Narrative:

I departed in VFR conditions enroute to L45. Visibility was more than 10 miles. Clouds were scattered with bases around 3;500 MSL and tops around 4;500 MSL. While in my initial climb I contacted bakersfield approach for flight following and advised I was climbing to 5;500 MSL and was given a squawk code. When I arrived at 5;500 MSL I was sufficiently above the scattered clouds but it appeared from that altitude that the cloud cover was increasing as we proceeded south. Rather than fly above a ceiling and shoot an approach I decided to descend down to roughly 2;200 to fly beneath the clouds. In order to do that I did a right 360 degree descending turn. Upon arriving at 2;200 MSL; bakersfield approach contacted me and indicated that radar contact had been lost. I advised them of my current location relative to ehf and advised that I had descended to 2;200 MSL to get below the clouds. My transmission was acknowledged and nothing else was said. The remainder of the flight was uneventful.the reason that I am writing this report is because it raises an issue that I continue to be confused by. On the one hand; I was VFR; not on a flight plan; and altitude was at my discretion. I had received no direction from ATC regarding a hard altitude and I was perfectly within my rights to descend without advising ATC. On the other hand; I did descend below radar coverage; and if I had thought about it; I would have realized that was going to be the case. So the polite thing for me to do would have been to advise bakersfield approach that I was beginning a circling descent to get below the clouds so when I dropped off of their screen they would not be surprised.but here is the issue. I have on a number of occasions been VFR with flight following and have advised approach/center that I was beginning a VFR descent. Sometimes they acknowledge my transmission and indicate 'VFR altitudes your discretion.' other times I have done the same thing and I have gotten the distinct impression that I was bothering the controller; that I should know that I do not have to advise them of the descent; and I must be a 'new' to the 'system.' in short; I have been made to feel like I made a mistake. I think that this is a situation that should be clarified in primary training. Does ATC want us to advise them of altitude changes or not? For my purposes; I think I will continue to err on the side of providing too much information; rather than too little. So given my view; I should have advised ATC that I was performing a circling descent to get under the clouds and in the future that is what I will do. I just hope that ATC views that as my trying to cooperate rather than bothering them with useless information.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A C182 pilot pondered the protocol for communications with ATC when on a VFR flight utilizing flight following.

Narrative: I departed in VFR conditions enroute to L45. Visibility was more than 10 miles. Clouds were scattered with bases around 3;500 MSL and tops around 4;500 MSL. While in my initial climb I contacted Bakersfield Approach for flight following and advised I was climbing to 5;500 MSL and was given a squawk code. When I arrived at 5;500 MSL I was sufficiently above the scattered clouds but it appeared from that altitude that the cloud cover was increasing as we proceeded south. Rather than fly above a ceiling and shoot an approach I decided to descend down to roughly 2;200 to fly beneath the clouds. In order to do that I did a right 360 degree descending turn. Upon arriving at 2;200 MSL; Bakersfield Approach contacted me and indicated that radar contact had been lost. I advised them of my current location relative to EHF and advised that I had descended to 2;200 MSL to get below the clouds. My transmission was acknowledged and nothing else was said. The remainder of the flight was uneventful.The reason that I am writing this report is because it raises an issue that I continue to be confused by. On the one hand; I was VFR; not on a flight plan; and altitude was at my discretion. I had received no direction from ATC regarding a hard altitude and I was perfectly within my rights to descend without advising ATC. On the other hand; I did descend below radar coverage; and if I had thought about it; I would have realized that was going to be the case. So the polite thing for me to do would have been to advise Bakersfield Approach that I was beginning a circling descent to get below the clouds so when I dropped off of their screen they would not be surprised.But here is the issue. I have on a number of occasions been VFR with flight following and have advised Approach/Center that I was beginning a VFR descent. Sometimes they acknowledge my transmission and indicate 'VFR altitudes your discretion.' Other times I have done the same thing and I have gotten the distinct impression that I was bothering the controller; that I should know that I do not have to advise them of the descent; and I must be a 'new' to the 'system.' In short; I have been made to feel like I made a mistake. I think that this is a situation that should be clarified in primary training. Does ATC want us to advise them of altitude changes or not? For my purposes; I think I will continue to err on the side of providing too much information; rather than too little. So given my view; I should have advised ATC that I was performing a circling descent to get under the clouds and in the future that is what I will do. I just hope that ATC views that as my trying to cooperate rather than bothering them with useless information.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.