Follow-on to Handheld GPS

[AR Dave]

HAH I'm glad you said that George, I do that too! Them Canadians was looking all over for me, but I out smarted them too! That transponder gave me away, cause they make you file a flight plan there and I made the mistake of checking VFR. What a mistake! Next thing I know, ####B do you read me this is Edmonton sumpin nother, are you in the clouds, ya, ya, ya, lecturing like my mother. But I never could turn mom off, like I did them! Here I got this new transponder just so I could fly to the lower 48 and look what it did for me. Luckily I gave them a contact phone number in Alaska. They was impressed with my flying, cause they kept leaving messages for me to call them. But I'm the modest type so just knowing they were calling was enough for me. I really need to write an article for The 170 News, about how to handle those nosey folks, before our Convention up there.

You wrote two post before I could edit my one. Which I was doing because you wrote 1 in between before I could post the one I was answering. If your plane is as fast as your fingers, I can see Joe is in trouble!

[GAHorn]

I was asking someone else "How many times..." they'd done that! I didn't say I ever did that. Tum-tee-tum...
Back in the mid-70's I once flew with a really old phart at a commuter airline. Arriving into the Wichita Falls (SPS) area he was slow to descend to the assigned altitude and the military controller really began to get peeved about it.
So while this crusty old captain did a Warp-speed descent he used his free hand to crank the encoding altimeter down to the assigned altitude (not realizing the cockpit readout on the instrument had absolutely nothing to do with the reported/encoded altitude.) He lied to the controller about what our altitude actually was and resulted in a violation for him because he didn't return their phone call. He ended up paying a $2500 fine and got a 30 day suspension.

If ever you do get a call from ATC to give them a phone call ...it's usually a good idea to do it if they know your tail number. Not calling them will usually result in an angry reaction from them instead of a mere lecture. Just remember that when you call them...let them do most of the talking and you do most of the listening with a few respectful "yes sirs and no sirs". All calls are recorded. (It helps to keep in mind that they don't want to lose a day filling out reports and attending court with you either.)

[johneeb]

Please please everyone heed George's advice, don't go into the clouds without a clearance.

The thught of uncontrolled aircraft in the clouds while I and thousands of other flights a day are relying on the Air Traffic Control system to provide separation from "known" traffic gives me a real hallow feeling in the pit of my stomach.

As for what other aircraft are going to do I will let you read below what the big guys are going to do when they get one of those "Resolution Advisories" (RA) from their TCAS systems. As you read the below you will see that even if they manage to avoid you there still a good chance the maneuver is going to cause some injuries.

Johneb

[GAHorn]

As for operating with your transponder or encoder turned off.... one might read up on FAR 91.215, especially para (c) which states:
91.215 (c) Transponder-On Operation: While in the airspace as specified in paragraph (b) of this secion or in all controlled airspace , each person operating an aircraft...shall operate the transponder including Mode C equipment ...and shall reply on the appropriate code or as assigned by ATC.

For practical purposes, controlled airspace within the lower 48 is virtually all airspace above 1200' above the ground not in the vicinity of an airport, and all airspace above 700' above the ground near airports with an instrument approach, and all airspace from the ground UP...near airports with a control tower. So the bottom line is, if you have a transponder you must operate it (and do so on the correct code) unless ATC tells you to turn it off.

[AR Dave]

For practical purposes, controlled airspace within the lower 48 is virtually all airspace above 1200' above the ground not in the vicinity of an airport.

I've got to ponder on this awhile!
I'm used to ATC being, when you fly over Moose Run Golf Course and call Merrill Field, before entering the traffic pattern.
I will be asking for a rundown on ATC over America, at Petit Jean.
Must be the Canadian influence! They'll be taking our guns next! Better put a after that!
Meanwhile, I'll bring her back from the paint shop below 1200'.

[GAHorn]

You'll still be in controlled airspace if you're more than 700' above the ground anywhere near Petit Jean.
In fact controlled airspace extends from several miles NW of Russellville to a long way SE of Little Rock. If you look at a Memphis Sectional you'll notice the irregularly shaped "magenta" outlines (sorta maroon color) which outlines the floor of controlled airspace at 700' AGL and above. Stay outside that magenta area to be in controlled airspace above 1200' AGL.
What does this mean? It means that if you are flying VFR you must maintain 1,000' above all clouds, 500' below all clouds, 2,000' horizontally from all clouds, and remain in visibility of 3 miles or greater while in that controlled airspace (and be transponding on 1200 or other assigned code.)
IFR aircraft must be on a clearance, and VFR aircraft will not be in or even near clouds. Ever. Lear Jets can exit clouds at 250 kts or greater and still have a chance to see the 170 for almost 20 whole seconds before smashing into it.
Below the floor of controlled airspace VFR pilots may operate "clear of clouds" and maintain 1 mile of visibility, and instrument rated pilots may fly IFR without a clearance. (VFR and IFR pilots may legally smash into each other.)

