Flying IFR routes VFR - ATC Considerations

[barcman1967]

Good Day,

I am curious to know if ATC requires or desires any planning information while flying an IFR route (including a DP). I have heard RW and PE pilots request and receive approval to simulate an approach while VFR so that isn't my question. My question is, does ATC want the heads up if I plan on flying a DP or route that for all intents and purposes would normally be IFR. I fly ALL my flights with flight following wherever possible.

Example, I am doing the Alphabet Challenge and my self assigned learning curve to work up to IFR is to try and fly some IFR routes and approaches rather than flying direct VFR - so for the KBFL to KCMA leg, I would like to fly the MARIC3 departure then route of GMN and FIM and practice the VOR approach at KCMA. This takes me a bit east of what ATC may expect on a flight with flight following.

To make a long question short - what would ATC like to know in this situation at departure, en-route and arrival segments? I am not a big fan of unnecessary radio chatter but also want to work with ATC wherever it helps them out.

[stevekirks]

If you want to depart VFR and then fly an instrument approach, you would be perfectly fine to request that when you're handing the destination's approach controller during flight following. Alternately, you can file IFR but not use the clearance, depart VFR, fly the route that you want, then call ATC and pickup the IFR enroute which would finish you IFR.

To answer the specific question:

If you want to practice the DP while VFR and it's not required for the VFR flight, I would tell the clearance or ground controller your intentions. In the real world and PE, I think the best case is to always inform ATC of your intentions and they will accomodate.

Speaking from the sim standpoint, PE is a training environment, so you're fine to tell ATC what you're doing for training and they will help if there's a conflict or suggest an alternate method to hit the training goal.

[Kyle.Sanders]

I agree with Steve, but I am curious, what is your desired benefits from flying an IFR route as VFR for practice?

In real life I would understand but this is a training environment. Why not go through the Pilot Ratings and learn the VFR/IFR stuff as needed? --- http://training.pilotedge.net/page/overview

[barcman1967]

Thanks Steve, makes sense and I kind of assumed that but wanted to confirm.

Kyle, to answer your question, I am doing the training ratings (completed V3 so far). I am very new to PE so I am using the alphabet challenge to get used to the controller environment and to hone my VFR skills in a "new" aircraft. That being said, rather than just fly a (for the most part) direct route, I figured I would start incorporating some IFR segment practice in a non-IFR (less strict) situation. Not sure if this clarifies my intent but think of it as a VFR flight using VOR navigation but also incorporating the departure and approach segments in a VFR environment also.

Hope that makes sense.

[Kyle.Sanders]

Ah ok

[HRutila]

There is nothing wrong with tracking an IFR route while operating under VFR so long as you're flying at VFR altitudes per 14 CFR 91.159. What you can do to briefly indicate your intentions to ATC is, after stating your destination, include "via [airway, route, etc]."

For example, from Lafayette (LAF) to Chicago DuPage (DPA), I might have a student state "...(destination) Chicago-DuPage via Joliet." For an example within California airspace, from Victorville-Southern California Logistics (VCV) to Palm Springs (PSP) "Palm Springs International via V386."

It is probably less common in mountainous areas than it is in the midwest where terrain is usually not a factor, but if you're not on a direct course to your stated destination out here, you will occasionally have a controller ask you to verify your destination, or to verify that you're on course.

[barcman1967]

Makes a lot of sense. Thanks!