IFR "pop-up" courtesy of ForeFlight

LDJones

LDJones

Touchdown! Greaser!
Gone West
Joined
Sep 6, 2011
Messages
10,998
Location
Twin Cities, MN
Display Name
Display name:
Jonesy
Flying back from the ND oil fields to Minneapolis on Friday we ended up diverting to Jamestown, ND (KJMS) when we noticed an issue with one of the fuel caps in the TN Bonanza. We were clipping along at 9,000' when we noticed it and gave ATC a heads-up of our change in plan. We started an immediate descent since we were only about 30 miles out and had to get below 3,000 for the approach. My instrument student did a commendable job on the GPS approach to rwy 13 with a nice transition to landing after a minimums approach under the hood.

After a quick taxi back and reseating of the fuel cap we were back in the air headed to KFCM. I called Mpls Center and asked if we could pick up a pop up IFR to Mpls. The controller said I'd have to call FSS and file the plan. We were climbing out of 3,000' so I punched KJMS KFCM into ForeFlight, hit the File and Brief button, changed the Souls on Board number and hit File. Within seconds it announced that I was "Filed!" My phone chirped seconds later with the e-mail confirmation.

So, less than a minute after being told to contact FSS I called up the controller and said, "You should have a plan on file for us." She said, "Let me check..." then came back five seconds later with a "Cleared as filed, climb and maintain niner thousand on your current squawk code."

I think that has to be one of the quickest, easiest pop-up clearances I've gotten in awhile. I love what technology is doing for our flying!
 
Foreflight is a great piece of technology isn't it? My IR instructor has been incorporating FF tips and tricks into the lesson plans. Love it.
 
asgcpa said:
Foreflight is a great piece of technology isn't it? My IR instructor has been incorporating FF tips and tricks into the lesson plans. Love it.
Click to expand...

It truly is a game-changer in so many ways. The IAP overlay feature is simply amazing, a real boost to situational awareness as you approach your destination.
 
Very nice. I have wondered how long it takes between the time you hit "file" and ATC actually getting the plan.
 
I've had to do that. Filed a quick flight plan on Foreflight, waited about 5 minutes and called up Orlando Approach (we were about 15nm SE of KMCO) and they were NOT happy about it. Cloud cover was getting lower and lower so we had no choice. Almost felt like we were a nuisance.
 
Yep, it's nice to see in an email while you're sitting on the ground and not trying to pick up in the air.
Took a friend to pick up his bird at maintenance shop yesterday. Filed back out while we were eating . Got back to leave and saw that I was going to be given a DP that would add 30 to 40 minutes to an hour flight. So I called up CL Del. , cancelled that and just got flight following.
 
Skypilotcfii said:
Get the Blue O-Rings installed on both Caps. 2 per Cap. Performance Aero has them.
Click to expand...

Good tip. Thanks. One cap had just been secured slightly kitty wampum, allowing the leak. Properly seated it was fine. But we will look into those.
 
Too bad data coverage isn't particularly reliable above a couple thousand feet. I've filed using the FF when the ceiling lowered on us to the point that we were about 2500agl. It took a few tries but finally got through. But yeah, FF rocks.

Maybe one of the benefits of drones darkening the skies will be greater availability of cellular data at altitude.
 
LDJones said:
Flying back from the ND oil fields to Minneapolis on Friday we ended up diverting to Jamestown, ND (KJMS) when we noticed an issue with one of the fuel caps in the TN Bonanza. We were clipping along at 9,000' when we noticed it and gave ATC a heads-up of our change in plan.
Click to expand...
Sounds like it worked out for you, I'm wondering tho' ... why didn't you just request a through clearance?
 
mcoflyer said:
I've had to do that. Filed a quick flight plan on Foreflight, waited about 5 minutes and called up Orlando Approach (we were about 15nm SE of KMCO) and they were NOT happy about it. Cloud cover was getting lower and lower so we had no choice. Almost felt like we were a nuisance.
Click to expand...

how could you tell? did they say something to you about it?
 
My my! MSP Center is getting a bit more rigid in their old age. It used to be that you could pretty much get them to do anything for you up in the northern sectors as they just didn't have that much to do. I have been up there at night when one controller was working Montana to Michigan. Admittedly, this was more than a few years ago.
 
mcoflyer said:
I've had to do that. Filed a quick flight plan on Foreflight, waited about 5 minutes and called up Orlando Approach (we were about 15nm SE of KMCO) and they were NOT happy about it. Cloud cover was getting lower and lower so we had no choice. Almost felt like we were a nuisance.
Click to expand...

