Flight Following. A universal procedure..?

[Fozzer]

Hello Lads...!

I found this a bit of a surprise...
Part of an article in my English version of "Pilot Magazine" relating to a tour flight around New York and the Statue of Liberty by a couple of English chaps, in a small GA aircraft...
"....Flight Following. The latter is that wonderful American system which gives you a radar service, passing you from ATC to ATC without having to explain yourself every time".

It works flawlessly in FS 2004. You just retune your Com radio and Transponder when requested.

Now I thought this was a universal procedure, which kept you on the ATC radar screen travelling from zone to zone, automatically?

Is the "Flight Following" procedure only used in the United States air space...?

Cheers all...!

Paul.......!

[Brett_Henderson]

I'm not sure how flight following works in other countries. Here in the U.S.

[beaky]

I'm surprised that they were using FF in that VFR corridor- whoever was tracking you there would not only be very busy with commercial traffic in and out of the three-headed monster KLGA/KJFK/KEWR, they'd have all the Hudson River traffic as well: "Traffic is a helicopter; 1 mile at your 12 o'clock, 50 feet, no wait, 100 feet, Piper 1/2 mile at your 9 o'clock, 1,000..."
It'd be like using FF while you're in the pattern at an uncontrolled field, almost.  In that particular zone, the practice is to use that CTAF and keep your eyes peeled.
I generally use FF for legs in excess of 50 miles, or if I'm skirting a busy controlled airspace. I've found that outside of major urban centers, you're unlikely to get anybody if you're below 2500. For my typical trips at 3000 or less among the clustered non-tower fields in this area, I'm better off monitoring the various CTAFs and tower freqs, and keeping a sharp eye out.
But it's a big help on those longer trips- like having an extra set of eyes in the cabin with you. Perfect example would be my epic flight to New Orleans: passing near the Philadelphia Class B at 6500, I was advised of heavy traffic climbing out- not that they're hard to see, but having it called out helps you spot them sooner.
But for most of the 22 hours of that round-trip, I didn't see or hear about any other planes, except in terminal areas where I was landing or departing. Not one! But I stayed with ATC... for the company, if nothing else.
 I don't think the majority of "weekend warriors" here in the US make regular use of it, nor do they file a flight plan for that extra bit of "insurance".

[C]

"....Flight Following. The latter is that wonderful American system which gives you a radar service, passing you from ATC to ATC without having to explain yourself every time".

Now I thought this was a universal procedure, which kept you on the ATC radar screen travelling from zone to zone, automatically?

Well today I told my home ATC my "plan" to go "somewhere", and was handled by 3 different radar units, but only explaining my intentions to the first before reaching the required "somewhere"...

This was all under a "Radar Information Service" (RIS), and was done using a "handover" from one unit to the next (ie, the controller will use a direct landline to tell the next unit who I am and what I'm doing).

If however I was to "freecall", then I would have to give my intentions to the unit in question, probably reidentify my squawk etc...

[Fozzer]

Well today I told my home ATC my "plan" to go "somewhere", and was handled by 3 different radar units, but only explaining my intentions to the first before reaching the required "somewhere"...

This was all under a "Radar Information Service" (RIS), and was done using a "handover" from one unit to the next (ie, the controller will use a direct landline to tell the next unit who I am and what I'm doing).

If however I was to "freecall", then I would have to give my intentions to the unit in question, probably reidentify my squawk etc...

Hi Charlie......!

..a land-line communication?

This seems somewhat different to the American "Flight Following" system, where  you request "Flight Following" once airborne with the "1200" Squawk code, and the ATC appear to automatically pick you up on their radar screen with this Squawk code when you enter their Zone.
They then give you their Com Frequency, and your new Squawk code, which you retain until you pass into the next Zone, where the procedure will be carried out all over again.
That way, it seems as though you are constantly on the Radar screen in the Zone you are flying over, and are identified by your ever-changing Squawk Code...Zone by Zone.
So little chance of a collision, wandering into a restricted/no-fly Zone....
...or getting lost for any reason...
...all automatically... ...?

What do you reckon...?

Cheers...!

Paul... ...!

[Hagar]

Hi Charlie......!

..a land-line communication?

I think Charlie is talking about the military system.

I found this article on Flight Following in the US. http://www.avweb.com/news/avtraining/183268-1.html
Note that this is an additional service & will depend on whether the controllers are busy. It can be terminated at any time at the controller's discretion.

Workload permitting

Flight following is an additional service provided above and beyond what controllers are required to provide. ATC's first priority is separating and sequencing of IFR traffic, and VFR flight following is provided on a "workload permitting" basis. So don't expect a very busy controller to take you on. If you call a number of times and are not acknowledged when a controller is busy, yes, he may be ignoring you (or your transmitter is dead). Use some judgment to decide when not to call. If the controller sounds as busy as a one-armed paperhanger, asking for VFR flight following is probably a waste of time. Consider waiting five or ten minutes until the frequency is less congested or you fly into another controller's radar sector.

