A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Silly controller



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 27th 06, 09:16 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Christopher C. Stacy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43
Default Silly controller

(Christopher C. Stacy) writes:

"Robert M. Gary" writes:

Christopher C. Stacy wrote:
"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:

"Christopher C. Stacy" wrote in message
...

When he gave you the clearance for the approach, did he say
"Maintain VFR?" If not, you were really IFR.


No. You're really IFR when you hear "Cleared to..."

Like in, "Cleared for the ILS runway 23 at Foobar maintain 2000 until established" ?

Or "Cleared to Land"

Word games aside, Steven is right. The difference between being IFR and
VFR in controlled airspace is being told "cleared to foobar".


The instruction "Cleared for the ILS runway 23 at Foobar maintain 2000 until established"
contains "cleared", a route (which is even a charted IFR procedure), an altitude,
and a clearance limit (landing Foobar airport, or executing the published missed
approach procedure). How is that not an IFR clearance?

I think it is, unless the controller adds the words "maintain VFR".
When I want a practice approach and the controller fails to say "VFR",
I add it back in to try and make sure, like:
"Cherokee 97R cleared for the ILS 29 maintain VFR".


I phoned Boston TRACON for their opinion, and the supervisor said that when
(for example) receiving multiple practice approaches in VFR conditions,
with the phraeology given above: unless the magic words "maintain VFR"
are in the instruction, you are in the system, receiving IFR separation,
and in the event of lost comm would be expected (in VFR conditions) to land.
  #2  
Old August 27th 06, 11:53 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Steven P. McNicoll[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 660
Default Silly controller


"Christopher C. Stacy" wrote in message
...

The instruction "Cleared for the ILS runway 23 at Foobar maintain 2000
until established" contains "cleared", a route (which is even a charted
IFR procedure), an altitude, and a clearance limit (landing Foobar
airport,
or executing the published missed approach procedure). How is that not
an IFR clearance?

I think it is, unless the controller adds the words "maintain VFR".
When I want a practice approach and the controller fails to say "VFR",
I add it back in to try and make sure, like:
"Cherokee 97R cleared for the ILS 29 maintain VFR".


It does not contain a clearance limit. IFR training flights frequently
include approaches at intermediate airports and approach clearances for each
one, but the clearance limit remains the destination airport.


  #4  
Old August 27th 06, 04:55 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Newps
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,886
Default Silly controller



Christopher C. Stacy wrote:



The instruction "Cleared for the ILS runway 23 at Foobar maintain 2000 until established"
contains "cleared", a route (which is even a charted IFR procedure), an altitude,
and a clearance limit (landing Foobar airport, or executing the published missed
approach procedure). How is that not an IFR clearance?


It's not.



I think it is, unless the controller adds the words "maintain VFR".
When I want a practice approach and the controller fails to say "VFR",
I add it back in to try and make sure, like:
"Cherokee 97R cleared for the ILS 29 maintain VFR".


Not necessary. If you are doing a whole series of practice approaches
the controller needs to tell you one time to maintain VFR. Not one time
per approach, just one time.
  #5  
Old August 28th 06, 03:20 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Robert M. Gary
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,767
Default Silly controller


Christopher C. Stacy wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" writes:

The instruction "Cleared for the ILS runway 23 at Foobar maintain 2000 until established"
contains "cleared", a route (which is even a charted IFR procedure), an altitude,
and a clearance limit (landing Foobar airport, or executing the published missed
approach procedure). How is that not an IFR clearance?

I think it is, unless the controller adds the words "maintain VFR".
When I want a practice approach and the controller fails to say "VFR",
I add it back in to try and make sure, like:
"Cherokee 97R cleared for the ILS 29 maintain VFR".


No, to be IFR you must have a clearance limit. The clearance must clear
you to some specific thing (like an intersection or most commonly, a
destination).
So a common popup IFR approach clearance sounds like...
"Cleared to the Foobar airport via radar vectors, fly heading 123,
maintain 2000 until established cleared for the ILS runway 22 foobar".
(Notice the "cleared to Foobar airport at the begining showing its an
IFR clearance.

-Robert, CFII

  #6  
Old August 26th 06, 07:54 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Steven P. McNicoll[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 660
Default Silly controller


"Christopher C. Stacy" wrote in message
...

Like in, "Cleared for the ILS runway 23 at Foobar maintain 2000 until
established" ?


No. Like when you picked up your IFR clearance some time prior to that and
heard "Cleared to..."




  #7  
Old August 27th 06, 11:32 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default Silly controller


Christopher C. Stacy wrote:
"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:

"Christopher C. Stacy" wrote in message
...

When he gave you the clearance for the approach, did he say
"Maintain VFR?" If not, you were really IFR.


No. You're really IFR when you hear "Cleared to..."


Like in, "Cleared for the ILS runway 23 at Foobar maintain 2000 until established" ?


My interpretation of the ATC handbook is that there are three types of
practice approaches:

1) You can be IFR, in which case it works just like any other IFR
operation except that practice approaches are lower priority (you can
be delayed). This comes with a proper IFR clearance (with a clearance
limit) as has been stated in this thread.

