Unclear Clearance

OK, just to distract you guys from "IFR with a VFR GPS" ---

Flying into Grand Marais MN last week (KCKC) I was out maybe
30 miles at 7000 and got "Cleared for the approach, maintain
4000 until established. Contact advisory ... "

The reason for the early clearance was, I think, that I was
at the edge of Center's radar and comm coverage. (Grand
Marais is near the Canadian border on the north shore of
Lake Superior. There was nobody around.)

But I really didn't want to fly that last 30 miles at 4000
as there were clouds about there and maybe a little ice. I
wanted to stay at 7. So I queried: "Center, that 4000 was
pilot's discretion, right?" and got a "Right."

Did I need to ask? Should I have assumed pilot's
discretion? She did not tell me to descend, just gave me
the altitude limit.

Mitty wrote:

snip
Did I need to ask?

If you are unclear, then you were right to ask. However, if your example
were complete, then you were allowed to descend.

Should I have assumed pilot's
discretion? She did not tell me to descend, just gave me
the altitude limit.

Assuming there was no other restriction ("upon reaching {IAF}" or "maintain
four thousand until established"), then you are cleared to descend as per
the approach plate when the controller states "cleared for the approach."


--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Mitty" wrote in message
...

Flying into Grand Marais MN last week (KCKC) I was out maybe 30 miles at
7000 and got "Cleared for the approach, maintain 4000 until established.
Contact advisory ... "

The reason for the early clearance was, I think, that I was at the edge of
Center's radar and comm coverage. (Grand Marais is near the Canadian
border on the north shore of Lake Superior. There was nobody around.)


I suspect it was solely due to communications. What was your assigned
route?

On 11/15/2005 5:37 PM, Steven P. McNicoll wrote the following:
"Mitty" wrote in message
...

Flying into Grand Marais MN last week (KCKC) I was out maybe 30 miles at
7000 and got "Cleared for the approach, maintain 4000 until established.
Contact advisory ... "

The reason for the early clearance was, I think, that I was at the edge of
Center's radar and comm coverage. (Grand Marais is near the Canadian
border on the north shore of Lake Superior. There was nobody around.)



I suspect it was solely due to communications. What was your assigned
route?

Direct KCKC. And she was going to lose me, probably at
5000. Both comm and radar. But it was the altitude
assignment that was the question.

"Mitty" wrote in message
...

Direct KCKC.


Direct KCKC from where?



And she was going to lose me, probably at 5000. Both comm
and radar.


That may be, but it is only the loss of communications that is reason to
issue the clearance and have you over to CTAF before it happens.



But it was the altitude assignment that was the question.


It was bad phraseology, and possibly a bad clearance. It's not clear if the
controller meant for the descent to be discretionary or not.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

It was bad phraseology, and possibly a bad clearance. It's not clear if the
controller meant for the descent to be discretionary or not.

What was unclear about it? I'd never infer discretionary descent unless it was
explicitly stated by the controller. I'd say the clearance unambiguously
required vacating 7000 (before amendment).

Dave

"Dave Butler" wrote in message
news:1132150865.836980@sj-nntpcache-5...

What was unclear about it?


Well, the controller thought it was discretionary. That you and she
disagree tends to indicate it's not clear.



I'd never infer discretionary descent unless it was explicitly stated by
the controller.


The controller does not have to state "descend at pilot's discretion" in
order for the descent to be discretionary. A descent clearance with a
crossing restriction is a discretionary descent. A cruise clearance to an
airport without an IAP is a discretionary descent.



I'd say the clearance
unambiguously required vacating 7000 (before amendment).


What amendment? The pilot asked the controller to verify that the descent
was at pilot's discretion and the controller responded in the affirmative.

In article , Mitty
wrote:

OK, just to distract you guys from "IFR with a VFR GPS" ---

Flying into Grand Marais MN last week (KCKC) I was out maybe
30 miles at 7000 and got "Cleared for the approach, maintain
4000 until established. Contact advisory ... "

As worded, you were required to vacate 7000. No need to rush down, but you
can't just hang out at 7000 for another 30 miles either.

"Center, that 4000 was pilot's discretion, right?" and got a "Right."

Did I need to ask?

Yup, you did. You did the right thing by asking.

Should I have assumed pilot's discretion? She did not tell me to
descend, just gave me the altitude limit.

If you're at 7000 and you're told you maintain 4000, descending is pretty
much the only way to comply. She didn't give you an "altitude limit", she
have you an "altitude". If she had said, "maintain at or above 4000 until
established", then you could have stayed at 7000 as long as you wanted.
Same with "descend at pilot's discretion and maintain 4000". Or, "Cruise
7000".

If she had said, "maintain at or above 4000 until
established", then you could have stayed at 7000 as long as you wanted.

Could he climb above 7000 with such a clearance?

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:
If she had said, "maintain at or above 4000 until established", then
you could have stayed at 7000 as long as you wanted.


Could he climb above 7000 with such a clearance?

No.