Controllers may terminate flight following services to you if they become too busy or if they can't hand you off to the next ATC sector. If this is the case, you may receive a transmission like this:

Cherokee 1SH, radar service terminated, squawk 1200, for further flight following try Los Angeles Center on 125.3.

You're now no longer receiving flight following and you've got to dial in the new frequency and request services all over again. The next sector may take you, or they may not, depending on how busy they are.

[beaky]

Hi Charlie......!

..a land-line communication?

So little chance of a collision, wandering into a restricted/no-fly Zone....
...or getting lost for any reason...
...all automatically... ...?

The main purpose of FF is to get traffic advisories, but it's not quite like being under IFR... it's still very much the PIC's responsibility to see and avoid. And a flight-following controller may have no idea whatsoever what your course should be, so they're under no obligation to provide you with corrections, except in cases where you've been warned of traffic and it still looks like you're in conflict with another aircraft.
Which is not to say they won't provide you with extra service if they're not too busy... the one time I ever came close to considering scud-running, the following controller helped me make up my mind by advising me that the clouds ahead were below the published MEA for that area... he didn't have to tell me that, but he was concerned. Very nice of him. When I decided to turn around and climb to find a path between the buildups, he gently chided me for doing so without telling him: I was not in a controlled airspace under ATC control, but several IFR flights in the soup above me were under his control as they approached a nearby Class D airport, and he was handling them. He had to make some quick adjustments...
 I should've advised him of what I was doing ("Next time, if you're changing heading more than 30 degress or changing altitude more than 500 feet, let me know"). This is not in the rulebook, and it was not taught during my training... just good practice.
I like to think of radar controllers as another "cockpit resource".

[Fozzer]

Thanks for the link, Doug...!
Very interesting... ...

Actually the article I was referring to at the beginning of this thread was in the May 2004 "Flyer" magazine.

The English pilots commented on the fact that they were very impressed with their flight following assistance they had from ATC during the flight...
...and American Air Traffic Controllers seem to be very polite and always helpful.... ...!

...that's nice to know...LOL...!

Cheers Doug...!

Paul... ...!

[beefhole]

...and American Air Traffic Controllers seem to be very polite and always helpful.... ...!

Heh.

Try flying in the tri-state area (specifically Philadelphia), and see how that view changes!

(I'm sure Rotty has had an experience or two, he's a bit north but I can't imagine they're much better up there!)

[beaky]

Heh.

Try flying in the tri-state area (specifically Philadelphia), and see how that view changes!

(I'm sure Rotty has had an experience or two, he's a bit north but I can't imagine they're much better up there!)

Don't deal with ATC much these days, but yes, the NYC area controllers can get a little cranky. When I was training at KTEB, there was one tower controller in particular who always seemed put-upon to handle light singles, esp. students.
But for the most part, they're  OK- just too busy, usually, to deal with any foolishness. If you are paying attention and following procedures correctly, it's all much more friendly.
On that long flight to KNEW, I got a good sampling of controllers enroute, and found that their attitude, not surprisingly, depends on workload. They do talk a little bit slower as you head south...

[Fozzer]

Heh.

Try flying in the tri-state area (specifically Philadelphia), and see how that view changes!

(I'm sure Rotty has had an experience or two, he's a bit north but I can't imagine they're much better up there!)

Listening in to live Philadelphia ATC, they sound like Cowboys herding cattle into market stalls...Yo' all...
Whereas....

http://atcmonitor.com/

Atlanta ATC sound like "English" Gentlemen....
..clear as crystal... ...!
LOL...!

Good practice for undersatnding the procedure for radio communication.... ...!

(Notice how clear this is...?
No background "mush"..)...!

Paul... ...!

[beefhole]

Listening in to live Philadelphia ATC, they sound like Cowboys herding cattle into market stalls...Yo' all...

Perfect characterization

[C]

The main purpose of FF is to get traffic advisories, but it's not quite like being under IFR... it's still very much the PIC's responsibility to see and avoid. And a flight-following controller may have no idea whatsoever what your course should be, so they're under no obligation to provide you with corrections, except in cases where you've been warned of traffic and it still looks like you're in conflict with another aircraft.

Aha. In the UK outside controlled airspace we can have a FIS (Flight Information Service - often when a radar service is not available), RIS (Radar Information Service) and RAS (Radar Advisory Service).

With a RIS you don't have to be flying IFR (it helps though), and the controller will give you positions and height (if known) of possible conflicting traffic, upon which it's the pilot's responsibility to see and avoid.
With a RAS, if the controller sees conflicting traffic it is his/her responsibility to ensure separation between the aircraft...





RIS