Flight following with abs-b

TheGolfPilot

TheGolfPilot

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jan 16, 2015
Messages
786
Location
Modesto, CA
Display Name
Display name:
Golfpilot
One of our planes just got a Gtn-750 with abs-b. I have only used it for a hour of flying and am already loving the benefits of it.
For the flight there I had used flight following, atc was constantly giving me traffic that I knew I had, and it suddenly didn't feel like as helpful of a resource as it used to be.

I would imagine I would still use flight following over long distances but shorter trips around the Bay Area it just doesn't seem necessary with full abs-b capability. I suppose after all that is the idea, to decrease atc workload and increase safety

I'm curious to hear other people's experience and opinions are
 
Last edited:
TheGolfPilot said:
One of our planes just got a Gtn-750 with abs-b. I have only used it for a hour of flying and am already loving the benefits of it.
For the flight there I had used flight following, atc was constantly giving me traffic that I knew I had, and it suddenly didn't feel like as helpful of a resource as it used to be.

I would imagine I would still use flight following over long distances but shorter trips around the Bay Area it just doesn't seem necessary with full abs-b capability. I suppose after all that is the idea, to decrease atc workload and increase safety

I'm curious to hear other people's experience and opinions are
Click to expand...

FF has other benefits than just traffic or weather (I am assuming your 750 has that also). For example, if you have a problem of any kind, you are already talking to them, much easier than trying to find and tune a freq and raising someone when under duress. And even for traffic and weather, you might be distracted and miss something important on your screen, while ATC will alert you to it.

Unlike the 750, their service is free, and in my book not getting FF on even a short CC gets added to the list of most useless things to pilots, like runway behind, altitude above and fuel in the fuel truck.
 
TheGolfPilot said:
One of our planes just got a Gtn-750 with abs-b. I have only used it for a hour of flying and am already loving the benefits of it.
For the flight there I had used flight following, atc was constantly giving me traffic that I knew I had, and it suddenly didn't feel like as helpful of a resource as it used to be.

I would imagine I would still use flight following over long distances but shorter trips around the Bay Area it just doesn't seem necessary with full abs-b capability. I suppose after all that is the idea, to decrease atc workload and increase safety

I'm curious to hear other people's experience and opinions are
Click to expand...

Careful....

ADS-B does NOT show all traffic. It shows all SECONDARY radar that ATC sees. It does not show primary-only returns, such as that from aircraft without transponders. Get more than 30 miles from SFO, especially to the east, and you'll run across these. Most of the gliders at Byron have no electrical systems, for instance.

More importantly, ADS-B isn't going to tell you about the jumper dumper letting go over Byron or New Jerusalem or Lodi, 10,000 feet above you (or if it does, you'll get all the region's airliner traffic, also 10,000 feet above you). Or whether or not R-2531 is "hot."

Get some more experience with this and you'll start to see traffic calls that aren't on your screen.

GTN-750s are nice boxes, but it's really important to know their limitations. I did most of my instrument training on GTN-650s with ADS-B in/out and all the doodads. There was a lot of stuff it didn't see.
 
What about planes without transponders? Still a good reason to talk to ATC. There's stuff you'll never see otherwise.
 
As someone who is ASD-B out with Foreflight and flies in heavy traffic areas and uses FF every flight...no way does ADS-B even come close to replacing Flight Following services. In addition to all the other perks of Flight Following, to me the ADS-B traffic picture is just added situational awareness to their traffic calls to help spot the traffic, not to be the primary source of traffic information.

I have been buzzed more than once by someone that was not on my screen....or called out by ATC.
 
ADS-B is certainly a significant aid to situational awareness but it's not a replacement for a good traffic scan and eyes out the window. Have heard the following exchange multiple times between pilots and ATC:

Controller: "Bugsmasher 123, traffic at your 2 o'clock, 1 mile, same altitude."

Pilot: "Roger, I see him too on my screen here."

Controller: "How about out the window, do you see him out the window?"

Pilot: "Ummm... looking."

Controller: "OK sir, it's VFR conditions out there, I need your eyes outside."
 
rocketflyer84 said:
ADS-B is certainly a significant aid to situational awareness but it's not a replacement for a good traffic scan and eyes out the window. Have heard the following exchange multiple times between pilots and ATC:

Controller: "Bugsmasher 123, traffic at your 2 o'clock, 1 mile, same altitude."

Pilot: "Roger, I see him too on my screen here."

Controller: "How about out the window, do you see him out the window?"

