when does a "remain clear" instruction end?

"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...

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?


No.



What bearing toes Ralphs instruction have?


It isn't Ralph's instruction personally, it's approach's instruction. It
remains in effect until an instruction is issued that permits entry to Class
C airspace.



What bearing does George's instruction have?


George didn't issue an instruction.



Does the Manly Piper need to know whether it's Ralph or George?


No.



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?


George need to know that Ralph told the Piper to stay clear, it would have
been part of the relief briefing.

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

To enter class C airspace, the FARs say that you have to establish
two-way radio communication.


Yes, but the FARs also say that except in an emergency, no person may
operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air
traffic control is exercised. Class C airspace is an area in which air
traffic control is exercised, so a pilot that has established two-way radio
communications and been instructed to remain clear of Class C airspace must
remain outside until further advised.



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."


The FARs and AIM indicate just the opposite, and you don't have any
experience to the contrary, you just misinterpreted the situation.



It does seem to be your opinion and it is far from a simple fact.


Actually, it is an indisputable fact. It can be no other way.



There is no language in the FARs or AIM that clearly supports either of
our opinions.


The FARs and AIM support what I've been saying and indicate that you're
wrong.



There is no text that says anything about what must happen after a
"remain clear" has been issued for class C.


What text says what must happen after any ATC instruction is issued?



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


Why? Because all ATC instructions are listed in the AIM and there is no
such instruction mentioned?



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?


In FAR 91.123 Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.

b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an
ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.


By the way, you're contradicting yourself. Earlier you wrote; "I agree that
ATC can establish communication but instruct the pilot to remain clear."
Now you're saying that ATC cannot instruct an aircraft that has established
radio communications to remain outside Class C airspace.



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."


If the controller didn't intend for the pilot to remain clear he wouldn't
have told him "after departure remain clear of the class C airspace". Why
would the controller need to repeat that instruction?



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.


Wrong. Two-way radio communications were established just once, when the
aircraft was on the ground, at the same time the instruction to remain
outside Class C airspace was issued. Communications are not established
with every communications exchange, just the first one.



Or, that I'm right.


The AIM, FARs, FAA Order 7110.65, and simple logic indicate you're wrong.





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.


But once you've been told to remain outside Class C airspace you do have to
hear something that indicates you can enter.



There is no documentation to support your point of view either.


All pertinent documentation supports my position.



My position is consistent with the documentation that does exist.


Your position is contrary to all pertinent documentation, you simply do not
understand the documentation.



It is consistent with my experiences at class C and D airports.


Impossible, as you cannot experience that which does not occur.



It is not completely illogical.


Actually, it is. You're just not thinking logically.



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.


What ambiguity?



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.


"Cleared" would be incorrect, but otherwise that's a reasonable facsimile.



I disagree with you.


Right. It's like I'm saying "two plus two equals four", and you're saying
"I disagree, in my experience two plus two equals five".



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


That's because you've misinterpreted the documents and drawn incorrect
conclusions from your experience.

Howdy!

In article k.net,
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

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

To enter class C airspace, the FARs say that you have to establish
two-way radio communication.


Yes, but the FARs also say that except in an emergency, no person may
operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air
traffic control is exercised. Class C airspace is an area in which air
traffic control is exercised, so a pilot that has established two-way radio
communications and been instructed to remain clear of Class C airspace must
remain outside until further advised.

How do you infer that from the plain text of the FARs (especially considering
the guidance the AIM offers)?

FAR 91.130 - Operations in Class C airspace.

(c) Communications. Each person operating an aircraft in Class C
airspace must meet the following two-way radio communications
requirements:

(1) Arrival or through flight. Each person must establish two-way radio
communications with the ATC facility (including foreign ATC in the case
of foreign airspace designated in the United States) providing air
traffic services prior to entering that airspace and thereafter
maintain those communications while within that airspace.

I also note that it never speaks of "clearance", but "ATC authorization".

Unless a two-way radio communication with the ATC facility includes an
explicit "remain clear", that communication authorizes entry into the
Class C airspace.

Do you have an authoritative statement that shows otherwise? Or are you
just waving your hands furiously?

