TIS and What could have been

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:


Be that as it may, it is not unusual (nor "odd") to not be assigned an
altitude when over flying the airport associated with a class C airspace.

Actually it is, and you're contradicting yourself.

I'm not going to get dragged into a ****ing contest over semantics, but
I'm only contradicting myself if you are misreading (either
intentionally or unintentionally) what I wrote.

While you may think that it's unusual to not be assigned an altitude
when under VFR following through class C or over the associated airport,
my experience has shown that, while it doesn't happen all the time, it
is not strange, odd, unusually, unlikely, bizarre, goofy, or whatever
adjective you want to through in.


-m
--
## Mark T. Dame
## VP, Product Development
## MFM Software, Inc. (http://www.mfm.com/)
"Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine."

"Mark T. Dame" wrote in message
...

I'm not going to get dragged into a ****ing contest over semantics, but
I'm only contradicting myself if you are misreading (either intentionally
or unintentionally) what I wrote.


I can assure you I understood what you wrote, perhaps you meant something
else.



While you may think that it's unusual to not be assigned an altitude when
under VFR following through class C or over the associated airport, my
experience has shown that, while it doesn't happen all the time, it is not
strange, odd, unusually, unlikely, bizarre, goofy, or whatever adjective
you want to through in.


It IS unusual not to be assigned an altitude restriction in those cases.