Question for the real pilots [Archive]

Larry Dighera

April 13th 07, 02:58 AM

On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 16:28:32 -0600, C Booth > wrote
in >:

>I was flying out of VGT last month (North Las Vegas) heading back to
>SLC in an Aztec after a great round of Golf. After getting VFR
>clearance from ground to MMM (Mormon Mesa Vortac) which is ENE of
>Vegas.

Ground Control doesn't issue other than taxi clearances to they?

>Cleared for takeoff and given a heading from the tower, then
>handed off to Nellis aproach.

Were you inside KLAS Class B airspace when you contacted Nellis
Approach?

>The controler gives me heading and asks
>intention and sounds like she has marbles in her mouth. I ask her to
>repeat instructions and finally get her instructions read back.

If she's vectoring you, I believe it is her responsibility to clear
your transitions through B, C and D terminal airspace. I'd have to
consult FAAO 7110.65R to be sure:
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/air_traffic_orders/media/7110.65R.pdf

>I am
>squawking a descreat code and continuing to follow instructions from
>Nellis getting vectored out of the way of inbound F-18's and even a
>B-2. All of a sudden out of the blue she calls me and asks me if I
>have class B clearance. I gulp hard a couple of times, in all the
>vectors and hand offs I realize that I have not received clearance...I
>fess up and say noooo. She says "Well, you're right smack in the
>middle of Class B airspace". That's it, no instructions. I say,
>"Well..., can I get clearance now, or do you want me to go somewhere?"

Perhaps she was a trainee and her trainer called the fact that she had
failed to specifically issue you Clearance into Bravo airspace.

>She gives me the clearance. Whew, first time that has ever happened
>to me. I am usually very careful not to bust airspace.

Sometimes Class Bravo clearance is implied, but it's always best if
you get it explicitly.

>Needless to
>say I was embarassed but in other instances where I have been vectored
>into Class B, such as in this instance, I have always been given the
>clearance. I know that it is my responsibility to get the clearance
>before flying into the airspace,

That's my understanding also.

>but if they are giving vectors to
>penetrate the airspace, are they at fault as well?

It's all in FAAO 7110.65R
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/air_traffic_orders/media/7110.65R.pdf

>Maybe I should
>file a NASA report just to be safe, what do you think?

I think it's always prudent to file a NASA form. Not only does it
usually save you from the ordeal of an enforcement action, but the
information you provide is used to make the NAS safer.

I believe the ATC tapes are available for ~15 days. You might phone
Nellis approach and arrange to discuss the incident with the
controller. She would normally have to file an FAA form for action to
be taken. She probably didn't do that, or you would have heard those
other little magic words, "Pleas phone ATC upon landing." At least
you'll get a chance to see what's up.

>Just thought an aviation based thread might be good for the group.

I couldn't agree more. Thanks.

>Cbooth
>SEL MEL Instrument

Kingfish

April 13th 07, 03:29 AM

On Apr 12, 5:28 pm, C Booth > wrote:

>> snip unfortunate airspace bust <<

What a coinky-dink... I did the same in my pal's Aztec a few years ago
flying back to CT from Reading, PA. I had a decent tailwind & GS was
over 200kts and was on with NY approach coming up on JFK. Right about
then I got that bad feeling that I just screwed up and realized I
never asked for a Bravo clearance. Oops. Nothing came of it, I
suspect, because I'm competant on the radio and that controller's
sector was pretty busy that day so he probably didn't have the time to
bust me. Whew. File that one away under "Stupid Pilot Tricks".

Luke Skywalker

April 13th 07, 03:38 AM

On Apr 12, 5:28 pm, C Booth > wrote:
> I was flying out of VGT last month (North Las Vegas) heading back to
> SLC in an Aztec after a great round of Golf. After getting VFR
> clearance from ground to MMM (Mormon Mesa Vortac) which is ENE of
> Vegas. Cleared for takeoff and given a heading from the tower, then
> handed off to Nellis aproach. The controler gives me heading and asks
> intention and sounds like she has marbles in her mouth. I ask her to
> repeat instructions and finally get her instructions read back. I am
> squawking a descreat code and continuing to follow instructions from
> Nellis getting vectored out of the way of inbound F-18's and even a
> B-2. All of a sudden out of the blue she calls me and asks me if I
> have class B clearance. I gulp hard a couple of times, in all the
> vectors and hand offs I realize that I have not received clearance...I
> fess up and say noooo. She says "Well, you're right smack in the
> middle of Class B airspace". That's it, no instructions. I say,
> "Well..., can I get clearance now, or do you want me to go somewhere?"
> She gives me the clearance. Whew, first time that has ever happened
> to me. I am usually very careful not to bust airspace. Needless to
> say I was embarassed but in other instances where I have been vectored
> into Class B, such as in this instance, I have always been given the
> clearance. I know that it is my responsibility to get the clearance
> before flying into the airspace, but if they are giving vectors to
> penetrate the airspace, are they at fault as well? Maybe I should
> file a NASA report just to be safe, what do you think?
>
> Just thought an aviation based thread might be good for the group.
>
> Cbooth
> SEL MEL Instrument

Hello

You should file a NASA report promptly. I doubt anything will come of
it, but a NASA report in any event will go into the data base on Class
Bravo incursions (inadvertant) and will work out to both the system
and other benefits (not to mention some possible ones for you).

I have read your post a few times...it has been so long since I flew
VFR out there but...a couple of questions come to mind if you are
interested in pursuing this.

My trick in dealing VFR with class B airspace is on the initial call
up to request "clearance through the Bravo" in ANY event if you even
think that you are going to come anywhere close to it. "Radar
contact" and "Clearance through the Bravo" seem the same but they are
not...particularly when you are not landing at the Bravo "surface"
airport.

I doubt anything will come of it because the controller made an
internal error (I believe I have asked some FSDO people about this and
have a name that will tell me on the record what the controller
"internal policies" are to perfunctory clear you through if they start
giving vectors) by giving and you accepting vectors and then
"discovering" that you were "smack dab" in the middle of the
airspace. This is true particularly on a "handoff" from a tower
controller.

A NASA report would be a good plan

Robert CFII/MEI ATP

TheSmokingGnu

April 13th 07, 03:45 AM

Larry Dighera wrote:
> Sometimes Class Bravo clearance is implied, but it's always best if
> you get it explicitly.