[snip]

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."


The FARs and AIM indicate just the opposite, and you don't have any
experience to the contrary, you just misinterpreted the situation.

Pray tell which FARs you are reading that say what you seem to think
they say?

[snip]

There is no language in the FARs or AIM that clearly supports either of
our opinions.


The FARs and AIM support what I've been saying and indicate that you're
wrong.

The only thing the 91.130 is at all vague about (and it may well be
defined elsewhere -- I didn't look) is what consitutes "establishes
two-way radio communication".





There is no text that says anything about what must happen after a
"remain clear" has been issued for class C.


What text says what must happen after any ATC instruction is issued?



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


Why? Because all ATC instructions are listed in the AIM and there is no
such instruction mentioned?

No. FARs 91.130 make no reference to a specific instruction (such as
a clearance). It merely requires the establishment of two-way radio
communication. See my excerpt above.



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?


In FAR 91.123 Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.

b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an
ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.


By the way, you're contradicting yourself. Earlier you wrote; "I agree that
ATC can establish communication but instruct the pilot to remain clear."
Now you're saying that ATC cannot instruct an aircraft that has established
radio communications to remain outside Class C airspace.

No, he's not. If a communication includes "remain clear", then you don't
enter. If it doesn't include that magic phrase, you are permitted to enter
the airspace. Period. Stop. End of story.

[snip]

If the controller didn't intend for the pilot to remain clear he wouldn't
have told him "after departure remain clear of the class C airspace". Why
would the controller need to repeat that instruction?

Because failure to repeat the instruction would create the condition
permitting entry into the airspace.

[snip remainder of "I know you are but what am I" mindless repetition of
unsupportable position by Steve]

yours,
Michael
--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
| http://www.radix.net/~herveus/

"Michael Houghton" wrote in message
...

How do you infer that from the plain text of the FARs (especially
considering the guidance the AIM offers)?

FAR 91.130 - Operations in Class C airspace.

(c) Communications. Each person operating an aircraft in Class C
airspace must meet the following two-way radio communications
requirements:

(1) Arrival or through flight. Each person must establish two-way radio
communications with the ATC facility (including foreign ATC in the case
of foreign airspace designated in the United States) providing air
traffic services prior to entering that airspace and thereafter
maintain those communications while within that airspace.


Here's the plain text of an applicable FAR, what do you infer from it?


FAR 91.123 Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.

(b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary
to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.



I also note that it never speaks of "clearance", but "ATC authorization".


Correct.



Unless a two-way radio communication with the ATC facility includes an
explicit "remain clear", that communication authorizes entry into the
Class C airspace.


Also correct, if you had read the thread from the beginning you'd know there
was an explicit "remain clear" in this case.



Do you have an authoritative statement that shows otherwise? Or are you
just waving your hands furiously?


I have provided applicable documentation.



Pray tell which FARs you are reading that say what you seem to think
they say?


FAR 91.123 Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.

(b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary
to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.



The only thing the 91.130 is at all vague about (and it may well be
defined elsewhere -- I didn't look) is what consitutes "establishes
two-way radio communication".


If the FAR isn't clear enough, the AIM certainly is.



No. FARs 91.130 make no reference to a specific instruction (such as
a clearance). It merely requires the establishment of two-way radio
communication. See my excerpt above.


Are you saying that ATC cannot instruct an aircraft to remain outside of
Class C airspace?



No, he's not. If a communication includes "remain clear", then you don't
enter. If it doesn't include that magic phrase, you are permitted to enter
the airspace. Period. Stop. End of story.


In this case the communication did include "remain clear".



Because failure to repeat the instruction would create the condition
permitting entry into the airspace.


Are you saying ATC instructions are valid only until the next communications
exchange? What do you base that on?



[snip remainder of "I know you are but what am I" mindless repetition of
unsupportable position by Steve]


If you had read the entire thread you'd have seen I did provide supporting
documentation.

Howdy!

In article .net,
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Michael Houghton" wrote in message
...

How do you infer that from the plain text of the FARs (especially
considering the guidance the AIM offers)?

