ATC out to get us?

The response was something like "both requests approved as requested" ...
No "cleared". Yet I felt that there was sufficient clarity in the
approval of my request.

Should I drag out and send in a NASA form?

Yes.

I agree there was sufficient clarity. However, if the FAA is willing to
bust people who don't hear "cleared" (or is willing to allow such a
rumor to circulate unchallenged) then they have to give us the correct
wording.

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

You weren't. Unless you hear "cleared into the class bravo", you're not.


Odd, then, that that phrase appears nowhere in Part 91.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
link.net...
You weren't. Unless you hear "cleared into the class bravo", you're not.

Odd, then, that that phrase appears nowhere in Part 91.

What other clearance would VFR traffic get that would allow them to enter
the Class B airspace? I'm drawing a blank at the moment.

I agree that the specific phraseology is not required. But *some* kind of
clearance is required, and that is stated in the FARs. I doubt VFR traffic
is going to get a landing clearance while still outside the Class B, and I'm
hard-pressed to think of another one that would be applicable to VFR
traffic.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

What other clearance would VFR traffic get that would allow them to enter
the Class B airspace? I'm drawing a blank at the moment.

I agree that the specific phraseology is not required. But *some* kind of
clearance is required, and that is stated in the FARs. I doubt VFR
traffic is going to get a landing clearance while still outside the Class
B, and I'm hard-pressed to think of another one that would be applicable
to VFR traffic.


How about "cleared for takeoff"? The regulation states, " The operator must
receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility having jurisdiction for that
area before operating an aircraft in that area." If you're departing VFR
from the core airport in a Class B surface area wouldn't a takeoff clearance
meet the letter of the law?

Let's say you're doing practice instrument approaches under VFR near a
Class
B boundary, and the approach procedure requires you to enter Class B
airspace.
Wouldn't clearance for the approach meet the letter of the law?

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

How about "cleared for takeoff"? The regulation states, " The operator must
receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility having jurisdiction for that
area before operating an aircraft in that area." If you're departing VFR
from the core airport in a Class B surface area wouldn't a takeoff clearance
meet the letter of the law?

You would think, but ATC here always issues "Cleared into the class
Bravo via fly runway heading..." just as if they were issuing an IFR
clearance.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
hlink.net...
How about "cleared for takeoff"? The regulation states, " The operator
must receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility having jurisdiction
for that area before operating an aircraft in that area." If you're
departing VFR from the core airport in a Class B surface area wouldn't a
takeoff clearance meet the letter of the law?

Sure, that seems like a good example. Possibly the only one.

Let's say you're doing practice instrument approaches under VFR near a
Class B boundary, and the approach procedure requires you to enter Class B
airspace. Wouldn't clearance for the approach meet the letter of the law?

If the aircraft isn't flying IFR, I don't see how ATC *can* give a
"clearance for the approach". As far as I know, there's no mechanism under
VFR to receive an instrument clearance. I realize that a controller may
offer IFR-like handling to facilitate the practice approach, but just as the
approach isn't a real instrument approach, neither is the handling a real
clearance.

Is there some regulation that I'm missing that allows an actual approach
clearance to be granted to an aircraft operating under VFR?

Pete

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

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

You weren't. Unless you hear "cleared into the class bravo", you're not.


Odd, then, that that phrase appears nowhere in Part 91.

You're picking nits, as you always do.

The wording in part 91 is "The operator must receive an ATC clearance from
the ATC facility having jurisdiction for that area before operating an
aircraft in that area."

It does not say that you must hear the particular phrase "cleared into the
class bravo". It just says that you need "an ATC clearance". That could
be an IFR clearance ("cleared to the Gopher VOR 150 radial 12 DME fix, via
radar vectors, maintain 3000"). In response to a request for a class bravo
clearance, it could be "Cleared as requested". The real magic word is
"cleared".

The most common thing a controller will say is "cleared into the class
bravo". That's what you want to hear. Variations on the theme are OK, as
long as they include the word "cleared".

What's not OK are things like "approved as requested", "proceed", or the
wonderfully vague "You'll be OK" that the OP reports having heard. Nowhere
in Part 91 does it say, "The operator must be told that they'll be OK".

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

You're picking nits, as you always do.


You say that like there's something wrong with it.



The wording in part 91 is "The operator must receive an ATC clearance from
the ATC facility having jurisdiction for that area before operating an
aircraft in that area."

It does not say that you must hear the particular phrase "cleared into the
class bravo". It just says that you need "an ATC clearance". That could
be an IFR clearance ("cleared to the Gopher VOR 150 radial 12 DME fix, via
radar vectors, maintain 3000"). In response to a request for a class
bravo clearance, it could be "Cleared as requested". The real magic word
is
"cleared".

The most common thing a controller will say is "cleared into the class
bravo". That's what you want to hear. Variations on the theme are OK, as
long as they include the word "cleared".

