![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Airpersoj wrote:But, the tower controller issues that heading with the expectation that the TRACON will cause it to be a vector..eventually. Ok, I can live with that. ;-) I take it you disagree with the blanket statement that a heading and vector mean the same thing? Airpersoj wrote:If the term "for radar vectors" has not been stated, the prudent pilot should ask, "Is that heading assignment for radar vectors?" And if the answer were "No", would you infer that the controller intended the heading to apply only after flying any DP or is able to maintain his own obstruction clearance? Airpersoj wrote: He was probably talking about a non-tower airport in Glass G airspace. Do you not think that departing a non-radar class D airport is an almost identical situation as departing a class G in regards to that initial heading assignment? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Airpersoj wrote: But, the tower controller issues that heading with the expectation that the TRACON will cause it to be a vector..eventually. What the hell does this mean? A heading issued is a vector. Airpersoj wrote:If the term "for radar vectors" has not been stated, the prudent pilot should ask, "Is that heading assignment for radar vectors?" To which the controller would immediately put on his kid gloves. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Newps wrote: Airpersoj wrote: But, the tower controller issues that heading with the expectation that the TRACON will cause it to be a vector..eventually. What the hell does this mean? A heading issued is a vector. Airpersoj wrote:If the term "for radar vectors" has not been stated, the prudent pilot should ask, "Is that heading assignment for radar vectors?" To which the controller would immediately put on his kid gloves. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Newps wrote: Airpersoj wrote: But, the tower controller issues that heading with the expectation that the TRACON will cause it to be a vector..eventually. What the hell does this mean? A heading issued is a vector. Ok, let me change "eventually" to "sooner or later." You can't apply the circumstances at BIL to all airports. Airpersoj wrote:If the term "for radar vectors" has not been stated, the prudent pilot should ask, "Is that heading assignment for radar vectors?" To which the controller would immediately put on his kid gloves. Sounds like a good plan to me. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Greg Esres wrote: Airpersoj wrote:But, the tower controller issues that heading with the expectation that the TRACON will cause it to be a vector..eventually. Ok, I can live with that. ;-) I take it you disagree with the blanket statement that a heading and vector mean the same thing? I do, unless it is at a place where context resolves any doubt in my mind. Airpersoj wrote:If the term "for radar vectors" has not been stated, the prudent pilot should ask, "Is that heading assignment for radar vectors?" And if the answer were "No", would you infer that the controller intended the heading to apply only after flying any DP or is able to maintain his own obstruction clearance? I would infer that ATC couldn't care less; that I am solely responsible for my own obstacle clearance. I would, and have, reply that I am going to fly the XYZ DP." Airpersoj wrote: He was probably talking about a non-tower airport in Glass G airspace. Do you not think that departing a non-radar class D airport is an almost identical situation as departing a class G in regards to that initial heading assignment? It varies so, that it is probably best to start from the premise that a Class D airport without radar could provide a departure clearance similar to what a Center does out of a Class G IFR airport. (Then, there are Glass G VFR airports where it really becomes a crap shoot ;-) As to the Class D non-radar airport, it all depends upon the IFR ATC clearance they issue in the context of the obtacle environment for that airport. Bottom line: the pilot is *always* the one on the hook, first anf foremost. To keep the system working, it's the pilot's duty to challenge any ATC clearance or instruction that is ambigous, but in a cooperative manner unless urgency is of the utmost importance. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
GPS approaches with Center | Dan Luke | Instrument Flight Rules | 104 | October 22nd 03 09:42 PM |
IFR Routing Toronto to Windsor (CYTZ - CYQG) | Rob Pesan | Instrument Flight Rules | 5 | October 7th 03 01:50 PM |
required readback on clearance | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 15 | September 17th 03 04:33 PM |
Picking up a Clearance Airborne | Brad Z | Instrument Flight Rules | 30 | August 29th 03 01:31 AM |
Big John Bites Dicks (Security Clearance) | Badwater Bill | Home Built | 27 | August 21st 03 12:40 AM |