Just curious were you landing at KMCO or nearby?
I have heard approach at a busy airport get quite curt with another pilot that opened an IFR plan when he was minutes from landing.

Don't remember exactly what was said but it was along the lines of needing reaction time for traffic sequencing.
 
Kristin said:
My my! MSP Center is getting a bit more rigid in their old age. It used to be that you could pretty much get them to do anything for you up in the northern sectors as they just didn't have that much to do. I have been up there at night when one controller was working Montana to Michigan. Admittedly, this was more than a few years ago.
Click to expand...
I took my instrument training at Williston, ND twenty-five years ago...just a sleepy little town in northwest North Dakota then. Now it's ground zero in the Bakken oil boom, such a mad-house I avoid it if at all possible. Over here in eastern Montana it's still pretty quite, not unusual that somebody'll call Salt Lake Center "just checkin' to see if you're still there".
 
Kristin said:
My my! MSP Center is getting a bit more rigid in their old age. It used to be that you could pretty much get them to do anything for you up in the northern sectors as they just didn't have that much to do. I have been up there at night when one controller was working Montana to Michigan. Admittedly, this was more than a few years ago.
Click to expand...

I think that unlikely, that would essentially require facility certification. Center controllers aren't facility certified like is commonly done in approach control facilities. Centers are divided into areas of specialization and areas are divided into sectors. A center controller is area certified when he is checked out on all sectors in his area.
 
peerlesscowboy said:
I took my instrument training at Williston, ND twenty-five years ago...just a sleepy little town in northwest North Dakota then. Now it's ground zero in the Bakken oil boom, such a mad-house I avoid it if at all possible. Over here in eastern Montana it's still pretty quite, not unusual that somebody'll call Salt Lake Center "just checkin' to see if you're still there".
Click to expand...

Yeah, Williston is crazytown these days. But the oil boom is creeping over into eastern Montana. One of our guys is spending more time over there lately.
 
LDJones said:
Yeah, Williston is crazytown these days. But the oil boom is creeping over into eastern Montana. One of our guys is spending more time over there lately.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I flew down to Sidney, MT one day last summer....new oil wells all the way from Sidney to just south of Brockton. They drilled a few wells up around Scobey and Four Buttes but it seems to have quieted down up there lately? Maybe they're just waiting for BNSF to get the RR branch line in shape to ship the crude out? I dunno' squat about the oil business, I'm just an old cowboy :) I leased out everything I have in Daniels County, MT a couple years ago, so far they haven't seemed interested in Valley County where I live. I guess the Bakken must end someplace?, I think I must be on the poverty side of the line :confused:
 
I think you're in violation of FCC regulations using cell technology in the air. I won't tell...
 
Captain said:
I think you're in violation of FCC regulations using cell technology in the air. I won't tell...
Click to expand...

Only if he is on an IFR clearance. Which he was not, at the time he filed his flight plan via foreflight.
 
dell30rb said:
Only if he is on an IFR clearance. Which he was not, at the time he filed his flight plan via foreflight.
Click to expand...

No, no he said FCC not FAA.

This is addressed by FCC 47 Part 22.925:

§22.925 Prohibition on airborne operation of cellular telephones.Cellular telephones installed in or carried aboard airplanes, balloons or any other type of aircraft must not be operated while such aircraft are airborne (not touching the ground). When any aircraft leaves the ground, all cellular telephones on board that aircraft must be turned off. The following notice must be posted on or near each cellular telephone installed in any aircraft:
“The use of cellular telephones while this aircraft is airborne is prohibited by FCC rules, and the violation of this rule could result in suspension of service and/or a fine. The use of cellular telephones while this aircraft is on the ground is subject to FAA regulations.”
Click to expand...


The reason being that at high speed and high altitude your cell phone engages too many towers at once and can cause limited service for others.

However, I think this is one of those things that's only bad if everyone is doing it and, with the speeds and altitudes of light GA aircraft, I doubt we would really be much of an impact anyway.
 
I was pretty sure cell phones (and the cell data) could only be used on the ground. Has there been a change?

I was kidding before, now I'm genuinely curious.
 
Captain said:
I was pretty sure cell phones (and the cell data) could only be used on the ground. Has there been a change?

I was kidding before, now I'm genuinely curious.
Click to expand...

See my post above yours (which I guess was at the same time).
 
