when does a "remain clear" instruction end?

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

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

You should never hear a controller utter the words "Cleared to enter
(or cleared through)the Class C airspace". You do not need a clearance
to enter Class C, only establishment of two-way radio communications
and a Mode C transponder.


But pilots request clearance through Class C (and Class D) airspace
anyway.
What would you have the controller do, tell the pilot "unable clearance
through Class C airspace"? It's simpler just to "clear" the guy.



You lost me. If a pilot requests to transition a class C, the controller has
several options: 1) ignore the call. 2) "aircraft calling, remain clear of
the class C." 3) "Cessna 1234, remain clear of the class C." 4) "Cessna
1234, standby" 5) "Cessna 1234, roger." 6) "Cessna 1234, altimeter setting
30.04." or even 7) "Cessna 1234 transition approved."

1, 2, and 3 are indications that the tranistion is not approved. 4, 5, 6 and
7 are clearances to enter. I agree with Tom that you will probably not hear
"cleared to enter the class C" but, more to the point, you certainly don't
to hear it before entering the class C.

Why would you say it is simpler to just clear the guy? The simplest thing to
do would be to ignore the call.

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

"Travis Marlatte" wrote in message
nk.net...
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

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

You should never hear a controller utter the words "Cleared to enter
(or cleared through)the Class C airspace". You do not need a clearance
to enter Class C, only establishment of two-way radio communications
and a Mode C transponder.


But pilots request clearance through Class C (and Class D) airspace
anyway.
What would you have the controller do, tell the pilot "unable clearance
through Class C airspace"? It's simpler just to "clear" the guy.



You lost me. If a pilot requests to transition a class C, the controller
has
several options: 1) ignore the call. 2) "aircraft calling, remain clear of
the class C." 3) "Cessna 1234, remain clear of the class C." 4) "Cessna
1234, standby" 5) "Cessna 1234, roger." 6) "Cessna 1234, altimeter setting
30.04." or even 7) "Cessna 1234 transition approved."


But the pilot didn't request transition through the Class C airspace, the
pilot requested clearance through the Class C airspace.



1, 2, and 3 are indications that the tranistion is not approved. 4, 5, 6
and
7 are clearances to enter. I agree with Tom that you will probably not
hear
"cleared to enter the class C" but, more to the point, you certainly don't
to hear it before entering the class C.

Why would you say it is simpler to just clear the guy? The simplest thing
to
do would be to ignore the call.


Because responding "Cessna 1234 cleared through Class C airspace" is simpler
than explaining to the guy that there are no clearances for VFR transition
of Class C airspace.

Howdy!

In article . net,
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

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

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

[snip]

You lost me. If a pilot requests to transition a class C, the controller
has
several options: 1) ignore the call. 2) "aircraft calling, remain clear of
the class C." 3) "Cessna 1234, remain clear of the class C." 4) "Cessna
1234, standby" 5) "Cessna 1234, roger." 6) "Cessna 1234, altimeter setting
30.04." or even 7) "Cessna 1234 transition approved."

But the pilot didn't request transition through the Class C airspace, the
pilot requested clearance through the Class C airspace.

Baloney.

The original poster said nothing about asking to be "cleared" into/
through the Class C. He was just looking for flight following.

[snip]

Because responding "Cessna 1234 cleared through Class C airspace" is simpler
than explaining to the guy that there are no clearances for VFR transition
of Class C airspace.

....so responding to incorrect phraseology with more incorrect phraseology is
how you would handle this?

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
...

Baloney.

The original poster said nothing about asking to be "cleared" into/
through the Class C. He was just looking for flight following.


Follow the thread, I wasn't referring to the original poster. Pilots DO
request clearance through Class C airspace.



...so responding to incorrect phraseology with more incorrect
phraseology is how you would handle this?


Let's see; I could say that I cannot issue a clearance through Class C
airspace, or I could provide a rather lengthy dissertation on Class C
procedures while ignoring other traffic, or I could just grant the request
for clearance. Which do you think is best?

Howdy!

In article .net,
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Michael Houghton" wrote in message
...

Baloney.

The original poster said nothing about asking to be "cleared" into/
through the Class C. He was just looking for flight following.

Follow the thread, I wasn't referring to the original poster. Pilots DO
request clearance through Class C airspace.

There is no such animal as a "clearance into Class C airspace".

If a pilot requests one, he is exhibiting ignorance of proper
radio procedure.

...so responding to incorrect phraseology with more incorrect
phraseology is how you would handle this?

Let's see; I could say that I cannot issue a clearance through Class C
airspace, or I could provide a rather lengthy dissertation on Class C
procedures while ignoring other traffic, or I could just grant the request
for clearance. Which do you think is best?

Neither. You present a false dilemma, ignoring several better
responses.

If it's quiet, the controller could possibly give a friendly
quick reminder that you don't do clearances.

In any case, "November 1234, come on down" would avoid giving
a clearance where one cannot, but would establish communications
authorizing entry. Yeah, it's probably not in the official
phrasebook, but it doesn't say things it shouldn't.

If you were to "clear" someone into Class C airspace, what
sort of clearance would you give? Please be explicit, and
explain how it would be a valid clearance.

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
...
Howdy!

In article .net,
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Michael Houghton" wrote in message
...

Baloney.

The original poster said nothing about asking to be "cleared" into/
through the Class C. He was just looking for flight following.

