"Dennis O'Connor" wrote in message
...

"Maule Driver" wrote in message
m...
Even though I think there is some grey area here, I agree with the
overly
curt but usually accurate Steven.

One of the things expressed by the folks I talked to; they get frustrated
by
pilots who enter the system and do not understand the most basic of rules,
even when the controller uses the exact phrasing that the AIM calls out...
As the one said, "I'm here for safety of flight, not to be your CFI..."
denny

I'm sure it is frustrating. But the answer to the original question
remained murky to me. So I too went back to the FARs and the AIM. My
understanding now is that you are correct Dennis. The pilot was legal but
the sequence of communciations from ATC was confusing. And getting to that
conclusion was not straightforward.

ATC had issued a "remain clear" before departure. And the implication in
the original post was the the tail number was used since a squawk code was
issued before the departure.

Steven stated, "Once told to memain clear you must remain clear until the
controller issues an instruction that permits entry." As a practical
matter, I would agree. But Dennis goes on to state, "...he has established
radio contact which is 'the clearance to enter'...So, I asked both(FAA
types) , wouldn't you tell the pilot that he is now 'cleared to enter the
C', to avoid confusion.. They both replied that there is no
confusion... The clearance to enter a Class C airspace is establishing radio
contact using the tail number exactly as spelled out in the AIM." I say
b*** s*** to the FAA types.

I would counter that the AIM is not regulatory and that an ATC communication
using your tail number is not always a clearance to enter. An example
would be where per the AIM, ATC says "1234Alpha, remain outside Class
Charlie and standby". Then follows with a "1234 Alpha traffic 11 oclock
3,000feet". I would maintain that I've been told to remain clear and that
the subsequent tail number identified communication *does not* clear me to
enter. I would still be waiting for an instruction that permits entry.

So, if a pilot has been told to remain clear and identified by tail number,
then he should remain clear until given an instruction that permits entry.
A vector would do the trick. Legally, a 'radar contact and altimeter' would
probably keep you out of jail but would be a bit stupid. Any frustration by
ATC is misguided. A simple "...and proceed direct xxx" would do. I've been
in this situation and in that particular case each traffic advisory was
accompanied by the repeated instruction to 'remain clear'. Now that was
clear!

But in this case, the key is that the "remain clear" was issued before
departure and therefore doesn't play a part in subsequent communications
after departure. There's no requirement to establish communications from an
underlying airport before departure so any radio contact established before
departure shouldn't be considered qualification to enter the Class C. By
the same token, the admonishment to remain clear of Class C issued before
departure is meaningless once one has departed. If one establishes radio
contact after departure, then one is cleared to enter just as the original
poster did.

It's clear to me now but it certainly isn't clear "according to the most
basic of rules".Nor is it clear to the well trained pilot in actual flight.
Otherwise their wouldn't be so much confusion on the part of so many
knowledgeable people on this newsgroup.

Thanks for an excuse to study the FAR/AIM.