Erk. Class B clearance must always, always, always, always (always) be
given explicitly with "... cleared to enter the Class Bravo
airspace...". Any other usage isn't an implied clearance.

You can get implied clearance through C and D space if they use your
full callsign, but B is the big special 80,000 lbs. gorilla, and needs
full, explicit clearance.

As to the OP, technically speaking it was mostly your responsibility to
get the clearance, but both parties were really at fault, and no real
harm came because of it, so I wouldn't worry too terribly much.

TheSmokingGnu

Jose

April 13th 07, 04:18 AM

> Sometimes Class Bravo clearance is implied, but it's always best if
> you get it explicitly.

When, under VFR, is a class Bravo clearance implied, such that this
implied clearance can be relied on at an enforcement hearing?

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

C J Campbell[_1_]

April 13th 07, 04:45 AM

On 2007-04-12 15:28:32 -0700, C Booth > said:

> Maybe I should
> file a NASA report just to be safe, what do you think?

File the NASA report. These reports are very valuable in identifying
problem areas like this.

This sort of thing happens altogether too often at Las Vegas.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

Luke Skywalker

April 13th 07, 05:18 AM

On Apr 12, 10:18 pm, Jose > wrote:
> > Sometimes Class Bravo clearance is implied, but it's always best if
> > you get it explicitly.
>
> When, under VFR, is a class Bravo clearance implied, such that this
> implied clearance can be relied on at an enforcement hearing?
>
> Jose
> --
> Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

A Bravo clearance is NEVER implied VFR, it must always be stated.
However, this incident if it were to go to an enforcement hearing (and
I would be very very very surprised if it did) would generate a lot of
"unhappy conversation" on all sides. The Controller errored as well.

Lisa Nowak stands a better chance of being acquited then this has of
going to an enforcement situation in my view

Robert

Larry Dighera

April 13th 07, 10:30 AM

On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:45:43 -0700, TheSmokingGnu
> wrote in
>:

>
>Erk. Class B clearance must always, always, always, always (always) be
>given explicitly with "... cleared to enter the Class Bravo
>airspace...". Any other usage isn't an implied clearance.

Not that I disagree with you, but are you able to cite FAA regulations
or orders that support your allegation?

Larry Dighera

April 13th 07, 11:23 AM

On 12 Apr 2007 21:18:23 -0700, "Luke Skywalker"
> wrote in
om>:

>The Controller errored as well.

Can you cite the particular part(s) of FAAO 7110.65 that the
controller violated?
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/air_traffic_orders/media/7110.65R.pdf

Larry Dighera

April 13th 07, 11:29 AM

On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 03:18:52 GMT, Jose >
wrote in >:

>> Sometimes Class Bravo clearance is implied, but it's always best if
>> you get it explicitly.
>
>When, under VFR, is a class Bravo clearance implied, such that this
>implied clearance can be relied on at an enforcement hearing?
>

Perhaps 'implied' wasn't the best choice of words to use in this
situation.

Without knowing all the circumstances (such as LOAs, the position of
the aircraft at various times, etc.) surrounding this particular
incident, it's probably not possible to assert a definitive answer to
your question, and I don't pretend to be knowledgeable about _all_ the
regulations that address this issue.

I was hoping that I wouldn't have to do the work of searching FAAO
7110.65, but here's what I found:

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/air_traffic_orders/media/7110.65R.pdf
2-1-16. SURFACE AREAS
a. Coordinate with the appropriate nonapproach
control tower on an individual aircraft basis before
issuing a clearance which would require flight within
a surface area for which the tower has responsibility
unless otherwise specified in a letter of agreement.
REFERENCE-
FAAO 7210.3, Letters of Agreement, Para 4-3-1.
14 CFR Section 91.127, Operating on or in the Vicinity of an
Airport in
Class E Airspace.
P/CG Term- Surface Area.
b. Coordinate with the appropriate control tower
for transit authorization when you are providing radar
traffic advisory service to an aircraft that will enter
another facility’s airspace.
NOTE-
The pilot is not expected to obtain his/her own
authorization through each area when in contact with a
radar facility.
c. Transfer communications to the appropriate
facility, if required, prior to operation within a surface
area for which the tower has responsibility.
REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Radio Communications Transfer, Para 2-1-17.
FAAO 7110.65, Surface Area Restrictions, Para 3-1-11.
FAAO 7110.65, Application, Para 7-6-1.
14 CFR Section 91.129, Operations in Class D Airspace.

Section 9. Class B Service Area- Terminal

7-9-2. VFR AIRCRAFT IN CLASS B AIRSPACE
a. VFR aircraft must obtain an ATC clearance to
operate in Class B airspace.
REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Operational Requests, Para 2-1-18.
FAAO 7110.65, Airspace Classes, Para 2-4-22.
PHRASEOLOGY-
CLEARED THROUGH/TO ENTER/OUT OF BRAVO
AIRSPACE,

2-1-18. OPERATIONAL REQUESTS
Respond to a request from another controller, a pilot
or vehicle operator by one of the following verbal
means:
a. Restate the request in complete or abbreviated
terms followed by the word “APPROVED.” The
phraseology “APPROVED AS REQUESTED” may
be substituted in lieu of a lengthy readback.
PHRASEOLOGY-
(Requested operation) APPROVED.
or
APPROVED AS REQUESTED.
b. State restrictions followed by the word
“APPROVED.”
PHRASEOLOGY-
(Restriction and/or additional instructions, requested
operation) APPROVED.
c. State the word “UNABLE” and, time permitting,
a reason.
PHRASEOLOGY-
UNABLE (requested operation).
and when necessary,
(reason and/or additional instructions.)
d. State the words “STAND BY.”
NOTE-
“STAND BY” is not an approval or denial. The controller
acknowledges the request and will respond at a later time.
REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Traffic Advisories, Para 2-1-21.
FAAO 7110.65, Route or Altitude Amendments, Para 4-2-5.
FAAO 7110.65, Methods, Para 7-9-3.

