when does a "remain clear" instruction end?

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

"Travis Marlatte" wrote in message
ink.net...

I don't think so. From the AIM 3-2-4,
3. Arrival or Through Flight Entry Requirements. ...

NOTE-
1. If the controller responds to a radio call with, "(aircraft
callsign)
standby," radio communications have been established and the pilot can
enter
the Class C airspace.

2. If workload or traffic conditions prevent immediate provision of
Class C services, the controller will inform the pilot to remain outside
the
Class C airspace until conditions permit the services to be provided.

3. It is important to understand that if the controller responds to
the
initial radio call without using the aircraft identification, radio
communications have not been established and the pilot may not enter the
Class C airspace.

EXAMPLE-
1. [Aircraft callsign] "remain outside the Class Charlie airspace
and
standby."

2. "Aircraft calling Dulles approach control, standby."


The material you quoted does not support your position.

Sure it does. My position is that radio contact where the controller uses
your tail number and lacking an explicit "remain clear" grants permission to
enter the class C. Note 1 above says this. You seem to be saying that once a
"remain clear" has been issued that the only way to reverse that is with an
explicit "cleared to enter the class C." The AIM doesn't really address this
sequence of events but does not refer to a specific clearance to enter the
class C either.




I think that this makes it pretty clear that any acknowledgement of a
specific aircraft without a specific caution to remain clear is
sufficient
radio contact to allow clearance into a Class C.


Yes, but that's not the case here. In this case there was acknowledgement
of a specific aircraft with a specific instruction to remain clear of the
Class C airspace.

I think it is the case as presented by the original poster. He had received
a "remain clear" prior to take off. After departure, he had a radio exchange
that included his tail number and took that as permission to enter the class
C.




Using your example of a subsequent instruction implicitly
canceling a previous instruction applies here as well.


It doesn't apply in this case because the instruction to remain clear of
the
Class C airspace was the only instruction issued.



Again, after departure, the pilot had a radio exchange where the controller
used his tail number. That grants permission to enter the class C.

I am based at a class C airport. I have heard "remain clear" many times. I
have never heard "cleared to enter." Subsequent radio contact that uses my
tail number is enough to rescind the "remain clear" instruction.

-------------------------------
Travis

"Travis Marlatte" wrote in message
ink.net...

Sure it does. My position is that radio contact where the controller uses
your tail number and lacking an explicit "remain clear" grants permission
to enter the class C. Note 1 above says this.


It doesn't. You stated that subsequent use of the tail number of an
aircraft, that had previously established communications and been told to
remain clear, especially with the phrase "radar contact", permitted entry to
the Class C airspace. The AIM does not support that viewpoint. ATC can
instruct aircraft that have established communications to remain outside of
Class C airspace.


FAA Order 7110.65N Air Traffic Control

Chapter 7. Visual

Section 8. Class C Service- Terminal

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.

PHRASEOLOGY-
(A/c call sign) REMAIN OUTSIDE CHARLIE AIRSPACE AND STANDBY.



You seem to be saying that once a "remain clear" has been issued
that the only way to reverse that is with an explicit "cleared to enter
the class C." The AIM doesn't really address this sequence of events
but does not refer to a specific clearance to enter the class C either.


I'm saying that an instruction to remain clear of Class C airspace issued to
an aircraft that has established two-way radio communications remains in
effect until another instruction is issued that permits that aircraft to
enter Class C airspace. That is not my opinion, that is a simple fact.



I think it is the case as presented by the original poster. He had
received a "remain clear" prior to take off. After departure, he
had a radio exchange that included his tail number and took that
as permission to enter the class C.


Yes. He erred. That radio exchange was not permission to enter Class C
airspace. His instruction to remain clear was still in effect because no
instruction permitting entry had been issued.



Again, after departure, the pilot had a radio exchange where the
controller used his tail number. That grants permission to enter
the class C.


And again, that is not the case. A subsequent radio exchange after
communications have been established does not, by itself, override the
instruction to remain clear. I don't know who told you otherwise but
whoever it was does not have a correct understanding of Class C airspace.



