Can GPS be *too* accurate? Do I need some XTE??

No, separation is not provided by ATC.




"Dan Girellini" wrote in message
...
== Peter R writes:

Bill Denton ) wrote:
And I don't know if this is a trick question, but if you are at 6000
(no
+500) wouldn't you be on an IFR flight plan, talking to ATC, and
receiving
traffic advisories?

In the US and outside of class B airspace, it is the pilot, not ATC,
who
is ultimately responsible for IFR/VFR traffic separation. A VFR
traffic
advisory to an IFR aircraft is a courtesy offered by ATC; it is not a
guarantee.

I thought Class C services included IFR/VFR separation. Is that old/wrong
information?

dan.

--
PGP key at http://www.longhands.org/drg-pgp.txt Key Id:0x507D93DF

Bill Denton ) wrote:

No, the orignal poster presented the scenario. I simply pointed out that a
6000 feet he would be on an IFR flight plan, talking to ATC, and receiving
traffic from ATC.

6,000 feet guarantees an IFR flight plan? Really? You had better
notify the FAA about all those VFR pilots who fly around Denver, CO.

You introduced the passage and misinterpreted it. I provided a correct
interpretation.

OK, Bill, you win. Your string of non sequiturs throughout this portion
of the thread has worn me out. I have no idea what passage you think I
introduced, as in reality I didn't introduce any passage in this thread,
but nonetheless, you win. I didn't think you were a troll, since you
are a regular in this and other aviation forums, but your self-admitted
lack of any real aviation experience combined with your talent to post
with such authority and conviction now make me wonder.

--
Peter

Dan Girellini ) wrote:

I thought Class C services included IFR/VFR separation. Is that old/wrong
information?

Yes, in the US VFR aircraft will receive separation services in class C
airspace, but is this the same level of service as the guaranteed
separation offered by class B? It is my understanding that the two are
not equivalent.

Hopefully one of the controllers who frequents this group will provide a
better explanation.



--
Peter

== Bill Denton writes:

"Dan Girellini" wrote in message

I thought Class C services included IFR/VFR separation. Is that old/wrong
information?

No, separation is not provided by ATC.

Can you explain how I'm misinterpreting this from the AIM?

[3-2-4] Class C Airspace
....
e. Aircraft Separation. Separation is provided within the Class C airspace
and the outer area after two-way radio communications and radar contact
are established. VFR aircraft are separated from IFR aircraft within the
Class C airspace by any of the following:

1. Visual separation.

2. 500 feet vertical; except when operating beneath a heavy jet.

3. Target resolution.

--
PGP key at http://www.longhands.org/drg-pgp.txt Key Id:0x507D93DF

Dan Girellini ) wrote:

I thought Class C services included IFR/VFR separation. Is that old/wrong
information?

Yes, in the US VFR aircraft will receive separation services in class C
airspace, but is this the same level of service as the guaranteed
separation offered by class B? It is my understanding that the two are
not equivalent.

Hopefully one of the controllers who frequents this group will provide a
better explanation.



--
Peter

-- " " == Peter R writes:

Dan Girellini ) wrote:
I thought Class C services included IFR/VFR separation. Is that old/wrong
information?

Yes, in the US VFR aircraft will receive separation services in class C
airspace, but is this the same level of service as the guaranteed
separation offered by class B? It is my understanding that the two are not
equivalent.

What's in my Jepp text and afaict is confirmed in the AIM is that class C
provides only vfr/ifr separation whereas class B provides all acft separation
(ie vfr/vfr).

dan.

--
PGP key at http://www.longhands.org/drg-pgp.txt Key Id:0x507D93DF

Bill Denton wrote:

I am not sure what your point about VFR-on-top is, but as a reminder to
you, in the US VFR-on-TOP is a specific IFR clearance that must be
requested.


And if you are granted that clearance, you will be flying under what are
essentially Visual Flight Rules, you will be allowed to deviate from your
as-filed flight plan,

No. You must follow the flight plan just as if you were regular IFR.
Slight deviations for cloud clearance are OK. If you want a different
route then you must ask for and receive a new clearance.

Bill Denton wrote:

No, separation is not provided by ATC.

ATC provides separation between IFR and VFR aircraft within the class C.

Peter R. wrote:

Dan Girellini ) wrote:


I thought Class C services included IFR/VFR separation. Is that old/wrong
information?


Yes, in the US VFR aircraft will receive separation services in class C
airspace, but is this the same level of service as the guaranteed
separation offered by class B? It is my understanding that the two are
not equivalent.


Well, it's not 1000 or 3 but you won't hit 'em.

An even number of hundreds of feet is reserved for IFR flights (5,000 or
6,000). VFR flights must be +500 (5,500 or 6,000). If you see someone
breaking the rules by flying VFR at 6,000 feet you should report them; it's
your safety that's at stake.

This is not a matter of winning an losing, it's a matter of learning the
rules and assuring everyone's safety.

And it's not a matter of aviation experience or the lack thereof. Very few
ATC controllers actually know how to fly. But we all read the same AIM, and
while it can sometimes be confusing, if you look at things in the larger
context you can usually make sense out of it. And if that fails, you can
always phone or email your local FSDO with any questions (which I frequently
do), I've always gotten very prompt answers.

As far as my "talent to post with such authority and conviction" goes, I've
been a professional writer most of my life; that's the way professional
writers write. But just because I write with "authority and conviction"
doesn't mean I'm always right. And I've been married and divorced four
times; I had more arguments than any man needs. I'm certainly not looking
for another. I'm here to learn and contribute what I can; that's all.




"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Bill Denton ) wrote:

No, the orignal poster presented the scenario. I simply pointed out that
a
6000 feet he would be on an IFR flight plan, talking to ATC, and
receiving
traffic from ATC.

6,000 feet guarantees an IFR flight plan? Really? You had better
notify the FAA about all those VFR pilots who fly around Denver, CO.

You introduced the passage and misinterpreted it. I provided a correct
interpretation.

OK, Bill, you win. Your string of non sequiturs throughout this portion
of the thread has worn me out. I have no idea what passage you think I
introduced, as in reality I didn't introduce any passage in this thread,
but nonetheless, you win. I didn't think you were a troll, since you
are a regular in this and other aviation forums, but your self-admitted
lack of any real aviation experience combined with your talent to post
with such authority and conviction now make me wonder.

--
Peter