Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Non-Airline Forums > Private Flying
Reload this Page >

'Flight Information Service' radio call

Wikiposts
Search
Private Flying LAA/BMAA/BGA/BPA The sheer pleasure of flight.

'Flight Information Service' radio call

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 31st Jan 2007, 20:37
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
DP

Sorry - Oxeagle it is.

(Another large mouthful of red wine for me - embarassed)
Fuji Abound is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2007, 21:43
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Up there somewhere
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Apolgies Oxeagle, I automatically assumed
Flik Roll is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2007, 03:46
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: ENGLAND, BUT IN ASIA NOW
Age: 34
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Radar Information Service in UK?

Hey everyone

Just wondered is it possible to request for a Radar information service instead of an FIS on stations such as birmingham radar? As I used a RIS instead of FIS in america, but don't know if it works here in UK.

Regards

Brian304
Brian304 is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2007, 17:49
  #24 (permalink)  
Blah Blah Blah
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Malmesbury VRP
Age: 48
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by dublinpilot
Fuji,

I think you're asking the wrong person the question

It was Oxeagle who had the flight and r/t conversation in question, not gcolyer

dp

Thanks for that. I thought i was starting to loose the plot.
gcolyer is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2007, 18:10
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Brian, you are probably using FlightWatch in the US. Which feels a little like RIS but is more similar to the French FIS with Radar service (no idea what they call it). With RIS you will have 'all known' conflicting traffic called where as with FlightWatch they will, time available, call traffic that is likely to merge with your radar target.
mm_flynn is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2007, 18:16
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mm_flynn
you are probably using FlightWatch in the US.
I think you mean "Flight Following" (Flight Watch is totally different again).

Brian - yes, no reason why you can't ask for a RIS but it is subject to Controller workload. If that Controller's primary job is vectoring and handling their own inbounds / outbounds and they're busy doing that then you may not get it, in which case you may have to put up with a FIS. However, you don't know until you ask.

Oxeagle - thank you, you're doing it right. As a FIS is effectively the lowest of the 3 services provided outside CAS and doesn't need you to be identified then it's not unusual to be told "Flight Information Service, QNH is ****, pass your message" (I do it all the time). After that all we want to know is what you're in, where you're from, where you're going, how high?

That's it - easy
Chilli Monster is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2007, 20:46
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Chilli Monster
I think you mean "Flight Following" (Flight Watch is totally different again).
My Brain Fade - Flight Watch = what's the weather - Flight Following = am I gonna hit someone
mm_flynn is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2007, 11:32
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Wildest Surrey
Age: 75
Posts: 10,819
Received 97 Likes on 70 Posts
Nothing to stop you asking for RIS from any radar equipped ATC unit, but you're more likely to get it from one that's notified as a LARS unit; as mentioned by Chilli, you may be refused due to controller workload if it's not a LARS unit. You may however, under FIS be allocated a transponder code for conspicuity (but not formally identified), so the controller can get back to you if he thinks you may conflict with his other traffic.
Can anyone advise how different 'flight following' is from RIS? I believe it's officially termed 'VFR Flight Following'.
chevvron is online now  
Old 2nd Feb 2007, 12:36
  #29 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Can anyone advise how different 'flight following' is from RIS? I believe it's officially termed 'VFR Flight Following'.
-Your details are handed off automatically to the next controller
-You won't be asked to "free call" anyone. In the case in a break in radar coverage you will be told "remain on this sqwark, radar services terminated, contact XYZ at ABC" and they will already have your details. Examples are heading through mountain passes.
-You are cleared through all airspace, class C and below, automatically just by being "Radar contact"ed
-You will get vectors if they don't want you to go through certain airspace
-They can clear you thorough restricted areas
-Many TFRs disappear when you are with ATC and have a transponder code
-Civil and military controllers can hand you between each other
-You will get vectors through bad convective weather if you ask for it (they paint it on their radars)

I've probably forgotten a few....
englishal is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2007, 12:53
  #30 (permalink)  
Blah Blah Blah
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Malmesbury VRP
Age: 48
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by englishal
-Your details are handed off automatically to the next controller
-You won't be asked to "free call" anyone.
I have routed from Daytona to Jacksonville and Dayton told me to squawk VFR and free call Jacksonville, whilst under VFR Flight Following.

I think during busy times ATC will/can drop VFR flight following services in some airspaces class's, but I am not totally certain.
gcolyer is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2007, 11:10
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In answer to the original question, it may be that the controller had DF on your RT so could see which dot was talking to him. This, combined with a mode C transponder (?), gave him all he needed to know about your position.