[170C]

George, I basically agree with what you are saying and yes I realize if I am on flight following the controllers have no requirement to advise of conflicting traffic. However I have found in the majority of cases, in all parts of the country that they do a pretty good job of it even when busy. I have been told by any number of high time pilots that if I am not on an IFR clearence it is still a good idea to request flight following when ATC has time to provide it. I do so a fair amount of the time, expecially if flying by myself (not with another plane--because we usually are yacking). There have been several times in the past 22 yrs of using flight following that I have observed traffic that wasn't pointed out to me, but I find the odds are on my side & it is comforting to know there is another set of eyes looking in most cases. Now if I were in IMC on an IFR clearence and the controller told me there was unidentfied traffic 2 miles @ my 12:00 indicating my altitude that would be a time I wouldn't give much thought to whether the other traffic's transponder was correct or not, I would be asking for some kind of deviation until it could be determined if I was clear of the traffic or not. This is assuming I am in IMC and assuming, based upon the information, that the other traffic must also be in IMC. Granted the other traffic is most likely flying illegally, but I don't want to chance being "dead right".

The main thing I think is to comply with the rules as best we can and not intensionally put ourselves in situations that could result in our endangering ourselves or others using our airspace whether the other guy is another GA aircraft flying VFR or IFR, military or airline.

[AR Dave]

Well ya'll sucked the laughter right out of me. I'm definitely stunned!
Am seriously thinking that going to ground school would be a wise thing to do.
Hey, I've got some concerns coming up! At what point does Fly-in become Convention status? 50, 170? over 100 people? Petit Jean doesn't have a control tower! Unless I should've been talking to ATC over America? NOT JOKING, this strip is going from 1 plane a week, to 50 planes at once. Everytime I open email, there are 2 more coming!
Can we listen to Flight following or something to keep track of members coming? Guess we need to write down everyone's N number, so we'll know who ATC is talking too!

[GAHorn]

Frank, ...Don't tell me you're defending an unlawful practice of VFR pilots violating the rules by noting that flight following is a good thing!
All those points are good, Frank, and I endorse them wholeheartedly. I also encourage folks to engage in flight-following....but I feel it's important to realize that no matter how often you've had other traffic pointed out to you while on flight following....that no relief from your obligation to "see and avoid" is issued. It's still YOUR responsibility to see and avoid other aircraft and YOUR responsibility to maintain VFR conditions. (I'm pretty sure you've also asked for flight following and had it denied because of controller workload. Just because a controller accepts your application for flight following places no onus for a performance standard on him to save you from a midair. If he fails to tell you about another aircraft....it's no skin of HIS nose. If he fails to advise an IFR aircraft of possible VFR aircraft...it's also no dereliction of duty on his part because VFR aircraft are by law required to stay out of IMC. (Anyone's premise that it's OK to occasionally venture into IMC because of some perceived safety net in that regard is incorrect.)
I have been known to ask for vectors around traffic while I'm IFR. (Usually this has been when I am in clear air and do not see traffic which is indicating a very close conflict. But you persist in implying that a VFR airplane in a cloud with an IFR aircraft will not be a hazard because of some controller down in a control room somewhere. Wrong!
Even if I'm advise of another aircraft in a cloud with me, which manuever can I make that will guarantee avoidance? By definition unless closely related traffic is sighted it cannot be effectively avoided. A turn or climb/descent in cloud has virtually the same likelihood of a smash as no action at all, and greatly increases the likelihood of disorientation.) The onus is NOT upon the IFR aircraft to avoid VFR aircraft in clouds. It's the other way around and no attempt on anyone's part to argue that is valid. Just because, without regard to others, you blasted thru a red traffic light successfully in the past doesn't make the practice legal or safe.
In any case, past happy experiences with flight following should not give comfort to VFR pilots that it's OK for them to disregard the FAR's in the belief that ATC will keep everyone from running into each other. It just ain't so. (How many aircraft that you didn't see were NOT pointed out to you by flight following? You might be surprised to find that is a common occurance.) Controllers sit in air-conditioned rooms, in comfortable swivel chairs that aren't hurtling along in danger of impacting some careless yahoo who thinks it's exciting to blast thru clouds while operating VFR. There is simply no merit to the concept that it's occasionally OK to do so. None.
Could you imagine a doctor at a medical convention speaking up for violating sound medical practices and rules just in order to make his own personal agenda easier? ("Awww. There's no reason to test for disease! Just prescribe all the antibiotics available! ONE of 'em'll kill the germ!') I'd encourage us all to reconsider the professional behavior which brings admiration from our peers and public... not to discard it or advocate carelessness.