I am based at a class C airport.


Which only proves that one can be based in Class C airspace without
understanding it.



I have heard "remain clear" many times. I have never heard "cleared
to enter."


As you gain experience you probably will.



Subsequent radio contact that uses my
tail number is enough to rescind the "remain clear" instruction.


I'm sure you believe that. That statement is unsupported by any
documentation and is completely illogical. I've explained this as simply as
I can and you still don't understand. I don't think you're even trying to
understand. Fine. Believe whatever you choose.

In article . net,
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

I'm saying that an instruction to remain clear of Class C airspace issued to
an aircraft that has established two-way radio communications remains in
effect until another instruction is issued that permits that aircraft to
enter Class C airspace. That is not my opinion, that is a simple fact.

So Stephen, what specifically would constitute another instruction that
permits entry, and don't try and tell me that it would have to include
"cleared to enter" because that would be incorrect phraseology with
respect to Class C airspace.

Tom Fleischman wrote in message arthlink.net...
In article . net,
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

I'm saying that an instruction to remain clear of Class C airspace issued to
an aircraft that has established two-way radio communications remains in
effect until another instruction is issued that permits that aircraft to
enter Class C airspace. That is not my opinion, that is a simple fact.

So Stephen, what specifically would constitute another instruction that
permits entry, and don't try and tell me that it would have to include
"cleared to enter" because that would be incorrect phraseology with
respect to Class C airspace.


how 'bout "resume own navigation"

In article ,
gross_arrow wrote:

Tom Fleischman wrote in message
arthlink.net...
In article . net,
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

I'm saying that an instruction to remain clear of Class C airspace issued
to
an aircraft that has established two-way radio communications remains in
effect until another instruction is issued that permits that aircraft to
enter Class C airspace. That is not my opinion, that is a simple fact.

So Stephen, what specifically would constitute another instruction that
permits entry, and don't try and tell me that it would have to include
"cleared to enter" because that would be incorrect phraseology with
respect to Class C airspace.


how 'bout "resume own navigation"

Sure that would work, along with something like, "N123AB, radar
contact, say destination and type aircraft", which was probably close
to what the original poster heard (my read of what he alluded to in his
original post).

"Tom Fleischman" wrote in message
rthlink.net...

Sure that would work, along with something like, "N123AB, radar
contact, say destination and type aircraft", which was probably close
to what the original poster heard (my read of what he alluded to in his
original post).


"Resume own navigation" isn't appropriate in this case because the aircraft
was never vectored. The query "N123AB, radar contact, say destination and
type aircraft" accomplishes nothing by itself. Once the pilot answers the
controller might respond with "proceed on course", that would do it.

"gross_arrow" wrote in message
om...

how 'bout "resume own navigation"


That's used after completion of a radar vector or when radar contact is lost
while the aircraft is being radar vectored. It wouldn't be appropriate in
this case as the aircraft was never vectored.

"Tom Fleischman" wrote in message
rthlink.net...

So Stephen, what specifically would constitute another instruction that
permits entry, and don't try and tell me that it would have to include
"cleared to enter" because that would be incorrect phraseology with
respect to Class C airspace.


As I said in several previous messages in this thread, an instruction to
remain clear of Class C airspace issued to an aircraft that has established
two-way radio communications remains in effect until another instruction is
issued that permits that aircraft to enter Class C airspace. That assumes,
of course, that the pilot still wants Class C services and remains on the
frequency. Examples would be "proceed on course", "fly heading XXX, vector
for sequencing", "enter right base for runway XX", etc.

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

"Travis Marlatte" wrote in message
ink.net...

It doesn't. You stated that subsequent use of the tail number of an
aircraft, that had previously established communications and been told to
remain clear, especially with the phrase "radar contact", permitted entry
to
the Class C airspace. The AIM does not support that viewpoint. ATC can
instruct aircraft that have established communications to remain outside
of
Class C airspace.

To enter class C airspace, the FARs say that you have to establish two-way
radio communication. The AIM provides a few examples which indicate that no
explicit clearance is required. I agree that ATC can establish communication
but instruct the pilot to remain clear. It is what can happen next that we
have been debating.

