Do you call when you're the unknown traffic

M

morleyz

Pre-Flight
Joined
Aug 31, 2023
Messages
47
Display Name
Display name:
Jeff
First time for me and it got me wondering what other pilots' SOP would be or what any controllers would prefer. I was on a x-country, heading 090 at 7500, squawking VFR south of the Akron-Canton charlie. I had a turn in about 20 miles to go between the charlie and Pittsburgh's bravo and was monitoring Akron approach. I hear the approach controller calling out "unknown traffic (my relative position), eastbound at 7500" for a commercial flight into Akron and I quickly realized it was me he was referring to. In this situation, would you ever let the controller know who you are and where you're going or just keep on keeping on your VFR way?
 
Typically I monitor ads-b and don't respond on frequency.
 
morleyz said:
First time for me and it got me wondering what other pilots' SOP would be or what any controllers would prefer. I was on a x-country, heading 090 at 7500, squawking VFR south of the Akron-Canton charlie. I had a turn in about 20 miles to go between the charlie and Pittsburgh's bravo and was monitoring Akron approach. I hear the approach controller calling out "unknown traffic (my relative position), eastbound at 7500" for a commercial flight into Akron and I quickly realized it was me he was referring to. In this situation, would you ever let the controller know who you are and where you're going or just keep on keeping on your VFR way?
Click to expand...
Yes I do routinely when I have the other traffic in sight "Center this is bugsmasher 1234A, we are that traffic and we have Cezzna 4321Z in sight".
RyanB said:
If you’re going to monitor frequency and do all of that, why not just get flight following?
Click to expand...
Depends on length of the flight, often times it's so short that's it's not worth the full call-up, but I still monitor the local approach.
 
I have done it before and also not done it before. After announcing myself it usually didn’t go any further than a “thanks”.
 
RyanB said:
If you’re going to monitor frequency and do all of that, why not just get flight following?
Click to expand...

Chicago approach likes to ignore me, so I've just gotten in the habit of flying without it since that's where I'm based and do most of my flying.
 
If you’re not going to call approach for FF, then just stay on your heading and altitude. That way you remain predicable for ATC to issue a traffic call on you. Chiming in at the last minute to tell ATC who you are isn’t much of a benefit to the controller.
 
Why not just get Flight Following?....THAT is what would help controllers as they can not assume your intentions of they are not talking to you and have to leave a wider berth for traffic they are talking to otherwise.

If they are too busy to talk to you then it is their problem and just keep chugging along. Random call up is only going to add to their workload which was apparently was already too busy to accept FF, but I always make the request.
 
I did once when towing a banner near a D. I'd called up (established two-way communication) and told the controller where I would be flying (circuits going in and out of the D). I guess he didn't tell anyone else because the next controller called me out to departing traffic as "unknown traffic, appears to be towing a banner." So I responded that it was me. Controller says I'm in his airspace without permission. I said I'd spoken to the controller previously on position and he just said ok, carry on.
 
RyanB said:
If you’re going to monitor frequency and do all of that, why not just get flight following?
Click to expand...
I suppose flight following means that you are then obligated to follow ATC instructions and some pilots are non-conformists? (not speaking for myself here) And it's one less potential violation :) (also not speaking for myself here either)
 
I do it when I hear them call me out. In fact did it yesterday as I was monitoring DFW approach on my way out of town. They had a few moments to get me in the system.
 
asicer said:
I suppose flight following means that you are then obligated to follow ATC instructions and some pilots are non-conformists? (not speaking for myself here) And it's one less potential violation :) (also not speaking for myself here either)
Click to expand...
It's easy enough to request something different, or even cancel FF. Can't understand the mindset of those who are scared of FF.
 
morleyz said:
First time for me and it got me wondering what other pilots' SOP would be or what any controllers would prefer. I was on a x-country, heading 090 at 7500, squawking VFR south of the Akron-Canton charlie. I had a turn in about 20 miles to go between the charlie and Pittsburgh's bravo and was monitoring Akron approach. I hear the approach controller calling out "unknown traffic (my relative position), eastbound at 7500" for a commercial flight into Akron and I quickly realized it was me he was referring to. In this situation, would you ever let the controller know who you are and where you're going or just keep on keeping on your VFR way?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing its pretty unhelpful to ATC when someone calls up and says that they are the traffic and they are actually not the traffic being referred to. For that reason, I either don't say anything or call up for flight following (without trying to "help") on the off-chance that I'm wrong.
 
I'd call, tell them, tell them my altitude, and ask for FF. If they are call you out to traffic, it helps them to be talking to you because then your altitude is verified. The downside is once on FF they may turn you, the bright side of that is it keeps you from conflicts.
 
morleyz said:
First time for me and it got me wondering what other pilots' SOP would be or what any controllers would prefer. I was on a x-country, heading 090 at 7500, squawking VFR south of the Akron-Canton charlie. I had a turn in about 20 miles to go between the charlie and Pittsburgh's bravo and was monitoring Akron approach. I hear the approach controller calling out "unknown traffic (my relative position), eastbound at 7500" for a commercial flight into Akron and I quickly realized it was me he was referring to. In this situation, would you ever let the controller know who you are and where you're going or just keep on keeping on your VFR way?
Click to expand...
I've done that only once. It was in Kansas City and there was a Mooney hauling as* that couldn't see me. It was abundantly clear I was the "unknown traffic" since they kept reading out my position, heading and altitude. We were getting too close and they were just not able to spot me. I chimed in on frequency with something like "KC Approach, Arrow 12345 is 5 northeast of KOJC westbound at 6.5k, has a Mooney in sight, maintaining visual separation". They acknowledged me, gave me immediate vectors to avoid him, and put me on flight following, which I should have been on to begin with to prevent that from happening in the first place.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
It is if you have the traffic in sight. That satisfies their deconfliction requirement.
Click to expand...
If using visual separation with the OP then sure, you want him to report the airliner in sight. But in this case, there is no approved separation criteria for IFR vs VFR (not talking to ATC) in the airspace in question. Technically after the traffic has been issued to the airliner, the controller met their requirement for traffic advisories. They can update if they have time but only thing required after the initial traffic not in sight is “traffic no longer a factor / no longer observed.” Also, as stated above, calling in at the last minute could confuse everyone involved.
 
morleyz said:
First time for me and it got me wondering what other pilots' SOP would be or what any controllers would prefer. I was on a x-country, heading 090 at 7500, squawking VFR south of the Akron-Canton charlie. I had a turn in about 20 miles to go between the charlie and Pittsburgh's bravo and was monitoring Akron approach. I hear the approach controller calling out "unknown traffic (my relative position), eastbound at 7500" for a commercial flight into Akron and I quickly realized it was me he was referring to. In this situation, would you ever let the controller know who you are and where you're going or just keep on keeping on your VFR way?
Click to expand...

What is the purpose of monitoring Approach (instead of talking to them)? They may point you out to other traffic, but you have to do the inverse calculation in your head to figure out where the other traffic is.
 
RyanShort1 said:
It's easy enough to request something different, or even cancel FF. Can't understand the mindset of those who are scared of FF.
Click to expand...

People express and derive joy from their freedoms differently? I could just as easily slur pilots who use FF as NPC conformists.

Some people like being part of a well-oiled and functional system like ATC.

Some people like just flying somewhere and being that fly on the wall. I think if you're that type, listening to ATC is prudent, there may be something unusual going on that you'd like to know about.
 
FORANE said:
Presuming those who don't use FF choose to avoid it because they are scared of it demonstrates your point.
Click to expand...
Hmmm...
schmookeeg said:
People express and derive joy from their freedoms differently? I could just as easily slur pilots who use FF as NPC conformists.

Some people like being part of a well-oiled and functional system like ATC.

Some people like just flying somewhere and being that fly on the wall. I think if you're that type, listening to ATC is prudent, there may be something unusual going on that you'd like to know about.
Click to expand...
You read into the words that I deliberately chose, while ignoring clues about me that aren't big secrets on this forum. I have a stock Luscombe and have done plenty of NORDO / no transponder / no ADS-B flying. I'm *obviously* not personally scared of flying without FF, although I prefer flying with it in the environments I spend the most time in.

I was speaking of those who choose to not use it out of fear and ignorance, not those who deliberately ignore it. I've met quite a few of them in my circles over the last 20 years. And it's not a slur to say that.
 
Punkinhead said:
One of my planes doesn't have ADSB. And I'm not the only one.
Click to expand...
OK. My plane does have it and I'd be the one calling up ATC. Not sure how your experience applies to my plane. I can qualify my statement to be "I tell ATC who I am to allow for deconfliction when and only when I have operable ADSB out" . But it doesn't quite have the same ring to it.
 
I monitor the frequency but do not talk because I want them to deviate, not me. Many times I’ve been vectored miles out of my way while VFR FF. If I see some confusion on the part of the controller(because of me), I will speak up. Last month they had my altitude go from 18,000 to 9,000 in secs, I identified myself since they were obvious confused.
 
Controllers are onto the fact that a lot of pilots monitor ATC without talking, and sometimes they will take advantage of ADSB to call a non-participating aircraft to point out an issue.
 
Dana said:
My understanding is that not all ATC facilities have access to ADSB data.

And not all airplanes have ADSB, or even a transponder.
Click to expand...
If it’s approach or center, they have access to ADS-B. The question is though, do they have it activated for a 1200 code. The software (STARS) that approach uses and the software (ERAM) that center uses, can show N # but only if the controller has activated it. There’s no directive to have a 1200 code tag info displayed either. It’s really hit or miss if the controller took the time to display the tag. Even then, it’s just an N #.
 
RyanShort1 said:
Hmmm...

