![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Michael Houghton" wrote in message ... Non sequitur. No, a non sequitur is a statement that does not follow logically from what preceded it. I don't believe that anyone has asserted that ATC cannot instruct one to remain clear of Class C airspace. You've stated that aircraft that are so instructed may enter Class C airspace. What's the difference? What you contend, without justification, is that that instruction, once givenn, must be explicitly and overtly overriden with some sort of instruction -- examples of which are not found in the AIM, nor in any other official source. You have failed to cite any authority for your assertion. Actually, I have cited the AIM, the FARs, and FAAO 7110.65. What you contend, without justification and contrary to simple logic, is that that instruction, once given, does not require aircraft to remain outside of Class C airspace. You have failed to cite any authority for your assertion. 91.130(c)1 defines how one is authorized to enter Class C airspace. You then insist that once a communication using the tail number is made that includes a "remain clear" instructionn, that instruction remains in force in the face of subsequent communications such as "N1234, standby". That is correct. I posited a scenario that fits your conditions; you asserted that entry would be permitted in my scenario -- a clear contradiction without an explicit acknowledgement of such. You are allowed to change your story, but you don't get to do so silently. Is this what you're referring to? "Consider the following scenario." "You take off outside the Class C and would like to transit it. You are instructed to remain clear. You circumnavigate it, reach your destination, and return without landing. You again approach the Class C with the desire to transit rather than go around. You call up ATC again and they reply with your tail number but no instructions. Can you go in or not? I'm positing on the order of an hour or more elapsing between the two attempts to transit." In this scenario two-way radio communications are established and the aircraft is NOT instructed to remain clear of Class C airspace. No contradiction here. In the matter at hand, how do Class D and Class C airspace differ? That's not the point. Travis is seeking "expert advice" about Class C airspace from controllers at a field with Class D airspace. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Mountain flying instruction: McCall, Idaho, Colorado too! | [email protected] | General Aviation | 0 | March 26th 04 11:24 PM |
Windshields - tint or clear? | Roger Long | Piloting | 7 | February 10th 04 02:41 AM |
Is a BFR instruction? | Roger Long | Piloting | 11 | December 11th 03 09:58 PM |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Piloting | 25 | September 11th 03 01:27 PM |