From the FARs, the AIM , and my experiences, the acknowledgement of a
particular plane by ATC establishes two-way radio communication and is
sufficient for the plane to enter the class C - even after the issuance of a
"remain clear."



You seem to be saying that once a "remain clear" has been issued
that the only way to reverse that is with an explicit "cleared to enter
the class C." The AIM doesn't really address this sequence of events
but does not refer to a specific clearance to enter the class C either.


I'm saying that an instruction to remain clear of Class C airspace issued
to
an aircraft that has established two-way radio communications remains in
effect until another instruction is issued that permits that aircraft to
enter Class C airspace. That is not my opinion, that is a simple fact.

It does seem to be your opinion and it is far from a simple fact. There is
no language in the FARs or AIM that clearly supports either of our opinions.
There is no text that says anything about what must happen after a "remain
clear" has been issued for class C.


I think it is the case as presented by the original poster. He had
received a "remain clear" prior to take off. After departure, he
had a radio exchange that included his tail number and took that
as permission to enter the class C.


Yes. He erred. That radio exchange was not permission to enter Class C
airspace. His instruction to remain clear was still in effect because no
instruction permitting entry had been issued.

There is no such thing as an instruction to permit entry into class C.


Again, after departure, the pilot had a radio exchange where the
controller used his tail number. That grants permission to enter
the class C.


And again, that is not the case. A subsequent radio exchange after
communications have been established does not, by itself, override the
instruction to remain clear. I don't know who told you otherwise but
whoever it was does not have a correct understanding of Class C airspace.

The FARs say that two-way radio communication is sufficient. The AIM says
that two-way radio communication is sufficient. Where does it say otherwise?

If the controller intended for the pilot to remain clear that he would have
simply ignored the pilot's radio calls or would have repeated the "remain
clear."

For the scenario described by the original poster, the departure controller
instructed him to remain clear of the class C. Once in the air, the radio
exchange that occured established two-way radio communication and was
sufficient for him to enter the class C.


I am based at a class C airport.


Which only proves that one can be based in Class C airspace without
understanding it.

Or, that I'm right.


I have heard "remain clear" many times. I have never heard "cleared
to enter."


As you gain experience you probably will.

I'll agree with that. I'm sure some day that a class C or D controller will
say something like "cleared to enter ..." but it is not necessary and I
don't need to hear it whether or not I have been told to remain clear.


Subsequent radio contact that uses my
tail number is enough to rescind the "remain clear" instruction.


I'm sure you believe that. That statement is unsupported by any
documentation and is completely illogical. I've explained this as simply
as
I can and you still don't understand. I don't think you're even trying to
understand. Fine. Believe whatever you choose.

There is no documentation to support your point of view either. My position
is consistent with the documentation that does exist. It is consistent with
my experiences at class C and D airports. It is not completely illogical. I
would suggest that having this ambiguity about a clearance to enter the
class C/D in the FARs in the first place is illogical.

You have explained it very simply and I do think that I understand what you
are saying. Let me summarize to be sure. You claim that once a controller
has issued a "remain clear" for a class C or D airspace that an explicit
"cleared into the class C or D airpspace" or some instruction that requires
entry is necessary before the pilot should enter.

I disagree with you. I am trying to map what you are saying to the
documentation and to my experiences. They don't seem to agree.

-------------------------------
Travis

Ok Steven. New hypothetical.

Manly Piper 54321 calls approach from the ground desiring to enter Class C
airspace after takeoff. Ralph at approach says "Piper 54321after takeoff
remain clear of the class C" Ralph then goes off shift.

Manly Piper takes off and begins to maneuver around the class C. He calls
approach, and George annswers "Piper 54321 say direction of flight"

Is Manly Piper permitted to enter the class C?
What bearing toes Ralphs instruction have?
What bearing does George's instruction have?
Does the Manly Piper need to know whether it's Ralph or George?
Does George need to know that Ralph told the Manly Piper to stay clear, or does
George get to start with a clean slate and make his own evaluation?

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)