You read into the words that I deliberately chose, while ignoring clues about me that aren't big secrets on this forum. I have a stock Luscombe and have done plenty of NORDO / no transponder / no ADS-B flying. I'm *obviously* not personally scared of flying without FF, although I prefer flying with it in the environments I spend the most time in.

I was speaking of those who choose to not use it out of fear and ignorance, not those who deliberately ignore it. I've met quite a few of them in my circles over the last 20 years. And it's not a slur to say that.
Click to expand...

I also missed the clue that someone claimed to be too scared to use FF apparently, so assumed you were providing that for OP. :dunno:

I got kicked off of a different forum for opining on this exact topic elsewhere. Possibly I am too sensitive about it. :)
 
schmookeeg said:
I also missed the clue that someone claimed to be too scared to use FF apparently, so assumed you were providing that for OP. :dunno:

I got kicked off of a different forum for opining on this exact topic elsewhere. Possibly I am too sensitive about it. :)
Click to expand...
It's ok. My read on the last part of what I quoted was that some people are afraid to use FF because of a potential violation...
And it's one less potential violation
Click to expand...
 
I don’t know of too many pilots that are afraid to use it but we’ve had some that have stated they don’t want to be a burden to ATC. It’s simple, if you’re a burden they’ll tell you they don’t have time for you. It happens in some of the busier areas but I’d say 90 % of the airspace it’s not an issue. Some just don’t want to hear all the yapping on the radio and just want a peaceful XC. I can understand that as well.

I’ve always been a believer in freedom of choice when it comes to FF. I never want to see it implemented in controlled airspace like a “seatbelt requirement” analogy. Even though I think accidents like the F-16 vs C150 around KCHS would have been prevented if FF was used, the overall safety benefit doesn't warrant making it mandatory.
 
I don't call when I'm the unknown traffic because I have no way of knowing that I'm the unknown traffic.
 
However, for those who do want to call, it's not necessary to say that you're the unknown traffic; just give position and altitude and ask for flight following.
 
I'll join the party if the controller makes a sidelong remark like "traffic, 12 oclock, unverified... I'm not talking to him" -- absent that, if I don't wanna talk, I'll continue my predictable pink line and netflix.

That will guilt me into calling with my little "VFR Request" for flight following. I won't add "hey that was meeeeeeee" in any way. :D
 
Unless you're knowingly screwing things up for others, I don't think guilt is involved.

For example, here in the SFO area, I have a pretty good idea how to get in and out without getting in the way of airliners.
 
Palmpilot said:
Controllers are onto the fact that a lot of pilots monitor ATC without talking, and sometimes they will take advantage of ADSB to call a non-participating aircraft to point out an issue.
Click to expand...
Yep, it's happened to me once. "Barnburner 1234, are you on frequency?" I suppose the regs allow you to ignore a blind call from ATC if you're outside their airspace. You don't even have to be on frequency. But I answered because I figure if they called me they probably have something important to say.

RyanB said:
If you’re going to monitor frequency and do all of that, why not just get flight following?
Click to expand...
Monitoring towers and approaches as you fly along VFR is useful for situational awareness. During summers I've heard towers announce pop-up firefighting TFRs and other hazards nearby. Also if anything bad happens or you have a PIREP, you've already got a frequency tuned. Yet often my route is outside their airspace so I don't have to talk to them, and it's obvious from listening and from my altitude, position & direction that I'm not a conflict, and I don't feel talkative. OTOH, if as I'm approaching while listening on the radio I hear that it's busy or any other specific reason to call in, then I will.

So I always listen in, but will request FF only when there is a specific reason for it.
 
If you have mode C and/or ADSB they know how high you are and only need to clear traffic at your altitude, so it's not a big deal if you continue moving predictably. If you only have mode A (or no transponder at all) then they have to deconflict all altitudes, around you, no? In the latter case a friendly "I'm that traffic and I'm at xxxx feet" call might keep ATC from unnecessarily diverting other traffic.
 
RyanShort1 said:
It's easy enough to request something different, or even cancel FF. Can't understand the mindset of those who are scared of FF.
Click to expand...
I use fught following in congested areas. But long flights in rural areas I prefer to listen to aydio books.

Sometimes, not often, I like to fly down low and slow where reception can be spotty.

I don't understand not using in in congested airspace. Well I use to until bypassing within a couple of miles of a class b airport (I was low and climbing slow on a hot day from a nearby airport., not the D). I had gotten in the habit of pulling back the overhead shade on my bubble canopy to look for traffic. I was climbing alongside of some tall hills/small mountains so probably below radar or blocked by it. When I looked up there was one of those high wing regional airlines. He was descending into (but still outside) the Class D and I was climbing up under him. I don't know the actual separation but it was scary-close for me. Always got flight following in congested airspace after that.
 
morleyz said:
Chicago approach likes to ignore me, so I've just gotten in the habit of flying without it since that's where I'm based and do most of my flying.
Click to expand...
"What? A flivver in my turbojet airspace?"...the attitude lives on at C90, the "keeper of the torch".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top