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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Canadian class C = USA class B?
Does anyone here know if Canada's class C is equivalent to the USA's class
B? A Canadian has told me this is so and that the USA does not follow ICAO convention. Is this true? Clyde Torres |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Clyde Torres" wrote in
: Does anyone here know if Canada's class C is equivalent to the USA's class B? A Canadian has told me this is so and that the USA does not follow ICAO convention. Is this true? Clyde Torres It is true. The Canadian class C requires a clearance to enter, just like the US class B. They also have a 30NM mode C veil. They are depicted as a class B (blue lines) on the US sectional charts, although the airport surface areas are shown as a class D. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Clyde Torres" wrote in message
... Does anyone here know if Canada's class C is equivalent to the USA's class B? A Canadian has told me this is so and that the USA does not follow ICAO convention. Is this true? The class of airspace tells you what separation is provided by ATC. In class B, all flights are separated. In class C, IFR flights are separated from everything else, but VFR flights are not separated from each other. This distinction is part of the ICAO classification scheme and is the same the world over. Where the US differs from ICAO (and the rest of the world) is in allowing VFR flights to operate in class C and D airspace without an explicit clearance, replacing this with a requirement for two-way comms. From an operational point of view I've never really understood the purpose of the distinction. The pilot is required to obey ATC instructions in class C just as in class B. Julian Scarfe |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Julian Scarfe" wrote in message
... [...] Where the US differs from ICAO (and the rest of the world) is in allowing VFR flights to operate in class C and D airspace without an explicit clearance, replacing this with a requirement for two-way comms. From an operational point of view I've never really understood the purpose of the distinction. The "purpose" is simply that those were the requirements of the airspace in the US that became Class C and D (Airport Radar Service Areas and Airport Traffic Areas, respectively). The airspace "reclassification" was simpler to do by not changing the requirements (not the mention easier to "sell" to American pilots, most of whom would reject an increase in regulation just for the sake of "being like the rest of the world"). Pete |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Clyde Torres" wrote in message ... Does anyone here know if Canada's class C is equivalent to the USA's class B? A Canadian has told me this is so and that the USA does not follow ICAO convention. Is this true? Clyde Torres As I read it, VFR in Canadian class C requires 1 Statute mile horizontal, and 500 feet vertical clearance from cloud, whereas USA class B is simply "clear of cloud"... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Julian Scarfe" wrote in message ... The class of airspace tells you what separation is provided by ATC. In class B, all flights are separated. In class C, IFR flights are separated from everything else, but VFR flights are not separated from each other. This distinction is part of the ICAO classification scheme and is the same the world over. Where the US differs from ICAO (and the rest of the world) is in allowing VFR flights to operate in class C and D airspace without an explicit clearance, replacing this with a requirement for two-way comms. From an operational point of view I've never really understood the purpose of the distinction. The pilot is required to obey ATC instructions in class C just as in class B. The US should conform to the ICAO standard in requiring a clearance for VFR operations in Class C airspace as VFR aircraft are provided separation. A clearance and separation go hand-in-hand. The ICAO standard should not require a clearance for VFR operations in Class D airspace as VFR aircraft are not separated. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:
The US should conform to the ICAO standard in requiring a clearance for VFR operations in Class C airspace as VFR aircraft are provided separation. A clearance and separation go hand-in-hand. The ICAO standard should not require a clearance for VFR operations in Class D airspace as VFR aircraft are not separated. I operate out of an airport which is Class D, cut out of a class C terminal area, with the only movement area being the runway. The tower we call is a couple of miles away centered in a Class C airport. Every time I call them (and I only have to call them to get instructions for the Delta airspace underlying their Charlie), I get a "remain clear of Charlie airspace" instruction. The end result is the same as the ICAO standard, isn't it, since U.S. pilots have to obey traffic control in Charlie airspace? Rob |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Rob Perkins" wrote in message ... I operate out of an airport which is Class D, cut out of a class C terminal area, with the only movement area being the runway. The tower we call is a couple of miles away centered in a Class C airport. Pearson Field? What do you mean by "the only movement area being the runway"? "Movement area" means the runways, taxiways, and other areas that are used for taxiing, takeoff, and landing of aircraft, other than loading ramps and parking areas. "Nonmovement area" means the area not under ATC control. At untowered airports the term "nonmovement area" is meaningless since ATC has no control over any surface. Every time I call them (and I only have to call them to get instructions for the Delta airspace underlying their Charlie), I get a "remain clear of Charlie airspace" instruction. The end result is the same as the ICAO standard, isn't it, since U.S. pilots have to obey traffic control in Charlie airspace? The end result is to require VFR aircraft with radios to call the tower and to hinder aircraft without radios. A Class D surface area without a towered airport serves no useful purpose. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Negative XPDR - under the outer ring of Class C | bcjames | Piloting | 8 | August 30th 04 11:49 PM |
Must the PLANE be IFR-equipped to fly over17,500? | john smith | Home Built | 11 | August 27th 04 02:29 AM |
Overlapping class C & D | Andrew Sarangan | Piloting | 14 | May 6th 04 04:08 AM |
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons | Curtl33 | General Aviation | 7 | January 9th 04 11:35 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |