"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Travis Marlatte" wrote in message
ink.net...

It doesn't. You stated that subsequent use of the tail number of an
aircraft, that had previously established communications and been told to
remain clear, especially with the phrase "radar contact", permitted entry
to
the Class C airspace. The AIM does not support that viewpoint. ATC can
instruct aircraft that have established communications to remain outside
of
Class C airspace.

To enter class C airspace, the FARs say that you have to establish two-way
radio communication. The AIM provides a few examples which indicate that no
explicit clearance is required. I agree that ATC can establish communication
but instruct the pilot to remain clear. It is what can happen next that we
have been debating.

From the FARs, the AIM , and my experiences, the acknowledgement of a
particular plane by ATC establishes two-way radio communication and is
sufficient for the plane to enter the class C - even after the issuance of a
"remain clear."



You seem to be saying that once a "remain clear" has been issued
that the only way to reverse that is with an explicit "cleared to enter
the class C." The AIM doesn't really address this sequence of events
but does not refer to a specific clearance to enter the class C either.


I'm saying that an instruction to remain clear of Class C airspace issued
to
an aircraft that has established two-way radio communications remains in
effect until another instruction is issued that permits that aircraft to
enter Class C airspace. That is not my opinion, that is a simple fact.

It does seem to be your opinion and it is far from a simple fact. There is
no language in the FARs or AIM that clearly supports either of our opinions.
There is no text that says anything about what must happen after a "remain
clear" has been issued for class C.


I think it is the case as presented by the original poster. He had
received a "remain clear" prior to take off. After departure, he
had a radio exchange that included his tail number and took that
as permission to enter the class C.


Yes. He erred. That radio exchange was not permission to enter Class C
airspace. His instruction to remain clear was still in effect because no
instruction permitting entry had been issued.

There is no such thing as an instruction to permit entry into class C.


Again, after departure, the pilot had a radio exchange where the
controller used his tail number. That grants permission to enter
the class C.


And again, that is not the case. A subsequent radio exchange after
communications have been established does not, by itself, override the
instruction to remain clear. I don't know who told you otherwise but
whoever it was does not have a correct understanding of Class C airspace.

The FARs say that two-way radio communication is sufficient. The AIM says
that two-way radio communication is sufficient. Where does it say otherwise?

If the controller intended for the pilot to remain clear that he would have
simply ignored the pilot's radio calls or would have repeated the "remain
clear."

For the scenario described by the original poster, the departure controller
instructed him to remain clear of the class C. Once in the air, the radio
exchange that occured established two-way radio communication and was
sufficient for him to enter the class C.


I am based at a class C airport.


Which only proves that one can be based in Class C airspace without
understanding it.

Or, that I'm right.


I have heard "remain clear" many times. I have never heard "cleared
to enter."


As you gain experience you probably will.

I'll agree with that. I'm sure some day that a class C or D controller will
say something like "cleared to enter ..." but it is not necessary and I
don't need to hear it whether or not I have been told to remain clear.


Subsequent radio contact that uses my
tail number is enough to rescind the "remain clear" instruction.


I'm sure you believe that. That statement is unsupported by any
documentation and is completely illogical. I've explained this as simply
as
I can and you still don't understand. I don't think you're even trying to
understand. Fine. Believe whatever you choose.

There is no documentation to support your point of view either. My position
is consistent with the documentation that does exist. It is consistent with
my experiences at class C and D airports. It is not completely illogical. I
would suggest that having this ambiguity about a clearance to enter the
class C/D in the FARs in the first place is illogical.

You have explained it very simply and I do think that I understand what you
are saying. Let me summarize to be sure. You claim that once a controller
has issued a "remain clear" for a class C or D airspace that an explicit
"cleared into the class C or D airpspace" or some instruction that requires
entry is necessary before the pilot should enter.

I disagree with you. I am trying to map what you are saying to the
documentation and to my experiences. They don't seem to agree.

-------------------------------
Travis