MyassisDragon said:
Just curious were you landing at KMCO or nearby?
I have heard approach at a busy airport get quite curt with another pilot that opened an IFR plan when he was minutes from landing.

Don't remember exactly what was said but it was along the lines of needing reaction time for traffic sequencing.
Click to expand...

No. We left KORL about 10 minutes earlier and we were headed down to KMLB for some approaches and then back to KORL. We stayed clear of KMCO and the Bravo.
 
tehmightypirate said:
No, no he said FCC not FAA.

This is addressed by FCC 47 Part 22.925:

The reason being that at high speed and high altitude your cell phone engages too many towers at once and can cause limited service for others.

However, I think this is one of those things that's only bad if everyone is doing it and, with the speeds and altitudes of light GA aircraft, I doubt we would really be much of an impact anyway.
Click to expand...

Since I can't make calls, I'll argue I wasn't using a "telephone", just an iPad! :wink2:

I suspect that rule was drafted pre-digital cellphones and massive cellular data usage.
 
LDJones said:
Since I can't make calls, I'll argue I wasn't using a "telephone", just an iPad! :wink2:

I suspect that rule was drafted pre-digital cellphones and massive cellular data usage.
Click to expand...

As I understand it the current and previous generation of cellular systems manage the connections so one phone is only using one tower at a time. The rule is outdated.
 
Clark1961 said:
As I understand it the current and previous generation of cellular systems manage the connections so one phone is only using one tower at a time. The rule is outdated.
Click to expand...

I remember reading something about this as well so I'll back that up. Plus, how many people actually turn off their phones or put them in airplane mode in-flight? Most people just leave them on in their pocket for both GA and commercial flight. Thus, with mobile data and such I imagine we have tons of connections inadvertently happening from aircraft all the time. I would assume that if this was indeed a problem cell phone coverage would be crazily unreliable.
 
tehmightypirate said:
Plus, how many people actually turn off their phones or put them in airplane mode in-flight?
Click to expand...

I always put mine in airplane mode before I fly. If I don't, it kills my battery and I always seem to receive a deluge of text messages when I descend into the pattern which is very distracting.
 
tehmightypirate said:
Plus, how many people actually turn off their phones or put them in airplane mode in-flight?
Click to expand...

I tend to use aircraft mode since the cellular frequency search produces strange noises in the headset (original Zulu). That said, data connections appear to frequently be available and I've heard stories of folks texting while in flight.
 
Clark1961 said:
I tend to use aircraft mode since the cellular frequency search produces strange noises in the headset (original Zulu). That said, data connections appear to frequently be available and I've heard stories of folks texting while in flight.
Click to expand...

My wife often texts during arrival when we fly GA
 
Part 91ops says the PIC can determine if portable electronic devices create a hazard for flight. I consider a smartphone a PED
 
Jaybird180 said:
Part 91ops says the PIC can determine if portable electronic devices create a hazard for flight. I consider a smartphone a PED
Click to expand...

Yowzer but the FCC sez something else...
 
AdamZ said:
Curious can WingX do that?
Click to expand...

Yes, WingX can do that From main screen DUATS->New->File Flight Plan. You can choose IFR, VFR, IFR ADIZ or VFR ADIZ plan and file it. It also has an option for email confirmation.
Had to file VFR flight plan last Sunday departing KONT to KPSP after TSA screening (there was TFR at KPSP). After passing screening I called Clearence Delivery and they told me I should file either IFR or VFR flight plan in order to go to KPSP and suggested contacting flight service. Just like OP I filed from WingX right away and called CD in about a minute. He sounded surprised but flight plan was there already :)
 
LDJones said:
Since I can't make calls, I'll argue I wasn't using a "telephone", just an iPad! :wink2:

I suspect that rule was drafted pre-digital cellphones and massive cellular data usage.
Click to expand...
Your suspicion is correct. That ruling came out when the only cellphone system was the original AMPS (analog, 830-890 MHz, max of two carriers) variety. And last time I checked the restriction on airborne use as written only applies to cellphones using those frequencies and many are in other bands these days.
 
Captain said:
I think you're in violation of FCC regulations using cell technology in the air. I won't tell...
Click to expand...

Nope... The scuttlebutt as related to me: because the pertinent reg applies to CELLULAR bands from decades ago. Everything nowadays is migrated to a different part of the spectrum so TECHNICALLY your portable phone is not a CELL phone but rather a PCS device or something else...

Or something obtuse like that...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top