Q about lost comms on weird clearance

I normally fly out of Rochester NY, which is towered and class C. And 99%
of the time my clearance route is "Vectors as filed". But yesterday I had
to stop off at Batavia to pick up something, and then continue on to
Goderich Ontario. Since it's just easier to be on an IFR flight plan when
crossing the border, I filed from Batavia (Genesee County). When I called
on the RCO to pick up my clearance, instead of what I expected, I got
"Cleared to Geneseo VOR, via direct, climb to 4,000 expect 6,000 one zero
minutes after departure". There was something in there about getting my
filed route later, but I didn't catch the exact wording. The controller
helpfully explained later that they do it that way to head you back
towards their airspace so they can get you radar identified before sending
you towards Buffalo, since Batavia is almost right on the border between
Rochester and Buffalo's airspace. And sure enough, as soon as I got to
pattern altitude and called Rochester, he asked me to ident, and when I
did he gave me the clearance to Goderich "As filed", so it's not like I
went well out of my way.

I think if I ever do that again, and it's good VFR conditions, I'll file
from Buffalo VOR and pick up my clearance in the air on the way there.

But I'm curious about what would have happened if I'd lost contact on the
way to GEE and it had been real IFR. Geneseo VOR was my clearance limit,
so what would I do if I couldn't go back to Rochester VFR? Assume I would
have got my further clearance at GEE, so after I got there squawk 7600 and
head off to Goderich? Hope that my transponder was still working and head
back to Rochester to do the ILS?

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"I love the smell of burning components in the morning.
Smells like victory." (The ******* Operator From Hell)

I teach to do what is expected if you can. Either do what they tell you to
expect, ie, leave your clearance fix at the expect further clearance time,
or do what you've told them to expect ( your flight plan route) If you'd
have lost radio com once reaching your clearence limit (the VOR), squawk
7600 and then begin the rest of your route. You mentioned that he said
something about getting your filed route later. That's what I'd do while
taking into account all of the altitude requirements.
--
Jim Burns III

Remove "nospam" to reply


"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
I normally fly out of Rochester NY, which is towered and class C. And 99%
of the time my clearance route is "Vectors as filed". But yesterday I had
to stop off at Batavia to pick up something, and then continue on to
Goderich Ontario. Since it's just easier to be on an IFR flight plan when
crossing the border, I filed from Batavia (Genesee County). When I called
on the RCO to pick up my clearance, instead of what I expected, I got
"Cleared to Geneseo VOR, via direct, climb to 4,000 expect 6,000 one zero
minutes after departure". There was something in there about getting my
filed route later, but I didn't catch the exact wording. The controller
helpfully explained later that they do it that way to head you back
towards their airspace so they can get you radar identified before sending
you towards Buffalo, since Batavia is almost right on the border between
Rochester and Buffalo's airspace. And sure enough, as soon as I got to
pattern altitude and called Rochester, he asked me to ident, and when I
did he gave me the clearance to Goderich "As filed", so it's not like I
went well out of my way.

I think if I ever do that again, and it's good VFR conditions, I'll file
from Buffalo VOR and pick up my clearance in the air on the way there.

But I'm curious about what would have happened if I'd lost contact on the
way to GEE and it had been real IFR. Geneseo VOR was my clearance limit,
so what would I do if I couldn't go back to Rochester VFR? Assume I would
have got my further clearance at GEE, so after I got there squawk 7600 and
head off to Goderich? Hope that my transponder was still working and head
back to Rochester to do the ILS?

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"I love the smell of burning components in the morning.
Smells like victory." (The ******* Operator From Hell)

(Paul Tomblin) wrote:
"Cleared to Geneseo VOR, via direct, climb to 4,000 expect 6,000 one zero
minutes after departure". There was something in there about getting my
filed route later, but I didn't catch the exact wording.

I'm guessing he said something to the effect of "expect filed route".
Another possibility is "expect further clearance at XXXX". Given the
information you supplied, it's a coin toss which :-)

But I'm curious about what would have happened if I'd lost contact on the
way to GEE and it had been real IFR.

You would have whipped out your laptop, fired up a web browser, and gone
to

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/c...4cfr91_00.html,

where you would have read:

91.185 *IFR operations: Two-way radio communications failure.
[...]
(c)(3) Leave clearance limit.
[...]
(ii) If the clearance limit is not a fix from which an approach begins, leave
the clearance limit at the expect-further-clearance time if one has been
received, or if none has been received, upon arrival over the clearance
limit, and proceed to a fix from which an approach begins and commence
descent or descent and approach as close as possible to the estimated time of
arrival as calculated from the filed or amended (with ATC) estimated time en
route.