[Harold Holiman]

Dave,

At the Edmonton convention, there were over 120 Cessna 170's present. The Canadian air traffic controllers went on strike the night before the convention so we had the whole Edmonton International Airport basicly to ourselves and the whole of Canadian airspace to do whatever we wanted with no towers operating or ATC working. By a special act of Parliment, the Cessna 170's were the only airplanes that were allowed to fly into Canada during the entire strike.

Harold

[rudymantel]

If I'm IFR in IMC and ATC advises there's unidentified traffic at my altitude and we're on a collision course I wouldn't sit there and do nothing. I'd advise ATC and change altitude.
Rudy

[doug8082a]

Good points George. Not only does flight following NOT relieve you of your obligation to “see and avoid”, one should remember that the controller’s workload and the type of aircraft in the skies that day also factor into the equation. If you get flight following you will get whatever advisories ATC cares to provide when they can provide them. This can easily, and often does, mean that there’ll be gaps in your ”coverage” during a flight because of changes in ATC’s workload. Here in southeastern New England we have all kinds of traffic going into a given airport, especially in the summer; Citations, Falcons, light twins, single engine piston, NORDO, ultralights, powered hangliders, you name it. I’ll bet some of the small stuff doesn’t even show up as a legit target on radar. I’ll bet they couldn’t tell you about some of this stuff even if they wanted to. It gets dang busy around here in the summer with all the traffic between Providence, Boston, Hyannis (Cape Cod), Nantucket, Martha’s Vineyard, and Block Island. The controllers do a good job of providing advisories when they can, but even then you’d be crazy to rely solely on them for avoiding traffic.

Also, what about the “other guy”? Is he talking to ATC like you? Is his transponder turned on? Does he even HAVE a transponder? “November 8082 Alpha, traffic 10 o’clock, 2 miles, westbound, altitude unknown.” Great! What am I supposed to do with that? Is it my buddy in his NORDO 1939 Taylorcraft, some guy in a 172 who forgot to turn on his transponder, or an ultralight at 1500’ that I’ll never see looking at the cranberry bogs? Chances are we’ll cross and I’ll never see him. There’s also times when the controller gives an advisory well after I’ve already spotted the traffic. It’s not that the controller is lazy, just REAL busy, but still trying to provide me with advisories.

Flight following is great and I certainly recommend using it whenever you can, but treat it for what it is… another set of eyes that may or may not point out traffic to you. Don't expect them to keep your butt out of trouble. If you want to blast through a cloud just for kicks don't come crying to ATC when you hit someone on the way through.

[170C]

Hey George, I completely agree with you on the subject of following the rules regarding VFR or IFR for that matter. Furthur I totally understand its each pilots responsibility to watch out for traffic. I just think that VFR flight following is one more way to help avoid conflicts. There have been more times, as recently as weekend before last, that the controller pointed out traffic that I wouldn't have likely seen had he not advised me of it. Fortunately none of it was on a collison course. I have had instances where I was told about traffic that had I not been told of it would have scared me. BUT again I understand it is still our job to watch for traffic and by no means do I recommend venturing into clouds unless on an IFR clearence. If I gave that impression it was a poor choice of words on my part. I sure don't want to mix any red paint with green Guess we all need tcas, but that wouldn't help if the other guy didn't have his transponder turned on or if it was malfunctioning.

[HA]

I fly airmed into Minneapolis/St. Paul a lot and I'm much happier on a low IFR day than a VFR one or worse yet VFR with some puffies to help obscure traffic, just for helping sort out all the airplanes. Even with the fishfinder, on a VFR day it is hard for us to see everybody, there can be a LOT of airplanes buzzing around heading for various small airports, lakes, training, etc. The TCAS makes me nervous because of all the planes we DON'T EVER see, even when you kind of know where to look.

Now, one of my guys used to fly Mig-29's for Mother Russia, and oddly enough he never misses traffic - sees planes from way out too. Glad I don't have him looking for me, if you know what I mean