5-4-5. TRANSFERRING CONTROLLER
HANDOFF
The transferring controller shall:
a. Complete a radar handoff prior to an aircraft’s
entering the airspace delegated to the receiving
controller.
REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Coordinate Use of Airspace, Para 2-1-14.
FAAO 7110.65, Control Transfer, Para 2-1-15.
FAAO 7110.65, Receiving Controller Handoff, Para 5-4-6.
b. Verbally obtain the receiving controller’s
approval prior to making any changes to an aircraft’s
flight path, altitude, or data block information while
the handoff is being initiated or after acceptance,
unless otherwise specified by a LOA or a facility
directive.
NOTE-
Those en route facilities using host software that provides
capability for passing interim altitude shall include the
specific operations and procedures for use of this
procedure in a LOA between the appropriate facilities.
c. Ensure that, prior to transferring communications:
1. Potential violations of adjacent airspace and
potential conflicts between aircraft in their own area
of jurisdiction are resolved.
2. Necessary coordination has been accomplished
with all controllers through whose area of
jurisdiction the aircraft will pass prior to entering the
receiving controller’s area of jurisdiction, except
when such coordination is the receiving controller’s
responsibility as stated in para 5-4-6, Receiving
Controller Handoff, and unless otherwise specified
by a LOA or a facility directive.
3. Restrictions issued to ensure separation are
passed to the receiving controller.
d. After transferring communications, continue to
comply with the requirements of subparas c1 and 2.
e. Comply with restrictions issued by the receiving
controller unless otherwise coordinated.
f. Comply with the provisions of para 2-1-17,
Radio Communications Transfer, subparas a and b.
To the extent possible, transfer communications
when the transfer of radar identification has been
accepted.
NOTE-
Before the ARTS/STARS “modify/quick look” function is
used to transfer radar identification, a facility directive
which specifies communication transfer points is required.
g. Advise the receiving controller of pertinent
information not contained in the data block or flight
progress strip unless covered in a LOA or facility
directive. Pertinent information includes:
1. Assigned heading.
2. Air speed restrictions.
3. Altitude information issued.
4. Observed track or deviation from the last
route clearance.
5. The beacon code if different from that
normally used or previously coordinated.
6. Any other pertinent information.
h. Ensure that the data block is associated with the
appropriate target.
i. Initiate verbal coordination to verify the position
of primary or nondiscrete targets when using the
automated handoff functions except for intrafacility
handoffs using single-sensor systems or multisensor
systems operating in a mosaic RDP mode.
j. Initiate verbal coordination before transferring
control of a track when “CST”, “FAIL”, “NONE”,
“NB”, “NX”, “IF”, or “NT” is displayed in the data
block.
k. Advise the receiving controller that radar
monitoring is required when the aircraft is on a direct
route initiated by ATC that exceeds usable NAVAID
distances.
l. Issue restrictions to the receiving controller
which are necessary to maintain separation from
other aircraft within your area of jurisdiction before
releasing control of the aircraft.
m. Consider the target being transferred as
identified on the receiving controller’s display when
the receiving controller acknowledges receipt
verbally or has accepted an automated handoff.
n. Accomplish the necessary coordination with
any intervening controllers whose area of jurisdiction
is affected by the receiving controller’s delay in the
climb or the descent of an aircraft through the vertical
limits of your area of jurisdiction when the receiving
controller advises you of that delay before accepting
the transfer of radar identification unless otherwise
specified by a LOA or a facility directive.
5-4-6. RECEIVING CONTROLLER HANDOFF
The receiving controller shall:
a. Ensure that the target position corresponds with
the position given by the transferring controller or
that there is an appropriate association between an
automated data block and the target being transferred
before accepting a handoff.
REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Coordinate Use of Airspace, Para 2-1-14.
FAAO 7110.65, Control Transfer, Para 2-1-15.
FAAO 7110.65, Transferring Controller Handoff, Para 5-4-5.
b. Issue restrictions that are needed for the aircraft
to enter your sector safely before accepting the
handoff.
c. Comply with restrictions issued by the initiating
controller unless otherwise coordinated.
d. Before you issue control instructions directly to
an aircraft that is within another controller’s area of
jurisdiction that will change that aircraft’s heading,
route, speed, altitude, or beacon code, ensure that
coordination has been accomplished with each of the
controllers listed below whose area of jurisdiction is
affected by those instructions unless otherwise
specified by a LOA or a facility directive:
NOTE-
Those en route facilities using host software that provides
capability for passing interim altitude shall include the
specific operations and procedures for use of this
procedure in a LOA between the appropriate facilities.
1. The controller within whose area of jurisdiction
the control instructions will be issued.
2. Any intervening controller(s) through whose
area of jurisdiction the aircraft will pass.
e. After accepting a handoff from another
controller, confirm the identity of primary target by
advising the aircraft of its position, and of a beacon
target by observing a code change, an “ident” reply,
or a “standby” squawk unless one of these was used
during handoff. These provisions do not apply at
those towers and GCAs which have been delegated
the responsibility for providing radar separation
within designated areas by the parent approach
control facility and the aircraft identification is
assured by sequencing or positioning prior to the
handoff.
REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Approach Separation Responsibility, Para 5-9-5.
f. When using appropriate equipment, consider a
discrete beacon target’s identity to be confirmed
when:
1. The data block associated with the target
being handed off indicates the computer assigned
discrete beacon code is being received, or
2. You observe the deletion of a discrete code
that was displayed in the data block, or
NOTE-
When the aircraft generated discrete beacon code does not
match the computer assigned beacon code, the code
generated will be displayed in the data block. When the
aircraft changes to the assigned discrete code, the code
disappears from the data block. In this instance, the
observance of code removal from the data block satisfies
confirmation requirements.
3. You observe the numeric display of a discrete
code that an aircraft has been instructed to squawk or
reports squawking.
g. Initiate verbal coordination prior to accepting
control of a track when “CST”, “NAT”, “NT”,
“NONE”, “NB”, “NX”, “OLD”, “OL”, “AMB”,
“AM”, or “TU” is displayed in the data block.
1. When an automated interfacility handoff
action is initiated and “AMB” or “AM” is displayed
in the full data block, advise the other facility that a
disparity exists between the position declared by their ...

