requested by the pilot. When advisory service is no longer desired, advise the controller before changing frequencies and then change your transponder code to 1200, if applicable. Pilots should also inform the controller when changing VFR cruising altitude. Except in programs where radar service is automatically terminated, the controller will advise the aircraft when radar is terminated.​

Nice source.

I'm back and forth to KTYS (Class C) a fair amount. I'll initially check in at 6,500' or so.

When it's time to descend, I'll say something like, "Leaving 6'500 for lower". As I said, it seems polite and a gentle reminder to check my descent path against other arrivals. It's not unusual for them to say "VFR descent at pilot's discretion", but I've also been asked to stay above a certain altitude until advised, or been assigned a heading for sequencing once they know I'm in my descent.

I've never once had them get snarky because my call might have been technically unnecessary.
 
Last edited:
Back to the original question about altitude changes while VFR...
AIM 4-1-15. Radar Traffic Information Service
b. Provisions of the Service
2. When receiving VFR radar advisory service, pilots should monitor the assigned frequency at all times. This is to preclude controllers' concern for radio failure or emergency assistance to aircraft under the controller's jurisdiction. VFR radar advisory service does not include vectors away from conflicting traffic unless requested by the pilot. When advisory service is no longer desired, advise the controller before changing frequencies and then change your transponder code to 1200, if applicable. Pilots should also inform the controller when changing VFR cruising altitude. Except in programs where radar service is automatically terminated, the controller will advise the aircraft when radar is terminated.​

Thanks for looking this up.
For what its worth, I have always advised ATC when on flight following (or requested if they gave me an altitude) and the few times I have not it seems in the end I always kick myself.

A few of the Kick me own bottom times were:

Under Bravo airspace where its tight like ORD over the lake shore I was advised by one controller "altitude my discretion" but then a shift change occurred and I got lambasted for changing altitude since I must have been entered into the system with my starting altitude.

Switching to different centers you always report in with altitude, but the last controller may have said alt was my discretion, new controller maybe not. I have checked in got confirmation and altimeter setting then changed altitude for clouds and whamo, got reprimanded and when I explained the last controller said my discretion he said but this is my TRSA not his.

Near towered airspace (and talking to approach not center) they seem to be more particular and appreciative about being in contact, I assume its for traffic control? Changed once 30 miles from an airport and was told we have arrival traffic please advise next time.

So the system taught me to always advise and it just has become habit to request changes.

Kind of funny, now I just file IFR anytime I am doing a cross country (almost easier filing with the Ipad and getting clearance out of towered enviroments) so my habits stay pretty consistent with VFR FF and IFR trips, I just request it.
 
Nice source.

I'm back and forth to KTYS (Class C) a fair amount. I'll initially check in at 6,500' or so.

When it's time to descend, I'll say something like, "Leaving 6'500 for lower". As I said, it seems polite and a gentle reminder to check my descent path against other arrivals. It's not unusual for them to say "VFR descent at pilot's discretion", but I've also been asked to stay above a certain altitude until advised, or been assigned a heading for sequencing once they know I'm in my descent.

I've never once had them get snarky because my call might have been technically unnecessary.
Same here. I have had them get very short when they are very busy though. But who doesn't. I don't want them wasting time when I'm trying to contact them. That wasn't the case when they vectored me into Bravo and I couldn't get back to them. They were BUSY.
 
You wrote; "I could care less about the argument claiming 'but I am VFR', if you decided to have a guy at an ATC facility, on the other side of the microphone, provide flight following, then you need to work with him and not against him." You also wrote, "My points reflect a professional approach/relationship when working with ATC." Controllers who assign headings to VFR aircraft operating outside of TRSAs, outside of Class C airspace (including the Outer Area), or outside of Class B airspace are operating in violation of the ATC order. Do you feel those controllers are taking a professional approach?

Outside TRSAs, Class C, and outside Class B ?

Not sure about you, but I have received headings on FF from center while enroute.

I also have had a control tower call airport security to open a gate for my rental car when FBO was closed.

I guess the above "cooperation" with general aviation and "outside of their ATC order" is unprofessional.

:rolleyes:
 
Outside TRSAs, Class C, and outside Class B ?

I don't understand the question.

Not sure about you, but I have received headings on FF from center while enroute.

I'm not sure I have received them but I've definitely witnessed them, and corrected the controller when I was able to.

I also have had a control tower call airport security to open a gate for my rental car when FBO was closed.

I don't see how that's relevant to this discussion.

I guess the above "cooperation" with general aviation and "outside of their ATC order" is unprofessional.

The question was about controllers operating in violation of the ATC order. Do you feel those controllers unprofessional?
 
So, as you understand it, what is a vector for traffic?

An heading or altitude assignment from ATC to avoid a potential conflict.

Last year I departed Caldwell, returning to Republic and picked up FF with NY approach. The controller gave me a few vectors around jet traffic inbound to Teterboro(he told me why he was doing so), and I was told to remain clear of the Bravo.

I complied as told and a few minutes later, I was back on course eastbound. I had no problem with it and was glad to have his assistance in this congested area.
 
Last edited:
I am once again gobsmacked at the majority of GA pilots theory on Flight FOLLOWING for aircraft not in ATC controlled airspace under VISUAL flight rules. Gobsmacked, well and truly. I'm going to start looking carefully at my fellow pilots noses for the lead ring.
 
Out of curiosity, and not that it's necessarily a smart thing to do, but can a VFR pilot, while flying in Class E airspace and receiving flight following, summarily and immediately go it on his own by saying something like this?

"Sometown Approach, Bugsmasher 1234 is terminating radar services. So long."
Yes, no problem at all and I do this regularly.
 
Back
Top