Follow the thread, I wasn't referring to the original poster. Pilots DO
request clearance through Class C airspace.

There is no such animal as a "clearance into Class C airspace".

If a pilot requests one, he is exhibiting ignorance of proper
radio procedure.

...so responding to incorrect phraseology with more incorrect
phraseology is how you would handle this?

Let's see; I could say that I cannot issue a clearance through Class C
airspace, or I could provide a rather lengthy dissertation on Class C
procedures while ignoring other traffic, or I could just grant the
request
for clearance. Which do you think is best?

Neither. You present a false dilemma, ignoring several better
responses.

If it's quiet, the controller could possibly give a friendly
quick reminder that you don't do clearances.

In any case, "November 1234, come on down" would avoid giving
a clearance where one cannot, but would establish communications
authorizing entry. Yeah, it's probably not in the official
phrasebook, but it doesn't say things it shouldn't.

If you were to "clear" someone into Class C airspace, what
sort of clearance would you give? Please be explicit, and
explain how it would be a valid clearance.

The best response I've heard is "Cessna 1234, proceed as requested" or
"Cessna 1234, tranisition approved." It goes beyond what they need to say
but is concise and clear. Even a "Cessna 1234, roger" would do (regardless
of whether a "remain clear" had been issued prior).


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/


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

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

The best response I've heard is "Cessna 1234, proceed as requested" or
"Cessna 1234, tranisition approved." It goes beyond what they need to
say but is concise and clear. Even a "Cessna 1234, roger" would do
(regardless of whether a "remain clear" had been issued prior).


If the aircraft had previously been instructed to remain clear of Class C
airspace, "Cessna 1234, proceed as requested" or "Cessna 1234, transition
approved" would permit entry, but "Cessna 1234, roger" would not.

"Michael Houghton" wrote in message
...

There is no such animal as a "clearance into Class C airspace".


Correct.



If a pilot requests one, he is exhibiting ignorance of proper
radio procedure.


Correct.



Neither. You present a false dilemma, ignoring several better
responses.


Like what?


If it's quiet, the controller could possibly give a friendly
quick reminder that you don't do clearances.


That's the second choice I listed.



In any case, "November 1234, come on down" would avoid giving
a clearance where one cannot, but would establish communications
authorizing entry. Yeah, it's probably not in the official
phrasebook, but it doesn't say things it shouldn't.


"Come on down"? That may be in the official "Price is Right" phrasebook, it
doesn't mean anything in ATC.



If you were to "clear" someone into Class C airspace, what
sort of clearance would you give? Please be explicit, and
explain how it would be a valid clearance.


Waco 9876Z calls approach: "Podunk approach, Waco 9876Z 15 west, request
clearance through Class C airspace". ATC responds; "Waco 9876Z, squawk
0340, cleared through Podunk Class C airspace, Podunk altimeter 29.96."

Yes, I know, there are no clearances for VFR aircraft through Class C
airspace. Nobody knows that better than I do. But I'm not going to argue
with the pilot, if he insists on a "clearance" I give him a "clearance".

Howdy!

In article .net,
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Michael Houghton" wrote in message
...
[snip]

Neither. You present a false dilemma, ignoring several better
responses.


Like what?


If it's quiet, the controller could possibly give a friendly
quick reminder that you don't do clearances.


That's the second choice I listed.

No. You posited a lengthy lecture/dissertation that tied up a busy
comm channel. Naturally, you were trying to post a patently absurd
choice, to make your other option look good. Logical fallacy. Bad
rhetoric. No biscuit.



In any case, "November 1234, come on down" would avoid giving
a clearance where one cannot, but would establish communications
authorizing entry. Yeah, it's probably not in the official
phrasebook, but it doesn't say things it shouldn't.


"Come on down"? That may be in the official "Price is Right" phrasebook, it
doesn't mean anything in ATC.

....neither does "cleared into the Class C airspace", and it has the
benefit of not conveying formal meaning it shouldn't, unlike a
clearance.

If you were to "clear" someone into Class C airspace, what
sort of clearance would you give? Please be explicit, and
explain how it would be a valid clearance.

Waco 9876Z calls approach: "Podunk approach, Waco 9876Z 15 west, request
clearance through Class C airspace". ATC responds; "Waco 9876Z, squawk
0340, cleared through Podunk Class C airspace, Podunk altimeter 29.96."

Yes, I know, there are no clearances for VFR aircraft through Class C
airspace. Nobody knows that better than I do. But I'm not going to argue
with the pilot, if he insists on a "clearance" I give him a "clearance".

You don't bother explaining how this is a valid clearance. Podunk
approach only needs to say "Waco 9876Z, roger." If Waco 9876Z can't figure
out what to do, he can ask. He might even learn something. Just issuing
a bogus clearance only perpetuates that ignorance.

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/

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

"Michael Houghton" wrote in message
...

Baloney.

The original poster said nothing about asking to be "cleared" into/
through the Class C. He was just looking for flight following.


Follow the thread, I wasn't referring to the original poster. Pilots DO
request clearance through Class C airspace.

But they do not have to be given anything thing that sounds like a clearance
to have the authorization to enter it.




...so responding to incorrect phraseology with more incorrect
phraseology is how you would handle this?


Let's see; I could say that I cannot issue a clearance through Class C
airspace, or I could provide a rather lengthy dissertation on Class C
procedures while ignoring other traffic, or I could just grant the request
for clearance. Which do you think is best?




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