Pilot: "Ummm... looking."

Controller: "OK sir, it's VFR conditions out there, I need your eyes outside."
Click to expand...


I'd tell I'm to eff himself. Don't effin chastise me radar goon. Your not my CFI and your not in charge of this ship. You wanna tell pilots how to fly, transfer to the FSDO and have at it. Otherwise, STFU......
 
Unit74 said:
Otherwise, STFU......
Click to expand...

ATC needs to hear a definite Yes..."Traffic in sight" or No..."Negative Contact" regarding VISUAL contact to a traffic advisory. Fish finder responses provide neither one of those answers for them and determines how they handle the potential traffic conflict moving forward.
 
Last edited:
And one reason I use VFR FF less and less. . .actually, more or less never, now. Traveling, I'm IFR most of the time. But VFR, I'd rather have fun, enjoy the experience, and not listen to ATC (or anyone else). . .
 
Unit74 said:
I'd tell I'm to eff himself. Don't effin chastise me radar goon. Your not my CFI and your not in charge of this ship. You wanna tell pilots how to fly, transfer to the FSDO and have at it. Otherwise, STFU......
Click to expand...
The FSDO could probably use him. . .Your FSDO has someone current and qualified?
 
MAKG1 said:
It shows all SECONDARY radar that ATC sees.
Click to expand...

Not so! If the interloper doesn't have working mode C, ADS-B ignores that aircraft...

Seems like ATC calls at least one of those for me as traffic every hour flying, or so. Even under the Class Bravo veil...

Paul
 
Shawn said:
ATC needs to hear a definite Yes..."Traffic in sight" or No..."Negative Contact" regarding VISUAL contact to a traffic advisory. Fish finder responses provide neither one of those answers for them and determines how they handle the potential traffic conflict moving forward.
Click to expand...

How does knowing you have it "on the screen" affect the way they handle the traffic conflict going forward?

Did you mean to say "does not affect"?

I sometimes mention that I have the traffic on the screen so that the controller doesn't need to worry about giving me more position updates, although I imagine they are probably required to anyhow.
 
dans2992 said:
How does knowing you have it "on the screen" affect the way they handle the traffic conflict going forward?

Did you mean to say "does not affect"?

I sometimes mention that I have the traffic on the screen so that the controller doesn't need to worry about giving me more position updates, although I imagine they are probably required to anyhow.
Click to expand...

They have to keep calling traffic until you see it visually. They're calling it obviously to prevent a collision but also times where separation exists like in a B,C or TRSA, they're trying to get visual sep.

Used to work fighters a lot on approach and they would call "radar contact" on traffic. That's good and all but you can't say "roger Blade11, maintain airborne radar separation from that traffic, descend and maintain 3,000." Still have to get the pilot to see the traffic in order to provide visual sep from it.

Someday we'll have a system where ATC will be monitors and we'll be able to separate ourselves with our onboard ADS-B. Free Flight...someday.
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
More importantly, ADS-B isn't going to tell you about the jumper dumper letting go over Byron or New Jerusalem or Lodi...
Click to expand...
And now, San Martin (South County) too!
 
dans2992 said:
How does knowing you have it "on the screen" affect the way they handle the traffic conflict going forward"
Click to expand...

Giving them a "on the screen" in neither a yes or no answer if the pilot has the traffic in sight visually which is what ATC needs to hear and is a useless response to their traffic advisory...which even though it it is not phased in the form of a question, needs a specific response. Yes means you can mainain visual separation. No means they have to continue providing traffic advisories and suggest heading changes if necessary to prevent bent metal. Fish Finder answers mean that have to ask you the same question again.
 
I would hope nobody says they have it on the screen if they also have a visual...
 
So, rather than saying I "have it on the screen, looking for a visual", I might as well just say "negative contact"....
 
dans2992 said:
So, rather than saying I "have it on the screen, looking for a visual", I might as well just say "negative contact"....
Click to expand...

I never tell them anything about having it on my display. It's either "traffic in sight" or "negative contact."

The AIM references ADS-B, TCAS and TIS in that they are to be used to acquire the "intruder" visually. While TCAS does allow the pilot to respond to an RA, cockpit traffic systems are not used for any ATC services or handling. Even mentions in the TIS / ADS-B section that a "traffic in sight" response is predicated on seeing the other aircraft visually and NOT on a display.

So yes, no point in throwing in the extra verbiage on how you see another aircraft on the "fish finder."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top