Howdy!

Thanksfully, Steve left in enough context to make sense of his
nonsense reply.

In article k.net,
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Michael Houghton" wrote in message
...

The ATC handbook (7110.65) includes:

7-8-4. ESTABLISHING TWO-WAY COMMUNICATIONS

Class C service requires pilots to establish two-way radio
communications before entering Class C airspace. If the controller
responds to a radio call with, "(a/c call sign) standby," radio
communications have been established and the pilot can enter Class C
airspace. If workload or traffic conditions prevent immediate provision
of Class C services, inform the pilot to remain outside Class C
airspace until conditions permit the services to be provided.

Thus, the sequence:

N1234: Podunk tower, N1234...rest of stuff in initial callup
Podunk: N1234, remain outside Charlie airspace and standby.
N1234: Podunk tower, N1234.
Podunk: N1234, standby.

authorized entry.


What led you to believe the phrase "Stand by" means "authorization to enter
Class C airspace is now granted"?

Plain English comprehension.

7110.65P 7-8-4 says "If the controller responds to a radio call with, "(a/c
call sign) standby," radio communications have been established and the pilot
can enter Class C airspace." In my hypothetical sequence, N1234 made a radio
call and the controller responded using the specific exemplar provided in
the order. The phrase "...and the pilot can enter Class C airspace" is the
key. I'm astonished that you have a problem understanding this, given your
claim to be a controller.


The second exchange did not instruct the pilot to
remain clear.


The second exchange included no instruction at all, the instruction to
remain outside Class C airspace was not altered in any way.

No, it merely served to establish communications in a manner consistent
with FAAO 7110.65P and FAR 91.130(c)1 and the AIM.



Steve has insisted the contrary,


Sure, that's just simple logic.



and even claimed to
be a controller working Class C airspace, and claimed to reference
7110.65. I quote what I found on the FAA website. Steve has declined
to rebut with actual citations. His sudden silence on this matter
would seem to be a concession that perhaps he misspoke.


Nope, Steve didn't misspeak. Steve is exactly correct.

Steve still doesn't offer citations supporting his specific contention
that a "remain clear" instruction, once given, lasts until it is
explicitly countermanded, despite a complete absence of phraseology to
accomplish this in FAAO 7110.65.


7110.65, the order prescribing air traffic control procedures and
phraseology for use by persons providing air traffic control services,
offers no special phraseology for the (hypothetical) instruction Steve
insists must be given.


There are many things that FAAO 7110.65 does not say. For example, it does
not say that "stand by" or "radar contact" authorizes entry for an aircraft
that had previously been instructed to remain outside Class C airspace. Nor
does it say that not repeating the instruction to remain outside in every
subsequent exchange authorizes entry. Why do you suppose that is?

Because what it actually says doesn't mean what you keep insisting it means.


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/