FAR 91.130 - Operations in Class C airspace.

(c) Communications. Each person operating an aircraft in Class C
airspace must meet the following two-way radio communications
requirements:

(1) Arrival or through flight. Each person must establish two-way radio
communications with the ATC facility (including foreign ATC in the case
of foreign airspace designated in the United States) providing air
traffic services prior to entering that airspace and thereafter
maintain those communications while within that airspace.


Here's the plain text of an applicable FAR, what do you infer from it?


FAR 91.123 Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.

(b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary
to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.

That clause is not relevant to the matter at hand. Two-way radio communication
is established by the controller's use of the aircraft's N-number (for whatever
value of "N" obtains). That establishment authorized entry into the Class C
airspace per 91.130.c.1. If the controller includes the instruction "remain clear"
in the communication, then the pilot has been given a specific instruction
to follow. Absent that instruction, the two-way communication authorizes
entry into the Class C.

Under your interpretation, there would be no way to enter the airspace once
a "remain clear" instruction was given, since there is no specific phrasing
or instruction express or implied that would affirmatively authorize entry.
That is nonsensical.

[snip]

Unless a two-way radio communication with the ATC facility includes an
explicit "remain clear", that communication authorizes entry into the
Class C airspace.


Also correct, if you had read the thread from the beginning you'd know there
was an explicit "remain clear" in this case.

One communication said "remain clear". A subsequent communication did not.
That second communication offered no instructions preventing the pilot from
entering per 91.123.c.1. Thus, the entry was in accordance with the FARs.

Do you have an authoritative statement that shows otherwise? Or are you
just waving your hands furiously?

I have provided applicable documentation.

No. You have not. You have mentioned a FAR clause that doesn't speak to the
question. You have not offered anything that clearly supports your claim.

91.123 applies broadly. In the context of 91.130, it provides a way for a
controller to establish two-way radio communication without allowing an
airplane into the Class C airspace. However, "November 1234, where ya goin?"
contains no ATC instructions, but does establish two-way radio communication.

[snip]

The only thing the 91.130 is at all vague about (and it may well be
defined elsewhere -- I didn't look) is what consitutes "establishes
two-way radio communication".

If the FAR isn't clear enough, the AIM certainly is.

I believe the AIM clearly articulates that using the N-number is the secret
handshake that formally established two-way radio communication. 91.130 is
(quite reasonably) silent on that point.


No. FARs 91.130 make no reference to a specific instruction (such as
a clearance). It merely requires the establishment of two-way radio
communication. See my excerpt above.


Are you saying that ATC cannot instruct an aircraft to remain outside of
Class C airspace?

No. I never said that. I repeat: each communication with the N-number
constitutes two-way radio communication that authorized entry unless it
includes explicit instruction to the contrary. The alternative is to
require ATC to explicitly and formally authorized entry (they can't
"clear" you - it isn't a "clearance"). What is the approved phraseology
for doing that? I'm not an expert, but I'm not aware of any such.

No, he's not. If a communication includes "remain clear", then you don't
enter. If it doesn't include that magic phrase, you are permitted to enter
the airspace. Period. Stop. End of story.

In this case the communication did include "remain clear".

Not the one that was the basis for heading in...


Because failure to repeat the instruction would create the condition
permitting entry into the airspace.


Are you saying ATC instructions are valid only until the next communications
exchange? What do you base that on?

I'm saying that the "remain clear" instruction only lasts until the next
communication that does not also include a "remain clear". I'm not
generalizing to other instructions -- strictly the "remain clear" one.

[snip remainder of "I know you are but what am I" mindless repetition of
unsupportable position by Steve]

If you had read the entire thread you'd have seen I did provide supporting
documentation.

I've read the thread. I have not see supporting documentation. I've seen
unsupported references to some mysterious ATC phraseology that no one has
articulated. I've seen the assertion of an interpretation that would make
it impossible to ever enter a Class C once told to "remain clear". I've
seen the assertion that the controller should accept a request for
clearance into a Class C with a clearance despite the fact that there is
no such clearance.

I stand by my summary.

yours,
Michael


--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
| http://www.radix.net/~herveus/