People who just pass their callsign on initial contact end up having to "pass your message" - rather airtime greedy when the conversation can be as short as the one Oxeagle had.
Droopystop is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2007, 11:15
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
After a visit to Birmingham ATC many years ago, i discovered it helps if you give on initial call the type of service you want i.e. FIS, RIS, Zone Entry, inbound or Transit. The ATCO can then select the appriopriate coloured flight strip to fill in and it saves them time.
BigEndBob is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2007, 16:48
  #33 (permalink)  
Spoon PPRuNerist & Mad Inistrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Twickenham, home of rugby
Posts: 7,390
Received 247 Likes on 165 Posts
'G-XXXX Flight Information Service you have, 1024'
Now I don't think I'm being pedantic, but what does the 1024 mean here? Is it the QNH? Or is it the assigned squawk?

This is the kind of seemingly trivial ambiguity that can sometimes be a part of one of those chains that end up in an accident.

If in doubt, check and confirm.

SD
Saab Dastard is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2007, 18:33
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sometimes north, sometimes south
Posts: 1,809
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 1 Post
Oxeagle:
Your response from Brum "FIS you have" is ATC speak for "don't expect anything from us pal, we've got much more important things to do than give you information". To be fair since Brum isn't a LARS unit they have no obligation to give you anything but the general perception is that Birmingham ATC does not want to speak to light aircraft outside their airspace because they don't have the resources to do that as well as their main task of controlling IFR traffic inside their airspace.
You can always tell. If they don't ask you anything about who you are/what you are etc it means they have no intention of giving you any meaningful service.
NS
NorthSouth is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2007, 09:30
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
NS,

In which case ATC should suggest a freecall to London Information instead of comitting themselves to a service they don't have the capacity to deal with.
Droopystop is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2007, 10:04
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In answer to the original question, it may be that the controller had DF on your RT so could see which dot was talking to him. This, combined with a mode C transponder (?), gave him all he needed to know about your position.

Exactly. That was why I raised the questions I did earlier. I dont see how a FIS could have been provided without this information. Could the controller have relied on DF alone or was the aircraft in fact given a squawk? I wonder whether I am wrong about my understanding of what can be expected from a FIS?
Fuji Abound is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2007, 23:27
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Fuji

There is no need to identify an aircraft to provide a FIS (otherwise how would non-radar units like London Info be able to provide it?). There isn't even a need to know exactly where they are (it just helps for what a FIS can give as will be detailed below).

A FIS is defined as follows:

6 Flight Information Service

6.1 A Flight Information Service (FIS) is a non-radar service provided, either separately or in conjunction with other services, for the purposes of supplying information useful for the safe and efficient conduct of flights.

Under a FIS the following conditions apply:

a) Provision of the service includes information about weather, changes of
serviceability of facilities, conditions at aerodromes and any other information
pertinent to safety.

b) The controller may attempt to identify the flight for monitoring and co-ordination purposes only. Such identification does not imply that a radar service is being provided or that the controller will continuously monitor the flight. Pilots must be left in no doubt that they are not receiving a radar service.

c) Controllers are not responsible for separating or sequencing aircraft.

6.2 In addition to the above, controllers will, subject to workload, provide pilots with information concerning collision hazards to aircraft operating in Class C, D, E, F or G airspace when self evident information from any source indicates that a risk of collision may exist. It is accepted that this information may be incomplete and the controller cannot assume responsibility for its issuance at all times or for its accuracy

The italicised / highlighted text are especially relevant in this scenario, proving as they do that you don't need everything to put the aircraft under a FIS, but you do need the information eventually to provide the service more completely.

Going off at a tangent on what has been posted previously - A DF trace matched to a radar return is NOT a valid means of radar identification.
Chilli Monster is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2007, 06:54
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Preston, England
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Incidentally, just to add my 2 cents - when I fly out of Blackpool (my local) and am just doing work in the local area, my instructor has always taught me to call up Blackpool Radar and say something along the lines of "Blackpool Radar, G-XXXX, departing north, looking for dlight information service." Then, when calling up any other frequencies, to simply start with the callsign.
woottsbj25 is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2007, 07:21
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Chilli

It still seems to me that it would be difficult to provide the service if you had no idea where the aircraft was (always accepting that in reality you may be intending to provide the absolute minimium of service due to workload).

Thinking about it, it leaves me wondering whether it might help if the service the pilot was getting should be more specifically defined. For example a RIS will be qualified if radar performance is poor.

If two aircraft are routing to the same VOR at the same height with the same expected ETA and the controller is not going to warn of the traffic due to controller workload perhaps that should be made clear when the service is agreed between the parties.
Fuji Abound is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2007, 08:10
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Fuji

Alternatively the pilot could actually understand the limitations and restrictions on what they're asking for.

When I ask for FIS all I'm after is pressures and any airsace info (e.g short notice NOTAM activity). ATC don't need to know all my details to supply that initially (as I said) but it helps later (as I said).

A FIS is the LOWEST form of ATC service and as such is not subject to the agreed, verbal contract required for RIS or RAS (hence there is no need to the pilot to read it back). You can't "Limit" a FIS - that would be nothing at all.
Chilli Monster is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.