5-4-10. PREARRANGED COORDINATION
Prearranged coordination allowing aircraft under
your control to enter another controller’s area of
jurisdiction may only be approved provided
procedures are established and published in a facility
directive/LOA in accordance with FAAO 7210.3,
para 3-7-7, Prearranged Coordination.
NOTE-
Under no circumstances may one controller permit an
aircraft to enter another’s airspace without proper
coordination. Coordination can be accomplished by
several means; i.e., radar handoff, automated information
transfer, verbal, point-out, and by prearranged
coordination procedures identified in a facility directive
that clearly describe the correct application. Airspace
boundaries should not be permitted to become barriers to
the efficient movement of traffic. In addition, complete
coordination, awareness of traffic flow, and understanding
of each position’s responsibility concerning penetration of
another’s airspace cannot be overemphasized.
REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Coordinate Use of Airspace, Para 2-1-14.
FAAO 7110.65, Transfer of Radar Identification, Methods, Para
5-4-3.
FAAO 7110.65, Automated Information Transfer (AIT), Para 5-4-8.
FAAO 7210.3, Prearranged Coordination, Para 3-7-7.

I'll let you do the work of interpreting the above and continuing the
search for pertinent sections....

Where's Mr. McNicoll when you need him? :-)

Ron Natalie

April 13th 07, 12:34 PM

Larry Dighera wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:45:43 -0700, TheSmokingGnu
> > wrote in
> >:
>
>> Erk. Class B clearance must always, always, always, always (always) be
>> given explicitly with "... cleared to enter the Class Bravo
>> airspace...". Any other usage isn't an implied clearance.
>
>
> Not that I disagree with you, but are you able to cite FAA regulations
> or orders that support your allegation?
>
He can't. There's no rule. The controller should issue VFR clerarances
that way however. Obviously IFR clearances aren't going to sound like
that at all.

The pilot is definitely responsible for the bust, but the controller
rules also prohibit the controller from vectoring aircraft into
airspace without coordinating the transition. Of course it fails
all the time.

Gig 601XL Builder

April 13th 07, 02:22 PM

C Booth wrote:
> I was flying out of VGT last month (North Las Vegas) heading back to
> SLC in an Aztec after a great round of Golf. After getting VFR
> clearance from ground to MMM (Mormon Mesa Vortac) which is ENE of
> Vegas. Cleared for takeoff and given a heading from the tower, then
> handed off to Nellis aproach. The controler gives me heading and asks
> intention and sounds like she has marbles in her mouth. I ask her to
> repeat instructions and finally get her instructions read back. I am
> squawking a descreat code and continuing to follow instructions from
> Nellis getting vectored out of the way of inbound F-18's and even a
> B-2. All of a sudden out of the blue she calls me and asks me if I
> have class B clearance. I gulp hard a couple of times, in all the
> vectors and hand offs I realize that I have not received clearance...I
> fess up and say noooo. She says "Well, you're right smack in the
> middle of Class B airspace". That's it, no instructions. I say,
> "Well..., can I get clearance now, or do you want me to go somewhere?"
> She gives me the clearance. Whew, first time that has ever happened
> to me. I am usually very careful not to bust airspace. Needless to
> say I was embarassed but in other instances where I have been vectored
> into Class B, such as in this instance, I have always been given the
> clearance. I know that it is my responsibility to get the clearance
> before flying into the airspace, but if they are giving vectors to
> penetrate the airspace, are they at fault as well? Maybe I should
> file a NASA report just to be safe, what do you think?
>
> Just thought an aviation based thread might be good for the group.
>
> Cbooth
> SEL MEL Instrument

NASA form for sure.

Peter R.

April 13th 07, 02:22 PM

On 4/13/2007 12:40:10 AM, Nomen Nescio wrote:

> Well, you're not the first person that's had that happen.
>
> And that's all I have to say about that. :)

Why so cryptic? You already are as anonymous around here as a leaf in the
rain forest.

--
Peter

Mxsmanic

April 13th 07, 06:32 PM

Larry Dighera writes:

> Not that I disagree with you, but are you able to cite FAA regulations
> or orders that support your allegation?

FAR 91.131(a)(1) (necessity of clearance) and 7710.65R 7-9-2(a) (approved
phraseology).

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic

April 13th 07, 06:32 PM

Ron Natalie writes:

> He can't. There's no rule.

Yes, there is. A specific clearance is required, and a specific phraseology
is used.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

A Guy Called Tyketto

April 13th 07, 08:34 PM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Nomen Nescio > wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> From: Mxsmanic >
>
>>> Not that I disagree with you, but are you able to cite FAA regulations
>>> or orders that support your allegation?
>>
>>FAR 91.131(a)(1) (necessity of clearance) and 7710.65R 7-9-2(a) (approved
>>phraseology).
>
> What part of the term "real pilots" confused you?
>
>

I really hate to come to Two-Tonne Tony's defense here, but he is
right as far as the .65 goes. There is the actual phraseology stated
here.

I'd also like to mention that while I am not a real pilot
(yet), I do understand the reasoning to know the regs before stepping
into the plane, so should that discriminate someone who knows it but
hasn't had the chance to apply it in the real world yet the opportunity
to answer?

Lastly, while I do flightsim, I also have more common sense to
think that flying a sim like MSFS *is real*. It is possible to get it
close to real, but it isn't. If one refuses to believe that there is a
difference, there is a problem.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGH9soyBkZmuMZ8L8RAjJuAKDZ5Feovdx41XMqnToVIp l7ue+7TQCfUO+a
ZOI9qeh4gKhIymI7NPbcMjc=
=EtG4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

TheSmokingGnu

April 14th 07, 01:38 AM

Larry Dighera wrote:
> Not that I disagree with you, but are you able to cite FAA regulations
> or orders that support your allegation?

Curses! Why must my answers be answered! And by him, of all people!

Regardless, you've got your man, Friday. Book 'em, Danno, and all that.

(I'll stop now, honest)

TheSmokingGnu

Larry Dighera

April 14th 07, 02:46 AM

On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 17:38:05 -0700, TheSmokingGnu
> wrote in
>:

>Regardless, you've got your man, Friday.

The issue isn't closed until Mr. McNicoll's wry analysis is indelibly
etched in electrons throughout the usenetosphere. :-)

TheSmokingGnu

April 14th 07, 04:00 AM

Larry Dighera wrote:
> The issue isn't closed until Mr. McNicoll's wry analysis is indelibly
> etched in electrons throughout the usenetosphere. :-)

ObReadAs: rye analysis. Keep yer mitts off me samm'iches! :D

TheSmokingGnu

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

April 18th 07, 02:15 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Larry Dighera writes:
>
>> Not that I disagree with you, but are you able to cite FAA regulations
>> or orders that support your allegation?
>
> FAR 91.131(a)(1) (necessity of clearance) and 7710.65R 7-9-2(a) (approved
> phraseology).

