Flight following question

[smv]

If you are talking about simply turning off your radio while you are receiving advisories, it would be fun to watch.

Which brings us back to what I actually said before you went off on a tangent: "...simply cancel Flight Following and turn off your radio."

What part of cancelling flight following then turning off the radio in Class E airspace violates the regulations?

 

[midlifeflyer]

Which brings us back to what I actually said before you went off on a tangent: "...simply cancel Flight Following and turn off your radio."

What part of cancelling flight following then turning off the radio in Class E airspace violates the regulations?

I didn't catch that it was after canceling without ATC saying "stay with me." Sorry.

 

[smv]

I didn't catch that it was after canceling without ATC saying "stay with me." Sorry.

No worries. It will all come out in the wash.

 

[Lindberg]

Which brings us back to what I actually said before you went off on a tangent: "...simply cancel Flight Following and turn off your radio."

What part of cancelling flight following then turning off the radio in Class E airspace violates the regulations?

If you're doing it because you don't intend to follow an instruction that ATC gave you while in that Class E airspace, it violates 91.123, which doesn't say anything about being or not being on flight following.

 

[smv]

If you're doing it because you don't intend to follow an instruction that ATC gave you while in that Class E airspace, it violates 91.123, which doesn't say anything about being or not being on flight following.

Pretty tough to prove intent.

 

[Lindberg]

Pretty tough to prove intent.

ATC: "Bugsmasher 123AB, turn right heading 270."
You: "No, terminate traffic advisories." [turns off radio, keeps flying heading 220]
What is ATC going to have trouble proving? You ignored an ATC instruction. If you're in E airspace, the FARs say you aren't allowed to do that:

91.123(b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.

Maybe you meant something different by "If you do not like what they are telling you to do, simply cancel Flight Following and turn off your radio."

 

[smv]

ATC: "Bugsmasher 123AB, turn right heading 270."
You: "No, terminate traffic advisories." [turns off radio, keeps flying heading 220]

Yah... That is exactly how it would go down.

What is ATC going to have trouble proving? You ignored an ATC instruction. If you're in E airspace, the FARs say you aren't allowed to do that:

You keep using that word "instruction". That is likely what is confusing you. When receiving VFR Traffic Advisories (AKA: "Flight Following"), you are receiving advisories, not instructions.

Maybe this will help:

https://www.aopa.org/training-and-safety/students/crosscountry/articles/vfr-traffic-advisories

Maybe you meant something different by "If you do not like what they are telling you to do, simply cancel Flight Following and turn off your radio."

Nope. That is exactly what I meant. You do not like the advice you received from ATC? Cancel VFR Traffic Advisories and turn off your radio.

NOTE: Nowhere have I said that anyone should do this nor have I said it was a good idea. I simply pointed out that ATC is not "controlling" you with VFR Advisories, they are only advising you. In this case "Legal" and "Right" do not ncessarily make "Safe". You may end up Dead Right.

 

[Lindberg]

You keep using that word "instruction". That is likely what is confusing you. When receiving VFR Traffic Advisories (AKA: "Flight Following"), you are receiving advisories, not instructions.

You seem to be under the misimpression that you cannot receive instructions while on flight following. That's not accurate. Anytime ATC is "telling you what to do," you are receiving instructions. When they are providing information, those are advisories. "Traffic, 2 o'clock, 2 miles," is an advisory. "Recommend you turn to 270 to avoid traffic," is an advisory. "Remain below 4,000 feet for traffic," is an instruction. You may get both when on flight following. And if you receive instructions while on flight following in controlled airspace, you must follow them.

The FAA has addressed this: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/practice_areas/regulations/interpretations/Data/interps/2013/Karas - (2013) Legal Interpretation.pdf

 

[smv]

You seem to be under the misimpression that you cannot receive instructions while on flight following. That's not accurate. Anytime ATC is "telling you what to do," you are receiving instructions. When they are providing information, those are advisories. "Traffic, 2 o'clock, 2 miles," is an advisory. "Recommend you turn to 270 to avoid traffic," is an advisory. "Remain below 4,000 feet for traffic," is an instruction. You may get both when on flight following. And if you receive instructions while on flight following in controlled airspace, you must follow them.

