Frankly I wouldn’t fly any trip in the US without flight following either.
Why not?! With ADS-B for traffic awareness I find that the hassles of ATC when en route far outweigh any additional benefit in traffic awareness and if you need to land somewhere in Class D or whatever you just call them up and tell them. They work for you as needed not vice versa. The idea that voice communication with the ground and “handoffs” en route are an intrinsic part of flying a plane is decidedly odd to me, unless IMC is involved, and is not something I’d want to be involved with. I would not be interested in flying if it was routinely the case.
To be fair this is also true where I come from in the US, where I was based at KPDK north of Atlanta. Going anywhere to the south means either circumnavigating a huge class B, filing IFR (where you were pretty certain to get an “over the top” clearance), or doing your best to negotiate a VFR crossing
You don’t need a clearance to fly over Class B. And when at low altitude just after takeoff ‘circumnavigation’ is generally not a significant diversion relative to avoiding streams of airliner traffic if choosing to operate inside the Class B surface area instead. I do notice that the Atlanta Class B extends to 12,500 ft which must be the highest in the US. If you were en route overhead that might be OK depending on the ceiling of the plane and equipment but regardless for most US Class B you could overfly VFR at 10,500 ft westbound or 11,500 ft eastbound. This is done all the time and the 10K Class B altitude allows it without dealing with oxygen, by design.
Silvaire wrote:
The idea that voice communication with the ground and “handoffs” en route are an intrinsic part of flying a plane is decidedly odd to me, unless IMC is involved, and is not something I’d want to be involved with. I would not be interested in flying if it was routinely the case.
I get that, and I know many people feel the same, even here. And like I said it’s not necessary for the vast majority of VFR trips even in Europe. However since I fly IFR a lot I really don’t find it an inconvenience to be in radio contact. It’s one <10 sec radio call to initiate and then I have an extra set of eyes and someone immediately available if I need help. I find that more value than nuisance. For sure ubiquitous ADS-B helps a lot, which is ironic since many US pilots objected vigorously to this requirement in the name of flying freedom. I personally would love to know everyone was broadcasting!
Silvaire wrote:
You don’t need a clearance to fly over Class B.
I should have been clearer. Departing KPDK you’re right up against the Class B to the south, so by “clearance over the top” I meant over the top of KATL, since there’s no way you could get above it in time regardless of the ceiling.
For sure ubiquitous ADS-B helps a lot, which is ironic since many US pilots objected vigorously to this requirement in the name of flying freedom.
The two positions are compatible. I can’t speak for everybody but my objection was requiring ADS-B OUT in non-rule airspace to receive ADS-IN from a ground station. Mode C out works fine for that purpose and this was clearly a case of compromising safety in the service of surveillance. There was no need for everybody to broadcast their identity in non-rule airspace to make their position available to anybody who would like to avoid them, particularly when they are not using ATC.
Silvaire wrote:
There was no need for everybody to broadcast their identity in non-rule airspace to make their position available to anybody who would like to avoid them, particularly when they are not using ATC.
What about making it cheaper for the others to see you?
Having just a Mode-S/Mode-C works only with SSRs and T(C)AS.
Mode C works fine for rebroadcast by US ADS-B ground stations which provide coverage over most of the US, in Class E airspace with radar coverage, and not only in the limited airspace areas where traffic is mandated to transmit ADS-B OUT. The only fundamental issue with that safety enhancement (meaning other than the FAA policy issue) is that for the plane receiving the position from the ground station via any ADS-B IN receiver, including an inexpensive battery powered unit, there is a delay and therefore small position error when the position is reported by the ground station and not air-to-air.
Silvaire wrote:
Mode C works fine for rebroadcast by US ADS-B ground stations which provide coverage over most of the US,
That is precisely the point I was trying to make – the ground stations need radar, otherwise it does not work. Same for small airfield towers.
If you want to save money, you just make the pilots broadcast the data all the time.
It is debateable (at least in my opinion) how unjustified it is, but it is an option.
Radar coverage is and will continue to be almost everywhere in the US, except at very low altitude. Mode C/Radar position data rebroadcast by ADS-B ground stations (also almost everywhere) provides useful ADS-B IN coverage over most of the US, except that FAA withholds the data from aircraft that are (entirely legally and properly) not broadcasting ADS-B OUT. That hurts safety and was the wrong policy, and that was my point to dutch_flyer about the lack of irony between appreciating ADS-B IN and objecting to mandatory ADS-B OUT being required to receive it from ground stations located in areas far from airspace where ADS-B OUT is required by ATC.
There is no business case in Europe for services to GA – other than ICAO-obliged FIS, and cases where airline traffic would be endangered if a radar service was not provided.
For example the UK LARS radar service (Farnborough etc) is 100% for
Everything beyond the above is wishful thinking 
BTW TCAS uses Mode C only. Mode S is used in TCAS-2 where the two transponders negotiate a resolution advisory. For example my TCAS-1 (TAS605) system does not use Mode S in the standard installation. Mode S can be received to decode tail numbers of N-reg targets but the box cannot deliver this extra data over ARINC429; it can send it only over RS232.
The US benefits from a federally funded FAA, ATC, etc. Europe has no equivalent. Some countries are better than others… This has not changed at all in the 24 years I’ve been flying and it will never change.
Peter wrote:
For example the UK LARS radar service (Farnborough etc) is 100% for the RAF whose fast jets kept getting lost because they had no GPS, and a fast jet is always on critical fuel, and to keep a lid on CAS busts (and to identify infringers for suitable “processing”)
Peter, I’m sorry but you’ve missed another one – providing services and traffic segregation for transport-category jets that use Farnborough.
That place is NOT cheap (in 2020 it was ~£600 for a C152)!
Yes; same for Southend etc. But none of these would be there for a general GA radar service if they were not paid for it. Farnborough gets a grant for providing LARS. An H24 radar desk costs 1-2M GBP a year…
