VFR Flight following

[chevvron]

There are frequently suggestions from pilots that ATC in the UK should provide this service, without saying what exactly it entails.
I know it entails identifying traffic requesting the service, but what does ATC actually provide? Is it just proximity hazard warnings, traffic information (as per RIS) or avoiding action as per RAS? Or is it none of these, just an alerting service? How does it differ from RIS?
In ICAO Document 4444 (Air Traffic Management), it's not mentioned, as the USA does not provide ATC in exact conformity to this document, but 4444 does give guidance on the use of radar in the flight information service, and this accords approximately to what we know in the UK as RAS!
I've had over 30 years experience of providing LARS, and seen many changes to types of service (VMC Radar Advisory; IMC radar advisory; TIS and then RIS), so what exactly is flight following, can anyone define it?

[Keygrip]

The USA flight following is almost the UK RIS.

Your own transponder code, info on any aircraft that they feel worthy of comment, service up to the edge of radar then - more often than not - dumped. May get a radar handover to the next sector if the controller feels like it.

Never heard avoiding action given.

[Bertie Thruster]

chevvron. Type "UK AIC 48/2004" into Google

regards, BT

[172driver]

chevron,

From the FAA website:
TRAFFIC ADVISORIES- Advisories issued to alert pilots to other known or observed air traffic which may be in such proximity to the position or intended route of flight of their aircraft to warrant their attention. Such advisories may be based on:
a. Visual observation.
b. Observation of radar identified and nonidentified aircraft targets on an ATC radar display, or
c. Verbal reports from pilots or other facilities.
Note 1: The word "traffic" followed by additional information, if known, is used to provide such advisories; e.g., "Traffic, 2 o'clock, one zero miles, southbound, eight thousand."
Note 2: Traffic advisory service will be provided to the extent possible depending on higher priority duties of the controller or other limitations; e.g., radar limitations, volume of traffic, frequency congestion, or controller workload. Radar/nonradar traffic advisories do not relieve the pilot of his/her responsibility to see and avoid other aircraft. Pilots are cautioned that there are many times when the controller is not able to give traffic advisories concerning all traffic in the aircraft's proximity; in other words, when a pilot requests or is receiving traffic advisories, he/she should not assume that all traffic will be issued.

In my experience (been a while), the advisories can range from anything like the above to full-blown radar vectors. It really depends on the airspace, controller workload and general situation. An important point is that the FAR/AIM states that Flight Following is wholly at controllers discretion and can be terminated at any time. Most of my own experience with it relates to flying in the greater LA airspace, a busy environment at any time.

On the continent (Europe), btw, the same service is called Flight Information Service, using phraseology as above.

[FlyingForFun]

There are frequently suggestions from pilots that ATC in the UK should provide this service, without saying what exactly it entailsMy understand of this type of demand from pilots, and my own feelings, are as follows: there is absolutely nothing wrong with the current offerings of FIS, RIS and RAS from UK ATC, but what we do have a problem with is the fact that a radar service is not available in many parts of the country, especially some very busy areas, and particularly at the weekends when those areas are the busiest.

The people who seem most concerned about this seem to IMC-rated pilots, who quite rightly would like a radar service when in IMC - especially since, in many of the areas where the problem exists, they are restricted to below 2500' or similar by airspace restrictions, and are therefore not able to get on top of the weather.

FFF
-----------------

[IO540]

Strictly speaking, FFF, the radar service IS available in the UK but is provided only to IFR traffic on full-airways flight plans.

In Europe, the UK is relatively unique in this absolutely strict demarcation. If a VFR pilot calls up London Control they will tell him to b*gger off. Whereas outside the UK, if you do a VFR flight at some reasonable level, not in the gutter like most UK GA flies but at say FL055-FL195 depending on the location and terrain etc, you can easily get an excellent service from their equivalent, e.g. Paris Control, Barcelona Control, Brussells Approach, etc and they give you a full RIS, switching you to vectors if they need to. You can do this in the busiest airspace around, which makes a bit of a mockery of the excuses made in the UK. A very refreshing experience. Just got to keep out of Class A :O

I suppose the UK two-level system has evolved as a result of the copious low level Class A, a general reluctance to permit Class D transits, a resulting training emphasis to avoid CAS like the plague, and the result is that most GA flies down in the gutter where a radar service could not be usefully provided anyway at any reasonable cost, due to range issues.

It's no good asking for pan-UK LARS while "everybody" is taught to fly below 2400ft, or indeed has no choice because of all the Class A.

France nowadays manages a pretty well universal radar service, rather low-key ("radar contact" means they have you on the screen, and you are also cleared for transit of whatever airspace you are about to fly into) but this is for VFR flights at say FL075; you won't get it when working your way through the mass of low level military airspace at 1400ft.

I am happy with the UK system. Statistically based on mid-airs, there is no argument for a universal RIS, notwithstanding the warm feeling it gives you in your heart.

The USA has mandatory Mode C transponders in all the right places - something else which makes an RIS useless much of the time.

[RatherBeFlying]

On my one flight to the USA, I requested it crossing the border mainly because I wanted somebody to know exactly where to look if I had an engine problem over the Alleghenies. Coming up to destination I was smoothly handed over to approach.

The same deal going back except at night I was on airways to ensure terrain clearance.

These days it's also a good way to avoid straying into a TFR or other restricted airspace.

[Talkdownman]

chevvron. Type "UK AIC 48/2004" into Google
regards, BT
...........and the connection is??
Plus I think chevvron knows just a little bit about UK FIS.

[Bertie Thruster]

None it appears! Read chevvrons post too briefly. Coat time.

[Talkdownman]

Refreshingly honest. Hang your coat back up, Bert.

[Rugerdog]

I've always used flight following when VFR and transiting a MOA or flying cross-country night here in the USA. I always ask politely and try to exude competence when communicating with the center controller, something along the lines of "request flight following, your workload permitting this morning", after having cleary stated my position, altitude, and route of flight.

I've always gotten my FF request and usually a nice handoff to ajoining centers or approach control.