"Jose" wrote in message
t...

Yes, I know this.


I don't think you do. If you knew it you wouldn't have said that clearances
for IAPs don't get issued to VFR aircraft.



Sticking with VFR if I request a practice approach, and I hear "practice
ILS 32 approach approved, maintain VFR, report VICHY inbound", is that a
clearance? Not all ATC instructions count as clearances, what is the rule
that determines what a clearance is? (i.e. under VFR flight following,
ATC doesn't give vectors or clearances, they give suggestions)


All ATC instructions that contain the word "cleared" are clearances. The
common practice of clearing VFR aircraft for practice IAPs has been
described in the AIM for many years. See AIM paragraph 4-3-21. Here is an
example of a Letter to Airmen described in 4-3-21.c:



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
GREEN BAY AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER
2077 AIRPORT DRIVE
GREEN BAY, WISCONSIN

ISSUE: MAY 1, 2007

EFFECTIVE: June 1, 2007

Facility Name: Green Bay Air Traffic Control Tower

Letter to Airman No. 07-1

SUBJECT: RADAR SERVICES TO VFR AIRCRAFT CONDUCTING PRACTICE APPROACHES AT
AIRPORTS WITHIN THE GREEN BAY APPROACH CONTROL AIRSPACE.

CANCELLATION DATE: June 1, 2009

Green Bay Approach Control provides approach control and radar service for
the following airports in the Green Bay Approach Control airspace. Austin
Straubel International Airport Green Bay (GRB), Appleton Outagamie County
Airport (ATW), Menominee-Marinette Twin County Airport (MNM), Manitowoc
County Airport (MTW), and Sturgeon Bay/Door County Cherryland Airport (SUE).

Green Bay Approach Control will provide radar services and IFR
lateral/longitudinal or 500 feet vertical separation from all IFR traffic
and other VFR aircraft practicing instrument approach procedures at Austin
Straubel International Airport Green Bay (GRB) and Appleton Outagamie County
Airport (ATW) during the respective published hours of operation. Aircraft
practicing instrument approach procedures at Menominee-Marinette Twin County
Airport (MNM), Manitowoc County Airport (MTW) and Sturgeon Bay/Door County
Cherryland Airport (SUE) will be provided IFR lateral/longitudinal or 500
feet vertical separation from all IFR and VFR practice instrument approach
aircraft from the time approach clearance is issued until the aircraft is
over the final approach fix or 5 miles from the airport, whichever is closer
to the airport. Separation services will not be provided to the surface at
Menominee-Marinette (MNM), Manitowoc County (MTW) and Sturgeon Bay (SUE)
Airports due to the limitations of radar coverage in those areas. Radar
services to VFR aircraft practicing instrument approach procedures at
Menominee-Marinette (MNM), Manitowoc (MTW) and Sturgeon Bay (SUE) will be
provided on a workload permitting basis.

Pilots requesting a VFR practice approach at any of the airports listed
above should advise Green Bay Approach Control of their intentions after
completion of the approach; e.g., full stop, stay in pattern, another
approach, etc. Pilots may expect to receive a clearance for the VFR
practice approach with the following phraseology:

"Maintain VFR, Cleared (type approach), (other instructions as required)."

Pilots requesting VFR practice approaches at the following airports should
contract Green Bay Approach Control on the frequencies listed below:

Austin Straubel International Green Bay (GRB) 119.4 VHF or 338.2 UHF

Appleton Outagamie County (ATW) 126.3 VHF or 338.2 UHF

Menominee-Marinette (MNM) 119.5

Manitowoc County (MTW) 120.2

Sturgeon Bay (SUE) 119.25

It must be clearly understood, however, that even though the controller may
be providing separation, pilots are required to comply with Visual Flight
Rules (FAR 91.113). Application of air traffic control procedures or any
action taken by the controller to avoid air traffic conflictions does not
relieve the pilot of the responsibility to see and avoid other traffic and
to maintain terrain and obstruction clearance while operating in VFR
conditions.

Jeffrey Koppa
Air Traffic Manager
Green Bay Air Traffic Control Tower




I may be paranoid (but that doesn't mean they aren't out to get me. Do
you know of any cases where the FAA has actually ruled the way you
believe?


I don't believe there have been any cases to rule on. Why would there be?
Every element of the regulatory requirement has clearly been met.



So I get my clearance in Cleveland for an IFR flight to JFK. Amazingly,
throughout the entire flight, there are no route changes. At what point
prior to hearing "cleared for the ILS..." have I received a clearance
=from= the ATC facility having jurisdiction over the NY Bravo? Is it when
I say to NY approach "N426RC, level at six point five" and they say "6RC
roger. NY altimeter 28.32"?


That's my point, in the case of IFR operations the letter of the law is NOT
followed, yet nobody questions it.



Because I have heard from many sources that an IFR clearance counts. I've
heard from many sources that otherwise, you must hear the magic words. I
suspect that it is just us pilots being a little on the "fearful of the
FAA" side, and the FAA thinking that's just ducky. But if the FAA is
comfortable enough with this (we've had TCAs since almost thirty years
ago), it becomes the rule until somebody risks their ticket.

And wins.

So, I'm looking for more than opinion, even if well founded. I'm looking
for cases, if there are any.


I don't think you'll find one.