You're an idiot.

Bertie

Larry Dighera

April 19th 07, 04:07 PM

In the discussion below, I stated that there are times when a Class B
clearance is implied. Can one of the ATC personnel among the
readership of this newsgroup respond to that?

On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 10:29:16 GMT, Larry Dighera >
wrote in >:

>On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 03:18:52 GMT, Jose >
>wrote in >:
>
>>> Sometimes Class Bravo clearance is implied, but it's always best if
>>> you get it explicitly.
>>
>>When, under VFR, is a class Bravo clearance implied, such that this
>>implied clearance can be relied on at an enforcement hearing?
>>
>
>Perhaps 'implied' wasn't the best choice of words to use in this
>situation.
>
>Without knowing all the circumstances (such as LOAs, the position of
>the aircraft at various times, etc.) surrounding this particular
>incident, it's probably not possible to assert a definitive answer to
>your question, and I don't pretend to be knowledgeable about _all_ the
>regulations that address this issue.
>
>I was hoping that I wouldn't have to do the work of searching FAAO
>7110.65, but here's what I found:
>
>
>http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/air_traffic_orders/media/7110.65R.pdf
> 2-1-16. SURFACE AREAS
> a. Coordinate with the appropriate nonapproach
> control tower on an individual aircraft basis before
> issuing a clearance which would require flight within
> a surface area for which the tower has responsibility
> unless otherwise specified in a letter of agreement.
> REFERENCE-
> FAAO 7210.3, Letters of Agreement, Para 4-3-1.
> 14 CFR Section 91.127, Operating on or in the Vicinity of an
>Airport in
> Class E Airspace.
> P/CG Term- Surface Area.
> b. Coordinate with the appropriate control tower
> for transit authorization when you are providing radar
> traffic advisory service to an aircraft that will enter
> another facility’s airspace.
> NOTE-
> The pilot is not expected to obtain his/her own
> authorization through each area when in contact with a
> radar facility.
> c. Transfer communications to the appropriate
> facility, if required, prior to operation within a surface
> area for which the tower has responsibility.
> REFERENCE-
> FAAO 7110.65, Radio Communications Transfer, Para 2-1-17.
> FAAO 7110.65, Surface Area Restrictions, Para 3-1-11.
> FAAO 7110.65, Application, Para 7-6-1.
> 14 CFR Section 91.129, Operations in Class D Airspace.
>
>
>
>
> Section 9. Class B Service Area- Terminal
>
> 7-9-2. VFR AIRCRAFT IN CLASS B AIRSPACE
> a. VFR aircraft must obtain an ATC clearance to
> operate in Class B airspace.
> REFERENCE-
> FAAO 7110.65, Operational Requests, Para 2-1-18.
> FAAO 7110.65, Airspace Classes, Para 2-4-22.
> PHRASEOLOGY-
> CLEARED THROUGH/TO ENTER/OUT OF BRAVO
> AIRSPACE,
>
>
>
> 2-1-18. OPERATIONAL REQUESTS
> Respond to a request from another controller, a pilot
> or vehicle operator by one of the following verbal
> means:
> a. Restate the request in complete or abbreviated
> terms followed by the word “APPROVED.” The
> phraseology “APPROVED AS REQUESTED” may
> be substituted in lieu of a lengthy readback.
> PHRASEOLOGY-
> (Requested operation) APPROVED.
> or
> APPROVED AS REQUESTED.
> b. State restrictions followed by the word
> “APPROVED.”
> PHRASEOLOGY-
> (Restriction and/or additional instructions, requested
> operation) APPROVED.
> c. State the word “UNABLE” and, time permitting,
> a reason.
> PHRASEOLOGY-
> UNABLE (requested operation).
> and when necessary,
> (reason and/or additional instructions.)
> d. State the words “STAND BY.”
> NOTE-
> “STAND BY” is not an approval or denial. The controller
> acknowledges the request and will respond at a later time.
> REFERENCE-
> FAAO 7110.65, Traffic Advisories, Para 2-1-21.
> FAAO 7110.65, Route or Altitude Amendments, Para 4-2-5.
> FAAO 7110.65, Methods, Para 7-9-3.
>
>
>
> 5-4-5. TRANSFERRING CONTROLLER
> HANDOFF
> The transferring controller shall:
> a. Complete a radar handoff prior to an aircraft’s
> entering the airspace delegated to the receiving
> controller.
> REFERENCE-
> FAAO 7110.65, Coordinate Use of Airspace, Para 2-1-14.
> FAAO 7110.65, Control Transfer, Para 2-1-15.
> FAAO 7110.65, Receiving Controller Handoff, Para 5-4-6.
> b. Verbally obtain the receiving controller’s
> approval prior to making any changes to an aircraft’s
> flight path, altitude, or data block information while
> the handoff is being initiated or after acceptance,
> unless otherwise specified by a LOA or a facility
> directive.
> NOTE-
> Those en route facilities using host software that provides
> capability for passing interim altitude shall include the
> specific operations and procedures for use of this
> procedure in a LOA between the appropriate facilities.
> c. Ensure that, prior to transferring communications:
> 1. Potential violations of adjacent airspace and
> potential conflicts between aircraft in their own area
> of jurisdiction are resolved.
> 2. Necessary coordination has been accomplished
> with all controllers through whose area of
> jurisdiction the aircraft will pass prior to entering the
> receiving controller’s area of jurisdiction, except
> when such coordination is the receiving controller’s
> responsibility as stated in para 5-4-6, Receiving
> Controller Handoff, and unless otherwise specified
> by a LOA or a facility directive.
> 3. Restrictions issued to ensure separation are
> passed to the receiving controller.
> d. After transferring communications, continue to
> comply with the requirements of subparas c1 and 2.
> e. Comply with restrictions issued by the receiving
> controller unless otherwise coordinated.
> f. Comply with the provisions of para 2-1-17,
> Radio Communications Transfer, subparas a and b.
> To the extent possible, transfer communications
> when the transfer of radar identification has been
> accepted.
> NOTE-
> Before the ARTS/STARS “modify/quick look” function is
> used to transfer radar identification, a facility directive
> which specifies communication transfer points is required.
> g. Advise the receiving controller of pertinent
> information not contained in the data block or flight
> progress strip unless covered in a LOA or facility
> directive. Pertinent information includes:
> 1. Assigned heading.
> 2. Air speed restrictions.
> 3. Altitude information issued.
> 4. Observed track or deviation from the last
> route clearance.
> 5. The beacon code if different from that
> normally used or previously coordinated.
> 6. Any other pertinent information.
> h. Ensure that the data block is associated with the