2) You can be VFR, but with separation services. Here you get 500 ft
vertical separation from other traffic and standard lateral separation.
The published miss is not authorized unless the controller
specifically approves it, and if he does approve it, separation
services are provided for the missed approach procedure as well. This
comes with the instruction "CLEARED FOR THE APPROACH" or similar.

3) You can be VFR, but without separation services. The missed
approach is again not authorized. This comes with the instruction
"PRACTICE APPROACH APPROVED" or similar.

If you're operating under VFR, the controller is supposed to remind you
by saying "MAINTAIN VFR" at some point, but if the controller forgets,
it doesn't change anything.

If separation services are provided, then the controller must be
informed when to terminate those services. Could this be when the
confusion occurs? What is the terminology for terminating VFR
separation services? I've assumed that many controllers use standard
IFR cancellation terminology for that even when the airplane is
operated under VFR.

Peter

  #8  
Old August 28th 06, 12:10 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Christopher C. Stacy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43
Default Silly controller

writes:
Christopher C. Stacy wrote:
"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:

"Christopher C. Stacy" wrote in message
...

When he gave you the clearance for the approach, did he say
"Maintain VFR?" If not, you were really IFR.


No. You're really IFR when you hear "Cleared to..."


Like in, "Cleared for the ILS runway 23 at Foobar maintain 2000 until established" ?


My interpretation of the ATC handbook is that there are
three types of practice approaches:


1) You can be IFR, in which case it works just like any other IFR
operation except that practice approaches are lower priority (you
can be delayed). This comes with a proper IFR clearance (with a
clearance limit) as has been stated in this thread.


Yes.

2) You can be VFR, but with separation services. Here you get 500 ft
vertical separation from other traffic and standard lateral separation.
The published miss is not authorized unless the controller
specifically approves it, and if he does approve it, separation
services are provided for the missed approach procedure as well.
This comes with the instruction "CLEARED FOR THE APPROACH" or similar.


Yes.

3) You can be VFR, but without separation services. The missed
approach is again not authorized. This comes with the instruction
"PRACTICE APPROACH APPROVED" or similar.


"MAINTAIN VFR, PRACTICE APPROACH APPROVED, NO SEPARATION SERVICES PROVIDED."

If you're operating under VFR, the controller is supposed to remind you
by saying "MAINTAIN VFR" at some point, but if the controller forgets,
it doesn't change anything.


It presumably reflects whether the controller believes whether you are now IFR.

The last time I asked an operational supervisor at the FAA (Boston),
which was yesterday, he said that in this (VFR) case the lack of the
phrase "MAINTAIN VFR" indicates they believe you are accepting an IFR
clearance with the airport as the clearance limit (unless you were
previously on an IFR clearance as you describe above). I specifically
asked him if there was a clearance limit, and what it would be.
He also went on to tell me about what he expected the lost communications
procedures would be. This was without having said "CLEARED TO airport".
That is the point of contention.

My point is just that the controller may have made a mistake and issued
a wrong clearance, and that the pilot should clarify what he wanted.
  #9  
Old August 28th 06, 12:50 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
KP[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default Silly controller

"Christopher C. Stacy" wrote in message
...
The last time I asked an operational supervisor at the FAA (Boston),
which was yesterday, he said that in this (VFR) case the lack of the
phrase "MAINTAIN VFR" indicates they believe you are accepting an IFR
clearance with the airport as the clearance limit (unless you were
previously on an IFR clearance as you describe above). I specifically
asked him if there was a clearance limit, and what it would be.
He also went on to tell me about what he expected the lost communications
procedures would be. This was without having said "CLEARED TO airport".
That is the point of contention.


Would this be a supervisor who's operational and procedural knowledge is on
a par with the one I dealt with at Miami TRACON in the mid-90s?

The one who told me they didn't use permanent echoes to align/check the
accuracy of their video maps even though a check of their own facility SOPs
clearly stated they did and even had photos of the indicator showing where
the PEs were.

Sometimes FAA supervisors are where they are to get them out of where they
were :-/

You're not on an IFR clearance until you're "Cleared to XXX, via YYY,
maintain ZZZ"

An approach clearance IS NOT an IFR clearance; with or without the phrase
"Maintain VFR."

has it correct.


  #10  
Old August 28th 06, 09:51 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Steven P. McNicoll[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 660
Default Silly controller


"Christopher C. Stacy" wrote in message
...

The last time I asked an operational supervisor at the FAA (Boston),
which was yesterday, he said that in this (VFR) case the lack of the
phrase "MAINTAIN VFR" indicates they believe you are accepting an IFR
clearance with the airport as the clearance limit (unless you were
previously on an IFR clearance as you describe above). I specifically
asked him if there was a clearance limit, and what it would be.
He also went on to tell me about what he expected the lost communications
procedures would be. This was without having said "CLEARED TO airport".
That is the point of contention.


He's wrong.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Air Force One Had to Intercept Some Inadvertent Flyers / How? Rick Umali Piloting 29 February 15th 06 04:40 AM
What was controller implying?? Bill J Instrument Flight Rules 65 September 28th 04 12:32 AM
Columns by a Canadian centre controller David Megginson Instrument Flight Rules 1 August 9th 04 10:05 PM
Skyguide traffic controller killed HECTOP Piloting 39 March 3rd 04 01:46 AM
AmeriFlight Crash C J Campbell Piloting 5 December 1st 03 02:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.