Flight Following VS. IFR Flight Plan
- Thread starter Jdehawk
- Start date
wjmiller3
Well-Known Member
Good question, I have often wondered this myself. Cause it makes no difference to me, but I wondered if one way or the other was easier on the controller.
Yank&BankmyRJ145
New Member
Well, I was looking at this the other day in the controller "book of how to control" 7110.65. During IFR for approaches- you are treated like a IFR aircraft the full time. During VFR/FF the controller is only required to provide separation services when they clear for the approach, which takes you through missed approach, till told again to maintain VFR again. (IF I read the section correctly)
Also, remember VFR advisories(approaches) are workload permitting and are on a first come first served bases. If that controller is busy, you may not get any approaches. That can also play into IFR also, if they are to busy you may be on the ground holding for release for a while, till he can work you in.
Personally, after reading that section. As a controller I would want you to do VFR/FF. It would give me a little help with separation services between approaches, and I could just release you to VFR if I get to busy. But also at the same time I would have no heads up your coming till you called up on Freq.
The above is just what I thought after reading the section in 7110.65. I am not a controller(In Training), but would love to hear what a controllers thoughts are on this subject, too.
Also, remember VFR advisories(approaches) are workload permitting and are on a first come first served bases. If that controller is busy, you may not get any approaches. That can also play into IFR also, if they are to busy you may be on the ground holding for release for a while, till he can work you in.
Personally, after reading that section. As a controller I would want you to do VFR/FF. It would give me a little help with separation services between approaches, and I could just release you to VFR if I get to busy. But also at the same time I would have no heads up your coming till you called up on Freq.
The above is just what I thought after reading the section in 7110.65. I am not a controller(In Training), but would love to hear what a controllers thoughts are on this subject, too.
I prefer the vfr route because I don't have to worry so much about ifr separation until I actually clear you for your approach. For me it's easier if you remain vfr and don't ask for an ifr clearance but again, thats just my opinion.
HD
borommakot
Well-Known Member
As a non-radar tower controller, I would prefer you VFR. It's just one less hassle to not have to worry about the additional IFR rules and separation requirements.
That being said, there isn't that much of a difference. For the most part, VFR and IFR practice approaches are handled pretty much identically. The only exception is that I assign IFR a/c climbout instructions (heading and altitude), whereas VFR a/c only get "after completing low-approach/touch-n-go, right turnout southwest bound approved."
From a pilot and flight instructor perspective, it's ofter a tradeoff as to which is going to get you better approaches.
If you are IFR, then you will have to wait until the a/c that was cleared for the approach ahead of you either lands or begins his climbout. This often means you will have to hold or be assigned penalty vectors before you can begin your approach. However, once you are cleared for the approach, you are now almost always the #1 priority in my airspace. I will get other people out of your way as much as possible to get you what you need.
If you shoot the approach VFR, then you will likely have less time to wait flying around before you get cleared. The center which provides the approach control to my airport has no qualms about clearing multiple a/c for the ILS approach at the same time, as long as they are VFR. For that same reason, however, if you are cleared for the ILS and a King Air or Gulfstream is cleared for the same approach behind you IFR with an 50+ knot overtake, guess which one is going to get broken off the final approach course? By the same token, I'm much more likely to give VFR approaches early breakoff or altitude restrictions to seperate then from the touch-n-go pattern traffic.
So, long story short, IFR will get you better/less-interupted approaches, but if it's busy VFR will get them more frequently.
At least, that's the case with the center than runs my approach. It might be a completely different story if you're dealing with a terminal approach control who does this far more regularly and whose regs and equipment are better designed for it.
That being said, there isn't that much of a difference. For the most part, VFR and IFR practice approaches are handled pretty much identically. The only exception is that I assign IFR a/c climbout instructions (heading and altitude), whereas VFR a/c only get "after completing low-approach/touch-n-go, right turnout southwest bound approved."
From a pilot and flight instructor perspective, it's ofter a tradeoff as to which is going to get you better approaches.
If you are IFR, then you will have to wait until the a/c that was cleared for the approach ahead of you either lands or begins his climbout. This often means you will have to hold or be assigned penalty vectors before you can begin your approach. However, once you are cleared for the approach, you are now almost always the #1 priority in my airspace. I will get other people out of your way as much as possible to get you what you need.
If you shoot the approach VFR, then you will likely have less time to wait flying around before you get cleared. The center which provides the approach control to my airport has no qualms about clearing multiple a/c for the ILS approach at the same time, as long as they are VFR. For that same reason, however, if you are cleared for the ILS and a King Air or Gulfstream is cleared for the same approach behind you IFR with an 50+ knot overtake, guess which one is going to get broken off the final approach course? By the same token, I'm much more likely to give VFR approaches early breakoff or altitude restrictions to seperate then from the touch-n-go pattern traffic.