What's not OK are things like "approved as requested", "proceed", or the
wonderfully vague "You'll be OK" that the OP reports having heard.
Nowhere in Part 91 does it say, "The operator must be told that they'll be
OK".


Correct.

Good advice here and from all... By the way, when I said "permission"
to enter class B as opposed to a "clearance", what I meant to convey
was not that permission=clearance but rather that permission most
emphatically is NOT a clearance, i.e., not accompanied by the magic
words. You have a good idea there, when getting "remain at 3000 and
you'll be fine" I could have said "understand cleared into class B" but
I at least could have said "does that mean you are clearing me into
class B"?

None of this is post 9-11 issues though... I encounter similar
scenarios all the time close in to class B both before and after 9-11,
namely a reluctance to give a clearance into class B for sightseeing,
but have yet to get denied without polite begging, and the request is
granted +/- special requests such as "remain northeast of MSP runway
12" etc.

Mitch

Roy Smith wrote:
"mvgossman" wrote:
1. Can Approach grant clearance to go thru intervening class D when
VFR? I am accustomed to this as a matter of routine when IFR but I do
not know about VFR.

Yes, it's standard practice, especially near the ceiling of the CDAS.

2. Why was I given in effect "permission", but no clearance, to enter
class Bravo at 3000, therefore permission to bust class Bravo and
potentially get cited?

You weren't. Unless you hear "cleared into the class bravo", you're not.
If the conversation really went on as you described it, I'd say the
controller was guilty of using some sloppy language. He should have either
said, "cleared into the class bravo", or "unable class bravo clearance".
One way or the other, you would have known exactly what he meant. I
haven't the foggiest idea what "You'll be OK" means.

Whenever in doubt, especially with a controller who is not being clear, the
way you can force a clear answer is to say, "Confirm Cessna 12345 is
cleared into the class bravo at 3000", or perhaps even, "Understand Cessna
12345 is cleared into the class bravo at 3000". That should get you an
unambiguous response.

Is it conceivable that a controller would be so sadistic as to send a
place through Bravo without clearance and then bust them?

Sadistic, no. But, I could certainly see a mis-understanding leading to a
bust. That's why the AIM has a glossary of specific words that have
specific meanings. If you ad-lib, you get mis-understandings.

3. Is there a better way for this trip that you can think of? For
instance, is it reasonable to file IFR and then, along the way, spring
a request to circle the area of interest, under the implied clearance
to be in Bravo and Class D afforded by the IFR flight plan?

There is no "implied" clearance. If you are on an IFR clearance, you've
got a clearance. Nothing implied about it.

Could you file IFR? Sure you could. But, if you wanted to do that, don't
spring any surprises on the controller. File an IFR flight plan from your
home base to your home base. For the route, put in a single waypoint, a
radial/DME from the nearest VOR. Put a comment that explains what you're
doing. I just did one in DUATS and it looks like this:

1 Type of flight plan: IFR
2 Aircraft tail number: N9003S
3 Acft type/special equip: BE35/G
4 True airspeed: 130
5 Departure point: HPN
6 Departure time: (UTC) Tue Oct 24 16:00
7 Altitude: 25
8 Route of flight: CMK270010/D00+20
9 Destination: HPN
10 Estimated time enroute: 0040
11 Remarks: SIGHTSEEING OVER FAIRGROUNDS
12 Fuel on board: 0400
13 Alternate destination(s):

I'm assuming 'the fairgrounds' would be a locally familiar landmark to ATC.

But, in all honesty, that's probably more trouble than it's worth. Just
call up VFR, tell the controller exactly what you want to do, and make sure
you get an unambiguous statement from him if you're cleared into the CBAS
or not.

If you're taking off from a towered airport, as CD to get you the class
bravo clearance before you take off. Even if they can't get you the
clearance per-se, they can generate a strip for you, get you a squawk, and
then Tracon will be expecting your handoff. Once you get in contact with
the first approach controller, he's the guy to tell what you want to do, "I
want to proceed direct to the Gopher 150 radial, 12 DME, and orbit at 3000
in that vicinity for 20 minutes".

mvgossman wrote:


1. Can Approach grant clearance to go thru intervening class D when
VFR? I am accustomed to this as a matter of routine when IFR but I do
not know about VFR.

Yes, that's their job. They are required to do that.



2. Why was I given in effect "permission", but no clearance, to enter
class Bravo at 3000, therefore permission to bust class Bravo and
potentially get cited? Is it conceivable that a controller would be so
sadistic as to send a place through Bravo without clearance and then
bust them?

You were right to keep pestering them.



3. Is there a better way for this trip that you can think of? For
instance, is it reasonable to file IFR and then, along the way, spring
a request to circle the area of interest, under the implied clearance
to be in Bravo and Class D afforded by the IFR flight plan?

VFR is better.