Rogue IFR

"Teacherjh" wrote in message ...

They'll get less frequency congestion if they tell me to stay out.
If they ignore me, I'll just keep calling. Fortunately the FAA pulled
a plug on this subterfuge in the class C's some time ago.


How?

By telling them they could tell people explcitly to remain clear. They were
using the "nonresponse" tactic to get around the fact that they were told not
to deny service.

(Corky Scott) wrote in message ...
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 17:57:43 -0500, "Ron Natalie"
wrote:


"Judah" wrote in message ...
What about a transition clearance?

There ain't no such thing.

So when the guys in the choppers call up Lebanon tower up here in NH
and request clearance through the class D airspace, they're just being
thoughtful?

No, they're missing a critical distinction between a requirement
to communicate, and a need for clearance.

They're required to communicate, and to follow any ATC instructions
or obtain amendment (true of any airspace, E included). But *clearance*
is not required.

"Whatsits Tower, Grumman 12345"
"Grumman 12345, Whatsits tower, go ahead" is all the permission I
need to enter the class D. Of course, part of communicating is
telling someone what you want, so I'm going to say "request transition
NE to SW at 2 thousand five hundred".

Without that call, they'd be cruising through the traffic pattern at
500 feet unannounced. That's straight over the runways. It happens
fairly regularly, and they call in and ask permission every time.

What am I missing?

That it's not a clearance. The VFR tower isn't providing any services
besides separation on the runway and traffic advisories as able. They
can not issue a vector. They aren't providing radar services. They
aren't providing separation in the air.

When you're cleared to enter the Class B airspace, along with that
clearance comes an *obligation* on the part of ATC to separate you
from other traffic, and an obligation on your part to comply with
specific headings and altitudes (so that you can be separated).
When you're cleared for an approach, or given an IFR clearance, again,
both sides assume obligations.

That's the difference and IMO it's not a trivial one.

Cheers,
Sydney

I don't think this is right. In Class B airspace, the only requirement is to be
clear of clounds. That means that an aircraft could be in the clouds at (for
example) 5,000 ft. and other aircraft could be VFR at 4,500 or 5,500, be clear
of the clouds and be quite legal.

Dave Reinhart


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

ATC doesn't have enroute radar capable of determining when another
aircraft is within those limits.


Enroute radar? Do you mean Air Route Surveillance Radar? Why are we
suddenly limited to ARSR for discussion purposes? Please, Pete, tell us
about the capabilities of ATC radar.


Furthermore, that assumes accurate reporting by the VFR target's
transponder. Again, an unidentified target would not qualify for
that assumption.


It assumes nothing at all. If a pilot reports he's in the clouds, then any
other
aircraft that is within 2000 feet horizontally, 1000 feet above, or 500 feet
below
the reporting aircraft MUST be in IMC.


There was no such part.


Yes there was. You said ATC can't rely on PIREPs to KNOW something. That's
obviously incorrect.

"David Reinhart" wrote in message
...

I don't think this is right. In Class B airspace, the only requirement is
to be
clear of clounds. That means that an aircraft could be in the clouds at
(for
example) 5,000 ft. and other aircraft could be VFR at 4,500 or 5,500, be
clear
of the clouds and be quite legal.


True, but since most airspace is other than Class B it is right in most
airspace.

BTW, this kind of scenario is a potential "gotcha" when leaving Class B airspace.
You can be flying along in Class B airspace, just above or below a cloud deck, exit
the Class Bravo and be instantly illegal when it comes to cloud clearance.

Dave Reinhart


David Reinhart wrote:

I don't think this is right. In Class B airspace, the only requirement is to be
clear of clounds. That means that an aircraft could be in the clouds at (for
example) 5,000 ft. and other aircraft could be VFR at 4,500 or 5,500, be clear
of the clouds and be quite legal.

Dave Reinhart


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

ATC doesn't have enroute radar capable of determining when another
aircraft is within those limits.


Enroute radar? Do you mean Air Route Surveillance Radar? Why are we
suddenly limited to ARSR for discussion purposes? Please, Pete, tell us
about the capabilities of ATC radar.


Furthermore, that assumes accurate reporting by the VFR target's
transponder. Again, an unidentified target would not qualify for
that assumption.


It assumes nothing at all. If a pilot reports he's in the clouds, then any
other
aircraft that is within 2000 feet horizontally, 1000 feet above, or 500 feet
below
the reporting aircraft MUST be in IMC.


There was no such part.


Yes there was. You said ATC can't rely on PIREPs to KNOW something. That's
obviously incorrect.

Also true, but one thing I've learned about the FARs is that it's the "unusual"
that can either get you grounded or help you get where you're going. It's sad
that pilots need to know the law as much or more than they need to know about
stick and rudder.

Dave Reinhart


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"David Reinhart" wrote in message
...

I don't think this is right. In Class B airspace, the only requirement is
to be
clear of clounds. That means that an aircraft could be in the clouds at
(for
example) 5,000 ft. and other aircraft could be VFR at 4,500 or 5,500, be
clear
of the clouds and be quite legal.


True, but since most airspace is other than Class B it is right in most
airspace.

"David Reinhart" wrote in message
...

BTW, this kind of scenario is a potential "gotcha" when leaving Class B
airspace.
You can be flying along in Class B airspace, just above or below a cloud
deck, exit
the Class Bravo and be instantly illegal when it comes to cloud clearance.


The same "gotcha" exists when leaving a surface area under SVFR.

We were always told that if you don't want someone in the airspace you
tell them to remain outside the class D/C airspace.

Ron Natalie wrote:
"Teacherjh" wrote in message ...

They'll get less frequency congestion if they tell me to stay out.
If they ignore me, I'll just keep calling. Fortunately the FAA pulled
a plug on this subterfuge in the class C's some time ago.


How?


By telling them they could tell people explcitly to remain clear. They were
using the "nonresponse" tactic to get around the fact that they were told not
to deny service.

Ron Natalie wrote:

They'll get less frequency congestion if they tell me to stay out.
If they ignore me, I'll just keep calling.

Absolutely.

Fortunately the FAA pulled
a plug on this subterfuge in the class C's some time ago.

The last time I tried to get through the Bristol, TN airspace, they were still
doing it. I don't remember exactly when that was, though.

George Patterson
You can dress a hog in a tuxedo, but he still wants to roll in the mud.

"Newps" wrote in message news:nohob.50763$ao4.131616@attbi_s51...
We were always told that if you don't want someone in the airspace you
tell them to remain outside the class D/C airspace.

That wasn't universally the case. Some of the ARSA's (this predates the lettered namespace)
were specifically using the "I can't hear you" approach in lieu of explicitly denying service.