The FAA has addressed this: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/practice_areas/regulations/interpretations/Data/interps/2013/Karas - (2013) Legal Interpretation.pdf

How does any of that prohibit a pilot from saying, "Cancel VFR Advisories, Squawking VFR, G"day!"?

 

[Velocity173]

The controllers who are initiating vectors and altitude assignments to VFR aircraft in class E (minus IAPs or sequence) don’t understand the history of flight following. Read the definition. That’s what the system was originally designed for. ATC management continues to make things clear as mud by not updating the .65. If you want hands on control from your controllers, why not just make coms and separation mandatory for VFRs in class E then? Personally, I’d rather keep participation voluntary and the services as laid out in the .65.

I want my “flight” to be “followed” not vectored to stay away from airliners because it makes it easier on them.

 

[luvflyin]

You seem to be under the misimpression that you cannot receive instructions while on flight following. That's not accurate. Anytime ATC is "telling you what to do," you are receiving instructions. When they are providing information, those are advisories. "Traffic, 2 o'clock, 2 miles," is an advisory. "Recommend you turn to 270 to avoid traffic," is an advisory. "Remain below 4,000 feet for traffic," is an instruction. You may get both when on flight following. And if you receive instructions while on flight following in controlled airspace, you must follow them.

The FAA has addressed this: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/practice_areas/regulations/interpretations/Data/interps/2013/Karas - (2013) Legal Interpretation.pdf

There was an ‘enforcement’ of this once. Can’t find it right now. Pilot didn’t like it so he took it to the next step. The cat in the long black robe with the big wood hammer said you be guilty dude, gimme yer ticket.

 

[Lindberg]

How does any of that prohibit a pilot from saying, "Cancel VFR Advisories, Squawking VFR, G"day!"?

I can only lead you to the water.

 

[skajake]

You seem to be under the misimpression that you cannot receive instructions while on flight following. That's not accurate. Anytime ATC is "telling you what to do," you are receiving instructions. When they are providing information, those are advisories. "Traffic, 2 o'clock, 2 miles," is an advisory. "Recommend you turn to 270 to avoid traffic," is an advisory. "Remain below 4,000 feet for traffic," is an instruction. You may get both when on flight following. And if you receive instructions while on flight following in controlled airspace, you must follow them.

The FAA has addressed this: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/practice_areas/regulations/interpretations/Data/interps/2013/Karas - (2013) Legal Interpretation.pdf

See the Doremire legal opinion from the FAA. It establishes in black and white language that VFR ATC vectors for traffic are neither clearances NOR instructions. Further it state matter of factly that any maneuvering by the pilot after receiving an ATC vector IS NOT a violation of 91.123

Quote: "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"

Source: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_or...10/Doremire - (2010) Legal Interpretation.pdf

 

[smv]

I can only lead you to the water.

In other words you cannot explain how any of that prohibits a pilot from saying, "Cancel VFR Advisories, Squawking VFR, G"day!"?

 

[Shawn]

See the Doremire legal opinion from the FAA. It establishes in black and white language that VFR ATC vectors for traffic are neither clearances NOR instructions. Further it state matter of factly that any maneuvering by the pilot after receiving an ATC vector IS NOT a violation of 91.123

Quote: "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"

Source: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/practice_areas/regulations/interpretations/Data/interps/2010/Doremire - (2010) Legal Interpretation.pdf

That is a very narrow interpretation regarding vectors into Bravo absolving the pilot from the necessity of receiving a clearance, not a blanket statement on all ATC instructions while receiving radar services.

Maneuvering to avoid Bravo and avoid a violation of regulations is not the same a maneuver to avoid ATC instructions which IS a violation of regulations.

Context matters.