Howdy!
In article k.net,
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Travis Marlatte" wrote in message
ink.net...
To enter class C airspace, the FARs say that you have to establish
two-way radio communication.
Yes, but the FARs also say that except in an emergency, no person may
operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air
traffic control is exercised. Class C airspace is an area in which air
traffic control is exercised, so a pilot that has established two-way radio
communications and been instructed to remain clear of Class C airspace must
remain outside until further advised.
How do you infer that from the plain text of the FARs (especially considering
the guidance the AIM offers)?
FAR 91.130 - Operations in Class C airspace.
(c) Communications. Each person operating an aircraft in Class C
airspace must meet the following two-way radio communications
requirements:
(1) Arrival or through flight. Each person must establish two-way radio
communications with the ATC facility (including foreign ATC in the case
of foreign airspace designated in the United States) providing air
traffic services prior to entering that airspace and thereafter
maintain those communications while within that airspace.
I also note that it never speaks of "clearance", but "ATC authorization".
Unless a two-way radio communication with the ATC facility includes an
explicit "remain clear", that communication authorizes entry into the
Class C airspace.
Do you have an authoritative statement that shows otherwise? Or are you
just waving your hands furiously?
[snip]
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."
The FARs and AIM indicate just the opposite, and you don't have any
experience to the contrary, you just misinterpreted the situation.
Pray tell which FARs you are reading that say what you seem to think
they say?
[snip]
There is no language in the FARs or AIM that clearly supports either of
our opinions.
The FARs and AIM support what I've been saying and indicate that you're
wrong.
The only thing the 91.130 is at all vague about (and it may well be
defined elsewhere -- I didn't look) is what consitutes "establishes
two-way radio communication".
There is no text that says anything about what must happen after a
"remain clear" has been issued for class C.
What text says what must happen after any ATC instruction is issued?
There is no such thing as an instruction to permit entry into class C.
Why? Because all ATC instructions are listed in the AIM and there is no
such instruction mentioned?
No. FARs 91.130 make no reference to a specific instruction (such as
a clearance). It merely requires the establishment of two-way radio
communication. See my excerpt above.
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?
In FAR 91.123 Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.
b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an
ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.
By the way, you're contradicting yourself. Earlier you wrote; "I agree that
ATC can establish communication but instruct the pilot to remain clear."
Now you're saying that ATC cannot instruct an aircraft that has established
radio communications to remain outside Class C airspace.
No, he's not. If a communication includes "remain clear", then you don't
enter. If it doesn't include that magic phrase, you are permitted to enter
the airspace. Period. Stop. End of story.
[snip]
If the controller didn't intend for the pilot to remain clear he wouldn't
have told him "after departure remain clear of the class C airspace". Why
would the controller need to repeat that instruction?
Because failure to repeat the instruction would create the condition
permitting entry into the airspace.
[snip remainder of "I know you are but what am I" mindless repetition of
unsupportable position by Steve]
yours,
Michael
--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
| http://www.radix.net/~herveus/