> appropriate target.
> i. Initiate verbal coordination to verify the position
> of primary or nondiscrete targets when using the
> automated handoff functions except for intrafacility
> handoffs using single-sensor systems or multisensor
> systems operating in a mosaic RDP mode.
> j. Initiate verbal coordination before transferring
> control of a track when “CST”, “FAIL”, “NONE”,
> “NB”, “NX”, “IF”, or “NT” is displayed in the data
> block.
> k. Advise the receiving controller that radar
> monitoring is required when the aircraft is on a direct
> route initiated by ATC that exceeds usable NAVAID
> distances.
> l. Issue restrictions to the receiving controller
> which are necessary to maintain separation from
> other aircraft within your area of jurisdiction before
> releasing control of the aircraft.
> m. Consider the target being transferred as
> identified on the receiving controller’s display when
> the receiving controller acknowledges receipt
> verbally or has accepted an automated handoff.
> n. Accomplish the necessary coordination with
> any intervening controllers whose area of jurisdiction
> is affected by the receiving controller’s delay in the
> climb or the descent of an aircraft through the vertical
> limits of your area of jurisdiction when the receiving
> controller advises you of that delay before accepting
> the transfer of radar identification unless otherwise
> specified by a LOA or a facility directive.
> 5-4-6. RECEIVING CONTROLLER HANDOFF
> The receiving controller shall:
> a. Ensure that the target position corresponds with
> the position given by the transferring controller or
> that there is an appropriate association between an
> automated data block and the target being transferred
> before accepting a handoff.
> REFERENCE-
> FAAO 7110.65, Coordinate Use of Airspace, Para 2-1-14.
> FAAO 7110.65, Control Transfer, Para 2-1-15.
> FAAO 7110.65, Transferring Controller Handoff, Para 5-4-5.
> b. Issue restrictions that are needed for the aircraft
> to enter your sector safely before accepting the
> handoff.
> c. Comply with restrictions issued by the initiating
> controller unless otherwise coordinated.
> d. Before you issue control instructions directly to
> an aircraft that is within another controller’s area of
> jurisdiction that will change that aircraft’s heading,
> route, speed, altitude, or beacon code, ensure that
> coordination has been accomplished with each of the
> controllers listed below whose area of jurisdiction is
> affected by those instructions unless otherwise
> specified by a LOA or a facility directive:
> NOTE-
> Those en route facilities using host software that provides
> capability for passing interim altitude shall include the
> specific operations and procedures for use of this
> procedure in a LOA between the appropriate facilities.
> 1. The controller within whose area of jurisdiction
> the control instructions will be issued.
> 2. Any intervening controller(s) through whose
> area of jurisdiction the aircraft will pass.
> e. After accepting a handoff from another
> controller, confirm the identity of primary target by
> advising the aircraft of its position, and of a beacon
> target by observing a code change, an “ident” reply,
> or a “standby” squawk unless one of these was used
> during handoff. These provisions do not apply at
> those towers and GCAs which have been delegated
> the responsibility for providing radar separation
> within designated areas by the parent approach
> control facility and the aircraft identification is
> assured by sequencing or positioning prior to the
> handoff.
> REFERENCE-
> FAAO 7110.65, Approach Separation Responsibility, Para 5-9-5.
> f. When using appropriate equipment, consider a
> discrete beacon target’s identity to be confirmed
> when:
> 1. The data block associated with the target
> being handed off indicates the computer assigned
> discrete beacon code is being received, or
> 2. You observe the deletion of a discrete code
> that was displayed in the data block, or
> NOTE-
> When the aircraft generated discrete beacon code does not
> match the computer assigned beacon code, the code
> generated will be displayed in the data block. When the
> aircraft changes to the assigned discrete code, the code
> disappears from the data block. In this instance, the
> observance of code removal from the data block satisfies
> confirmation requirements.
> 3. You observe the numeric display of a discrete
> code that an aircraft has been instructed to squawk or
> reports squawking.
> g. Initiate verbal coordination prior to accepting
> control of a track when “CST”, “NAT”, “NT”,
> “NONE”, “NB”, “NX”, “OLD”, “OL”, “AMB”,
> “AM”, or “TU” is displayed in the data block.
> 1. When an automated interfacility handoff
> action is initiated and “AMB” or “AM” is displayed
> in the full data block, advise the other facility that a
> disparity exists between the position declared by their ...
>
>
>
> 5-4-10. PREARRANGED COORDINATION
> Prearranged coordination allowing aircraft under
> your control to enter another controller’s area of
> jurisdiction may only be approved provided
> procedures are established and published in a facility
> directive/LOA in accordance with FAAO 7210.3,
> para 3-7-7, Prearranged Coordination.
> NOTE-
> Under no circumstances may one controller permit an
> aircraft to enter another’s airspace without proper
> coordination. Coordination can be accomplished by
> several means; i.e., radar handoff, automated information
> transfer, verbal, point-out, and by prearranged
> coordination procedures identified in a facility directive
> that clearly describe the correct application. Airspace
> boundaries should not be permitted to become barriers to
> the efficient movement of traffic. In addition, complete
> coordination, awareness of traffic flow, and understanding
> of each position’s responsibility concerning penetration of
> another’s airspace cannot be overemphasized.
> REFERENCE-
> FAAO 7110.65, Coordinate Use of Airspace, Para 2-1-14.
> FAAO 7110.65, Transfer of Radar Identification, Methods, Para
>5-4-3.
> FAAO 7110.65, Automated Information Transfer (AIT), Para 5-4-8.
> FAAO 7210.3, Prearranged Coordination, Para 3-7-7.
>
>
>
>I'll let you do the work of interpreting the above and continuing the
>search for pertinent sections....
>
>Where's Mr. McNicoll when you need him? :-)

Newps

April 19th 07, 11:17 PM

Larry Dighera wrote:
> In the discussion below, I stated that there are times when a Class B
> clearance is implied. Can one of the ATC personnel among the
> readership of this newsgroup respond to that?

