Narrative:

Attached is a memo dated jul/xa/96 and a subsequent memo dated feb/xd/98. The feb/xd/98 memo refers to an earlier memo dated jul/xb/96. Both refer to the subject of FAA policy regarding VFR aircraft. Not until the feb/xd/98 memo was issued did I become aware of the FAA policy regarding VFR aircraft. If an aircraft asks for VFR flight following, in most sits we (ZAB) provide the service. Sometimes during periods of heavy traffic, flight following is denied -- but these are rare occurrences. When aircraft are provided flight following, they are given radar TA's, terrain warnings, and route monitoring. In the past if we lost radar/radio contact with a VFR aircraft, we attempted to locate/contact the aircraft. I have seen instances where flight following was being provided and the controller noticed that the VFR aircraft was in a coast track. In most instances this is due to loss of radar with the aircraft. When attempts to make radio contact with the aircraft were unsuccessful, the controller dropped track (this removes the data block from the radar scope), but the flight plan kept processing to sectors down the line. In instances such as these, sectors down the line will have a flight plan on an aircraft which indicates that the aircraft should be in their airspace. If the aircraft were on an IFR flight plan controllers and supervisors would immediately begin trying to track down the aircraft to find out which sector had control of the aircraft last, and what happened from there. The procedures are not the same for a VFR flight following aircraft. Sometimes attempts will be made to find the aircraft and sometimes not. As you can see from the attached letter, the FAA seems to feel that it is not their responsibility to find VFR aircraft. When you are working a sector and you see that an aircraft should be in your sector but is not, you have no idea what happened to that aircraft. The FAA's way to handle this is 'to keep the VFR strip a reasonable amount of time and then discard it' (see attached memo). At some point it is inevitable that a VFR aircraft is going to crash, and rather than looking for the aircraft the controllers are simply going to 'discard the strip.' the controller would be correct in doing this because of the current FAA policy. This not only opens up several liability issues, but safety issues as well. I would hate to think that someone could crash and be seriously injured and no one looks for them simply because they were a VFR aircraft. The FAA should be concerned about the safety of all aircraft. I think any controller would attempt to locate any aircraft if sudden loss of radar and radio contact took place. That is not my concern here. My concern is that the whereabouts of a VFR aircraft can be unknown, and will simply be 'discarded' as though it never existed. Since the FAA is unwilling to address this serious issue, I am hoping that an independent agency will have some effect on this.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZAB ARTCC CTLR CONCERNED WITH ZAB INTERP OF VFR RADAR SVC ADVISORIES. RPTR DOES CONCUR.

Narrative: ATTACHED IS A MEMO DATED JUL/XA/96 AND A SUBSEQUENT MEMO DATED FEB/XD/98. THE FEB/XD/98 MEMO REFERS TO AN EARLIER MEMO DATED JUL/XB/96. BOTH REFER TO THE SUBJECT OF FAA POLICY REGARDING VFR ACFT. NOT UNTIL THE FEB/XD/98 MEMO WAS ISSUED DID I BECOME AWARE OF THE FAA POLICY REGARDING VFR ACFT. IF AN ACFT ASKS FOR VFR FLT FOLLOWING, IN MOST SITS WE (ZAB) PROVIDE THE SVC. SOMETIMES DURING PERIODS OF HVY TFC, FLT FOLLOWING IS DENIED -- BUT THESE ARE RARE OCCURRENCES. WHEN ACFT ARE PROVIDED FLT FOLLOWING, THEY ARE GIVEN RADAR TA'S, TERRAIN WARNINGS, AND RTE MONITORING. IN THE PAST IF WE LOST RADAR/RADIO CONTACT WITH A VFR ACFT, WE ATTEMPTED TO LOCATE/CONTACT THE ACFT. I HAVE SEEN INSTANCES WHERE FLT FOLLOWING WAS BEING PROVIDED AND THE CTLR NOTICED THAT THE VFR ACFT WAS IN A COAST TRACK. IN MOST INSTANCES THIS IS DUE TO LOSS OF RADAR WITH THE ACFT. WHEN ATTEMPTS TO MAKE RADIO CONTACT WITH THE ACFT WERE UNSUCCESSFUL, THE CTLR DROPPED TRACK (THIS REMOVES THE DATA BLOCK FROM THE RADAR SCOPE), BUT THE FLT PLAN KEPT PROCESSING TO SECTORS DOWN THE LINE. IN INSTANCES SUCH AS THESE, SECTORS DOWN THE LINE WILL HAVE A FLT PLAN ON AN ACFT WHICH INDICATES THAT THE ACFT SHOULD BE IN THEIR AIRSPACE. IF THE ACFT WERE ON AN IFR FLT PLAN CTLRS AND SUPVRS WOULD IMMEDIATELY BEGIN TRYING TO TRACK DOWN THE ACFT TO FIND OUT WHICH SECTOR HAD CTL OF THE ACFT LAST, AND WHAT HAPPENED FROM THERE. THE PROCS ARE NOT THE SAME FOR A VFR FLT FOLLOWING ACFT. SOMETIMES ATTEMPTS WILL BE MADE TO FIND THE ACFT AND SOMETIMES NOT. AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE ATTACHED LETTER, THE FAA SEEMS TO FEEL THAT IT IS NOT THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO FIND VFR ACFT. WHEN YOU ARE WORKING A SECTOR AND YOU SEE THAT AN ACFT SHOULD BE IN YOUR SECTOR BUT IS NOT, YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT ACFT. THE FAA'S WAY TO HANDLE THIS IS 'TO KEEP THE VFR STRIP A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME AND THEN DISCARD IT' (SEE ATTACHED MEMO). AT SOME POINT IT IS INEVITABLE THAT A VFR ACFT IS GOING TO CRASH, AND RATHER THAN LOOKING FOR THE ACFT THE CTLRS ARE SIMPLY GOING TO 'DISCARD THE STRIP.' THE CTLR WOULD BE CORRECT IN DOING THIS BECAUSE OF THE CURRENT FAA POLICY. THIS NOT ONLY OPENS UP SEVERAL LIABILITY ISSUES, BUT SAFETY ISSUES AS WELL. I WOULD HATE TO THINK THAT SOMEONE COULD CRASH AND BE SERIOUSLY INJURED AND NO ONE LOOKS FOR THEM SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WERE A VFR ACFT. THE FAA SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAFETY OF ALL ACFT. I THINK ANY CTLR WOULD ATTEMPT TO LOCATE ANY ACFT IF SUDDEN LOSS OF RADAR AND RADIO CONTACT TOOK PLACE. THAT IS NOT MY CONCERN HERE. MY CONCERN IS THAT THE WHEREABOUTS OF A VFR ACFT CAN BE UNKNOWN, AND WILL SIMPLY BE 'DISCARDED' AS THOUGH IT NEVER EXISTED. SINCE THE FAA IS UNWILLING TO ADDRESS THIS SERIOUS ISSUE, I AM HOPING THAT AN INDEPENDENT AGENCY WILL HAVE SOME EFFECT ON THIS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.