So, long story short, IFR will get you better/less-interupted approaches, but if it's busy VFR will get them more frequently.
At least, that's the case with the center than runs my approach. It might be a completely different story if you're dealing with a terminal approach control who does this far more regularly and whose regs and equipment are better designed for it.
BrewMaster
Well-Known Member
Not to hijack the thread, but it got me thinking....
It may have already been happening for a while, but everytime I get FF with my students, we show up on FlightAware. How long has this been happening, not a big deal, but I thought FlightAware was only IFR traffic. I guess just anyone with a code?
It may have already been happening for a while, but everytime I get FF with my students, we show up on FlightAware. How long has this been happening, not a big deal, but I thought FlightAware was only IFR traffic. I guess just anyone with a code?
I noticed that too.. for about the last year or so I've been taking a look at it after flight following flights.
Thanks everybody for the input.. its been helpful!
R
Roger, Roger
Guest
It seems to me that if your FF goes to center it shows up on FlightAware. Around here if we stay with Longview and SHV approach, it doesn't usually show up. OTOH, if you talk to FTW center going into the Dallas area, it does.
HeyEng
Well-Known Member
It's sporadic for me. Sometimes it's there, sometimes it isn't. I have noticed if coming back from somewhere, as soon as I am handed of to SAT approach, the graphical track stops, but my speeds, altitudes and time are there until I cancel FF. Not real sure why this is and why it is so sporadic. Kinda freaked out my SO once when she was watching my progress after a long XC when my track stopped 40 miles from the airport!
anic:Actually now that I think about it, I *think* it will show up if you are handed off to a enroute center. For example, if I stay with SAT approach...it won't show up. Now if I handed off to HOU or FTW it does...ah yes, I think that's it. I will have to go back and look at my history.
BrewMaster
Well-Known Member
I guess I should have added that it is somewhat random. Not every flight I use FF on is on FlightAware, but I just never remembered it being on there before. Maybe I trained my students so well that center thinks we are on an IFR flight plan
Now I'm really gonna hijack the thread.....
Our airport has this new camera that is on about a 10' pole on top of the airport manager's/ARFF building that is on the city's website. Supposedly for "realtime weather viewing" but the problem is that it is 100' yards away directly across the ramp from the FBO. Talk about Big Brother, I hate that damn thing:banghead:
Now I'm really gonna hijack the thread.....
Our airport has this new camera that is on about a 10' pole on top of the airport manager's/ARFF building that is on the city's website. Supposedly for "realtime weather viewing" but the problem is that it is 100' yards away directly across the ramp from the FBO. Talk about Big Brother, I hate that damn thing:banghead:
Douglas
Old School KSUX
This might be better in the "fake it till you make it" thread, but I had to become a CFI and shot a lot of practice approaches before I found out that controllers are providing aircraft separation after you are cleared for an approach in VFR/FF conditions.
It hit me like a load of bricks when the controller said, "N123, due to traffic I can not clear you for the approach, but if you want you can do the approach on your own."
We were going in, full stop to our satellite airport.
Our controllers are great with all of our practice approaches and it is great to know that most would prefer VFR/FF.
Good Idea for a thread.
It hit me like a load of bricks when the controller said, "N123, due to traffic I can not clear you for the approach, but if you want you can do the approach on your own."
We were going in, full stop to our satellite airport.
Our controllers are great with all of our practice approaches and it is great to know that most would prefer VFR/FF.
Good Idea for a thread.
MNFlyGuy
New Member
I like to have students practice filing and opening an IFR flight plan at the beginning of a flight. In VMC I will then offer to cancel IFR and go to FF if it would help them with seperation. If they are busy they will ask for a switch, if workload is light they will suggest we stay IFR.
genot
Well-Known Member
MNFlyguy you're right about filing and I forgot to mention that in my previous post. I know when I was getting my instrument my CFII only had me file when we'd be in actual, which wasn't much, and I suffered because of that. The only thing I'd say from a controller's point of view is don't file via cell phone on the ramp after the pre flight just before taxi. Give FSS a chance to enter the plan and for flight data to post the strip. This is doubly true if you intend to depart in marginal VFR and pick up your IFR in the air. Its a process that takes a good few minutes, which if you're on the ground is just a minor thing, but if you're MVFR in the air, it can be a big pain.
The other thing I'd add is it is always nice if you add in the remarks IFR training. That way if its a tie between you and some tired check hauler itching to get home after a 400 mile trip in a C206, well then I know who would much much rather be first lol.
The other thing I'd add is it is always nice if you add in the remarks IFR training. That way if its a tie between you and some tired check hauler itching to get home after a 400 mile trip in a C206, well then I know who would much much rather be first lol.
As a controller I second that........