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

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
news:1121727705.48e6aca971a848425a3fb7d89eeb231a@t eranews...

But why didn't ATC just issue the re-route instead of saying "State
Intentions"? The whole things just seems weird, as if ATC were in an
unstated and subtle fashion encouraging cancelling IFR.


He wants to know if the pilot wants to be rerouted around approach, or
around the weather, or divert to another airport, etc., etc., etc.

If this had happened to me I at first would have been somewhat dumbstruck.
Would a reasonable response to what happened be "I would like to proceed to
xyz (the airport initially filed to), I have x hours of fuel before reserve,
can you give me a routing to xyz that avoids significant weather and closed
airspace?". If that were given as my intentions would the controller have
enough information to issue an amended clearance?

Howard