Next, you would have slapped yourself for not paying more attention to
your original clearance and take a guess at whether you had a EFC time
or not, and if you did, what it was. For the moment, let's assume what
the controller said was "Expect filed route after GEE". If so, assuming
your filed route included GEE, you would have flown your cleared route,
climbing to 6000 10 minutes after you took off.

The interesting question is what you do when you get to your
destination. Do you hold until your ETA, or do you just go ahead and
fly the aporoach and land ASAP, as has been espoused so often on this
newsgroup.

What makes it interesting in my mind is twofold: 1) I have no idea if
Goderich is in an area of radar coverage, and 2) I have little
experience flying in Canada. I think I've got a good feel for how ATC
works in the US, and feel comfortable exercising my PIC authority to
play fast and loose with the last sentence of 91.185(c)(3)(ii). I can
only assume that 91.185 is basicly an echo of ICAO procedures and the
rules in Canada are the essentially the same, but I'd personally be more
inclined to play a literal interpretation in Canadian airspace.





Geneseo VOR was my clearance limit,
so what would I do if I couldn't go back to Rochester VFR? Assume I would
have got my further clearance at GEE, so after I got there squawk 7600 and
head off to Goderich? Hope that my transponder was still working and head
back to Rochester to do the ILS?

In a previous article, Roy Smith said:
(Paul Tomblin) wrote:
"Cleared to Geneseo VOR, via direct, climb to 4,000 expect 6,000 one zero
minutes after departure". There was something in there about getting my
filed route later, but I didn't catch the exact wording.

I'm guessing he said something to the effect of "expect filed route".
Another possibility is "expect further clearance at XXXX". Given the
information you supplied, it's a coin toss which :-)

No, I'm pretty sure there wasn't an EFC.

or not, and if you did, what it was. For the moment, let's assume what
the controller said was "Expect filed route after GEE". If so, assuming
your filed route included GEE, you would have flown your cleared route,
climbing to 6000 10 minutes after you took off.

My filed route didn't include GEE, but I'd filed "Direct BUF v84 YXU ...",
so I guess I would have flown the airway that connects GEE to BUF.

What makes it interesting in my mind is twofold: 1) I have no idea if
Goderich is in an area of radar coverage, and 2) I have little

It wasn't. As a matter of fact, the controller turned me loose about 20
minutes before I got to Goderich because his radio repeater near there
wasn't working. Which is about where I entered IMC - kind of strange to
be out of contact with radar, radio and the horizon all at once.

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Heaven has all the lusers, a generous supply of larts -
and no PHBs anywhere in sight.
-- The BOFH Heaven, according to Suresh

In article ,
(Paul Tomblin) wrote:
My filed route didn't include GEE, but I'd filed "Direct BUF v84 YXU ...",
so I guess I would have flown the airway that connects GEE to BUF.

Seems like a reasonable plan. Going direct BUF would be more in tune
with the letter of how the rule is written, though, since that's what
you filed and were told to expect. On the other hand, in a lost comm
situation, there's a good argument to be made for staying on airways,
since they guarantee nav signal reception and terrain clearance. On the
third hand, if you've got GPS, and are above the OROCA, going direct
seems like the right thing to do.

kind of strange to be out of contact with radar, radio and the
horizon all at once.

Why? Radar and radio contact with ATC are just conveniences. Neither
is necessary to fly the airplane.

In a previous article, Roy Smith said:
In article ,
(Paul Tomblin) wrote:
My filed route didn't include GEE, but I'd filed "Direct BUF v84 YXU ...",
so I guess I would have flown the airway that connects GEE to BUF.

Seems like a reasonable plan. Going direct BUF would be more in tune

If I'm at GEE, "direct BUF" and "follow the airway between them" is the
same thing.

kind of strange to be out of contact with radar, radio and the
horizon all at once.

Why? Radar and radio contact with ATC are just conveniences. Neither
is necessary to fly the airplane.

Hey, I said it was strange (as in "unfamiliar"), not stressful or scary.

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Your mouse has moved. Windows NT must be restarted for the change to
take effect. Reboot now? [ OK ]

Paul Tomblin wrote:

No, I'm pretty sure there wasn't an EFC.

So, in the future, would it be valuable to expect an EFC and ask for
one if you don't receive it? (A sincere question from a low-time IFR
pilot G)

--
Peter







----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

So, in the future, would it be valuable to expect an EFC and ask for
one if you don't receive it? (A sincere question from a low-time IFR
pilot G)


An EFC does not have to be issued if no delay is expected.

When given a clearance to a point enroute that is not your destination you
should also receive an EFC - just in case of lost comms - and ask for one if
not provided.
I doubt this would only be a Canadian procedure.
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

So, in the future, would it be valuable to expect an EFC and ask for
one if you don't receive it? (A sincere question from a low-time IFR
pilot G)


An EFC does not have to be issued if no delay is expected.