The FAA tells pilots that class B clearances are never implied. However
many pilots have gotten off during the investigation because the
controller vectored them into the class B. But it would sure be a pain
in the ass to be right in this situation.

Roy Smith

April 20th 07, 02:22 AM

Newps > wrote:
> The FAA tells pilots that class B clearances are never implied. However
> many pilots have gotten off during the investigation because the
> controller vectored them into the class B. But it would sure be a pain
> in the ass to be right in this situation.

Almost had this just the other day. Asked for a practice ILS-34 into HPN,
VFR, to a full stop. Controller said he had several IFR flights he needed
to work in before us and gave us delaying vectors. A few minutes later,
we're looking at the east wall of the inner ring of the NY Class B, so I
got on the radio and said, "We're going to need a clearance on this heading
in minute", which got us a vector in the other direction. Kind of a pity,
really; I don't think I've ever flow right over my house before, and I
missed the chance.

The GPS really lets you get lazy. It's got all the CBAS boundaries, so I
knew exactly where we were, but it doesn't have the floor altitudes. I
know the floor of the outer ring is 3000, but I sure don't have memorized
the floors of all the inner segments. I had to go scrambling for a
sectional to figure out if we were good or not.

Mxsmanic

April 20th 07, 05:16 AM

Roy Smith writes:

> The GPS really lets you get lazy. It's got all the CBAS boundaries, so I
> knew exactly where we were, but it doesn't have the floor altitudes. I
> know the floor of the outer ring is 3000, but I sure don't have memorized
> the floors of all the inner segments. I had to go scrambling for a
> sectional to figure out if we were good or not.

Which GPS was it? Some units will give you the vertical limits of the
airspace as well.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 20th 07, 12:44 PM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>
> In the discussion below, I stated that there are times when a Class B
> clearance is implied. Can one of the ATC personnel among the
> readership of this newsgroup respond to that?
>

What is a Class B clearance?

