Message-ID: <36633588.4424@ibm.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 18:17:12 -0600
From: Snowbird <snbird@ibm.net>
Reply-To: snbird@ibm.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
Subject: Re: VFR Flight Following
References: <OFqbQfjG#GA.264@upnetnews03> <365F6767.5487@stephenames.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: 32.101.53.6
X-Trace: 1 Dec 1998 00:29:44 GMT, 32.101.53.6
Organization: IBM.NET
Lines: 22
X-Notice: Items posted that violate the IBM.NET Acceptable Use Policy
X-Notice: should be reported to postmaster@ibm.net
X-Complaints-To: postmaster@ibm.net
Path: news.jprc.com!newsfeed.sgi.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!newsm2.ibm.net!ibm.net!news1.ibm.net!32.101.53.6
Xref: news.jprc.com rec.aviation.student:40693

St. Stephen, Kim & Lacy Ames wrote:

> I say don't be lazy and ask ATC to open or close a plan for you...Let
> them do their job...Open and close your own I say!

The problem with this little saying is that asking ATC to open or
close a flight plan may have nothing to do with laziness.  

Examples:
	1) you are unable to raise FSS on any of the frequencies
           locally available (maybe the RCO or VOR voice is OTS)
	2) there are no FSS frequencies available in the vicinity
	   of your arrival or departure airport
	3) at one airport I know, flight following is requested 
           from FSS and treated like a pseudo-IFR plan; the flight
           plan is automatically activated by ATC and automatically
           closed by them (wish more airports would adopt this system)
	   WARNING: *don't EXPECT this to happen*

Snowbird