"Ross" wrote in message
ble.rogers.com...

When given a clearance to a point enroute that is not your destination you
should also receive an EFC - just in case of lost comms - and ask for one
if not provided.
I doubt this would only be a Canadian procedure.


FAA Order 7110.65N Air Traffic Control

Chapter 4. IFR

Section 6. Holding Aircraft

4-6-1. CLEARANCE TO HOLDING FIX

Consider operational factors such as length of delay, holding airspace
limitations, navigational aids, altitude, meteorological conditions when
necessary to clear an aircraft to a fix other than the destination airport.
Issue the following:

a. Clearance limit (if any part of the route beyond a clearance
limit differs from the last routing cleared, issue the route the pilot can
expect beyond the clearance limit).

PHRASEOLOGY-
EXPECT FURTHER CLEARANCE VIA (routing).

EXAMPLE-
"Expect further clearance via direct Stillwater V-O-R, Victor Two
Twenty-Six Snapy intersection, direct Newark."

b. Holding instructions.

1. Holding instructions may be eliminated when you inform the
pilot that no delay is expected.

2. When the pattern is charted, you may omit all holding
instructions except the charted holding direction and the statement "as
published." Always issue complete holding instructions when the pilot
requests them.

NOTE-
The most generally used holding patterns are depicted on U.S.
Government or commercially produced low/high altitude en route, area, and
STAR Charts.

PHRASEOLOGY-
CLEARED TO (fix), HOLD (direction), AS PUBLISHED,

or

CLEARED TO (fix), NO DELAY EXPECTED.

c. EFC. Do not specify this item if no delay is expected.

1. When additional holding is expected at any other fix in your
facility's area, state the fix and your best estimate of the additional
delay. When more than one fix is involved, state the total additional en
route delay (omit specific fixes).

NOTE-
Additional delay information is not used to determine pilot action
in the event of two-way communications failure. Pilots are expected to
predicate their actions solely on the provisions of 14 CFR Section 91.185.

PHRASEOLOGY-
EXPECT FURTHER CLEARANCE (time),

and if required,

ANTICIPATE ADDITIONAL (time in minutes/hours) MINUTE/HOUR DELAY AT
(fix),

or

ANTICIPATE ADDITIONAL (time in minutes/hours) MINUTE/HOUR EN ROUTE
DELAY.

EXAMPLE-
1. "Expect further clearance one niner two zero, anticipate
additional three zero minute delay at Sweet."

2. "Expect further clearance one five one zero, anticipate
additional three zero minute en route delay."

2. When additional holding is expected in an approach control
area, state the total additional terminal delay.

PHRASEOLOGY-
EXPECT FURTHER CLEARANCE (time),

and if required,

ANTICIPATE ADDITIONAL (time in minutes/hours) MINUTE/HOUR TERMINAL
DELAY.

3. TERMINAL. When terminal delays exist or are expected, inform
the appropriate center or approach control facility so that the information
can be forwarded to arrival aircraft.

4. When delay is expected, issue items in subparas a and b at
least 5 minutes before the aircraft is estimated to reach the clearance
limit. If the traffic situation requires holding an aircraft that is less
than 5 minutes from the holding fix, issue these items immediately.

NOTE-
1. The AIM indicates that pilots should start speed reduction when
3 minutes or less from the holding fix. The additional 2 minutes contained
in the 5-minute requirement are necessary to compensate for different
pilot/controller ETAS at the holding fix, minor differences in clock times,
and provision for sufficient planning and reaction times.

2. When holding is necessary, the phrase "delay indefinite" should
be used when an accurate estimate of the delay time and the reason for the
delay cannot immediately be determined; i.e., disabled aircraft on the
runway, terminal or center sector saturation, weather below landing
minimums, etc. In any event, every attempt should be made to provide the
pilot with the best possible estimate of his/her delay time and the reason
for the delay. Controllers/supervisors should consult, as appropriate, with
personnel (other sectors, weather forecasters, the airport management, other
facilities, etc.) who can best provide this information.

PHRASEOLOGY-
DELAY INDEFINITE, (reason if known), EXPECT FURTHER CLEARANCE
(time). (After determining the reason for the delay, advise the pilot as
soon as possible.)

EXAMPLE-
"Cleared to Drewe, hold west, as published, expect further
clearance via direct Sidney V-O-R one three one five, anticipate additional
two zero minute delay at Woody."

"Cleared to Aston, hold west on Victor two twenty-five, seven mile
leg, left turns, expect further clearance one niner two zero, anticipate
additional one five minute terminal delay."

"Cleared to Wayne, no delay expected."

"Cleared to Wally, hold north, as published, delay indefinite,
snow removal in progress, expect further clearance one one three zero."