>
>
> On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 10:29:16 GMT, Larry Dighera >
> wrote in >:
>
>>On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 03:18:52 GMT, Jose >
>>wrote in >:
>>
>>>> Sometimes Class Bravo clearance is implied, but it's always best if
>>>> you get it explicitly.
>>>
>>>When, under VFR, is a class Bravo clearance implied, such that this
>>>implied clearance can be relied on at an enforcement hearing?
>>>
>>
>>Perhaps 'implied' wasn't the best choice of words to use in this
>>situation.
>>
>>Without knowing all the circumstances (such as LOAs, the position of
>>the aircraft at various times, etc.) surrounding this particular
>>incident, it's probably not possible to assert a definitive answer to
>>your question, and I don't pretend to be knowledgeable about _all_ the
>>regulations that address this issue.
>>
>>I was hoping that I wouldn't have to do the work of searching FAAO
>>7110.65, but here's what I found:
>>
>>
>>http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/air_traffic_orders/media/7110.65R.pdf
>> 2-1-16. SURFACE AREAS
>> a. Coordinate with the appropriate nonapproach
>> control tower on an individual aircraft basis before
>> issuing a clearance which would require flight within
>> a surface area for which the tower has responsibility
>> unless otherwise specified in a letter of agreement.
>> REFERENCE-
>> FAAO 7210.3, Letters of Agreement, Para 4-3-1.
>> 14 CFR Section 91.127, Operating on or in the Vicinity of an
>>Airport in
>> Class E Airspace.
>> P/CG Term- Surface Area.
>> b. Coordinate with the appropriate control tower
>> for transit authorization when you are providing radar
>> traffic advisory service to an aircraft that will enter
>> another facility's airspace.
>> NOTE-
>> The pilot is not expected to obtain his/her own
>> authorization through each area when in contact with a
>> radar facility.
>> c. Transfer communications to the appropriate
>> facility, if required, prior to operation within a surface
>> area for which the tower has responsibility.
>> REFERENCE-
>> FAAO 7110.65, Radio Communications Transfer, Para 2-1-17.
>> FAAO 7110.65, Surface Area Restrictions, Para 3-1-11.
>> FAAO 7110.65, Application, Para 7-6-1.
>> 14 CFR Section 91.129, Operations in Class D Airspace.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Section 9. Class B Service Area- Terminal
>>
>> 7-9-2. VFR AIRCRAFT IN CLASS B AIRSPACE
>> a. VFR aircraft must obtain an ATC clearance to
>> operate in Class B airspace.
>> REFERENCE-
>> FAAO 7110.65, Operational Requests, Para 2-1-18.
>> FAAO 7110.65, Airspace Classes, Para 2-4-22.
>> PHRASEOLOGY-
>> CLEARED THROUGH/TO ENTER/OUT OF BRAVO
>> AIRSPACE,
>>
>>
>>
>> 2-1-18. OPERATIONAL REQUESTS
>> Respond to a request from another controller, a pilot
>> or vehicle operator by one of the following verbal
>> means:
>> a. Restate the request in complete or abbreviated
>> terms followed by the word "APPROVED." The
>> phraseology "APPROVED AS REQUESTED" may
>> be substituted in lieu of a lengthy readback.
>> PHRASEOLOGY-
>> (Requested operation) APPROVED.
>> or
>> APPROVED AS REQUESTED.
>> b. State restrictions followed by the word
>> "APPROVED."
>> PHRASEOLOGY-
>> (Restriction and/or additional instructions, requested
>> operation) APPROVED.
>> c. State the word "UNABLE" and, time permitting,
>> a reason.
>> PHRASEOLOGY-
>> UNABLE (requested operation).
>> and when necessary,
>> (reason and/or additional instructions.)
>> d. State the words "STAND BY."
>> NOTE-
>> "STAND BY" is not an approval or denial. The controller
>> acknowledges the request and will respond at a later time.
>> REFERENCE-
>> FAAO 7110.65, Traffic Advisories, Para 2-1-21.
>> FAAO 7110.65, Route or Altitude Amendments, Para 4-2-5.
>> FAAO 7110.65, Methods, Para 7-9-3.
>>
>>
>>
>> 5-4-5. TRANSFERRING CONTROLLER
>> HANDOFF
>> The transferring controller shall:
>> a. Complete a radar handoff prior to an aircraft's
>> entering the airspace delegated to the receiving
>> controller.
>> REFERENCE-
>> FAAO 7110.65, Coordinate Use of Airspace, Para 2-1-14.
>> FAAO 7110.65, Control Transfer, Para 2-1-15.
>> FAAO 7110.65, Receiving Controller Handoff, Para 5-4-6.
>> b. Verbally obtain the receiving controller's
>> approval prior to making any changes to an aircraft's
>> flight path, altitude, or data block information while
>> the handoff is being initiated or after acceptance,
>> unless otherwise specified by a LOA or a facility
>> directive.
>> NOTE-
>> Those en route facilities using host software that provides
>> capability for passing interim altitude shall include the
>> specific operations and procedures for use of this
>> procedure in a LOA between the appropriate facilities.
>> c. Ensure that, prior to transferring communications:
>> 1. Potential violations of adjacent airspace and
>> potential conflicts between aircraft in their own area
>> of jurisdiction are resolved.
>> 2. Necessary coordination has been accomplished
>> with all controllers through whose area of
>> jurisdiction the aircraft will pass prior to entering the
>> receiving controller's area of jurisdiction, except
>> when such coordination is the receiving controller's
>> responsibility as stated in para 5-4-6, Receiving
>> Controller Handoff, and unless otherwise specified
>> by a LOA or a facility directive.
>> 3. Restrictions issued to ensure separation are
>> passed to the receiving controller.
>> d. After transferring communications, continue to
>> comply with the requirements of subparas c1 and 2.
>> e. Comply with restrictions issued by the receiving
>> controller unless otherwise coordinated.
>> f. Comply with the provisions of para 2-1-17,
>> Radio Communications Transfer, subparas a and b.
>> To the extent possible, transfer communications
>> when the transfer of radar identification has been
>> accepted.
>> NOTE-
>> Before the ARTS/STARS "modify/quick look" function is
>> used to transfer radar identification, a facility directive
>> which specifies communication transfer points is required.
>> g. Advise the receiving controller of pertinent
>> information not contained in the data block or flight
>> progress strip unless covered in a LOA or facility
>> directive. Pertinent information includes:
>> 1. Assigned heading.
>> 2. Air speed restrictions.
>> 3. Altitude information issued.
>> 4. Observed track or deviation from the last
>> route clearance.
>> 5. The beacon code if different from that
>> normally used or previously coordinated.
>> 6. Any other pertinent information.
>> h. Ensure that the data block is associated with the
>> appropriate target.
>> i. Initiate verbal coordination to verify the position
>> of primary or nondiscrete targets when using the
>> automated handoff functions except for intrafacility
>> handoffs using single-sensor systems or multisensor
>> systems operating in a mosaic RDP mode.
>> j. Initiate verbal coordination before transferring
>> control of a track when "CST", "FAIL", "NONE",
>> "NB", "NX", "IF", or "NT" is displayed in the data
>> block.
>> k. Advise the receiving controller that radar
>> monitoring is required when the aircraft is on a direct
>> route initiated by ATC that exceeds usable NAVAID
>> distances.
>> l. Issue restrictions to the receiving controller
>> which are necessary to maintain separation from
>> other aircraft within your area of jurisdiction before
>> releasing control of the aircraft.
>> m. Consider the target being transferred as
>> identified on the receiving controller's display when
>> the receiving controller acknowledges receipt
>> verbally or has accepted an automated handoff.
>> n. Accomplish the necessary coordination with
>> any intervening controllers whose area of jurisdiction
>> is affected by the receiving controller's delay in the
>> climb or the descent of an aircraft through the vertical
>> limits of your area of jurisdiction when the receiving
>> controller advises you of that delay before accepting
>> the transfer of radar identification unless otherwise
>> specified by a LOA or a facility directive.
>> 5-4-6. RECEIVING CONTROLLER HANDOFF
>> The receiving controller shall:
>> a. Ensure that the target position corresponds with
>> the position given by the transferring controller or
>> that there is an appropriate association between an
>> automated data block and the target being transferred
>> before accepting a handoff.
>> REFERENCE-
>> FAAO 7110.65, Coordinate Use of Airspace, Para 2-1-14.
>> FAAO 7110.65, Control Transfer, Para 2-1-15.
>> FAAO 7110.65, Transferring Controller Handoff, Para 5-4-5.
>> b. Issue restrictions that are needed for the aircraft
>> to enter your sector safely before accepting the
>> handoff.
>> c. Comply with restrictions issued by the initiating
>> controller unless otherwise coordinated.
>> d. Before you issue control instructions directly to
>> an aircraft that is within another controller's area of
>> jurisdiction that will change that aircraft's heading,
>> route, speed, altitude, or beacon code, ensure that
>> coordination has been accomplished with each of the
>> controllers listed below whose area of jurisdiction is
>> affected by those instructions unless otherwise
>> specified by a LOA or a facility directive:
>> NOTE-
>> Those en route facilities using host software that provides
>> capability for passing interim altitude shall include the
>> specific operations and procedures for use of this
>> procedure in a LOA between the appropriate facilities.
>> 1. The controller within whose area of jurisdiction
>> the control instructions will be issued.
>> 2. Any intervening controller(s) through whose
>> area of jurisdiction the aircraft will pass.
>> e. After accepting a handoff from another
>> controller, confirm the identity of primary target by
>> advising the aircraft of its position, and of a beacon
>> target by observing a code change, an "ident" reply,
>> or a "standby" squawk unless one of these was used
>> during handoff. These provisions do not apply at
>> those towers and GCAs which have been delegated
>> the responsibility for providing radar separation
>> within designated areas by the parent approach
>> control facility and the aircraft identification is
>> assured by sequencing or positioning prior to the
>> handoff.
>> REFERENCE-
>> FAAO 7110.65, Approach Separation Responsibility, Para 5-9-5.
>> f. When using appropriate equipment, consider a
>> discrete beacon target's identity to be confirmed
>> when:
>> 1. The data block associated with the target
>> being handed off indicates the computer assigned
>> discrete beacon code is being received, or
>> 2. You observe the deletion of a discrete code
>> that was displayed in the data block, or
>> NOTE-
>> When the aircraft generated discrete beacon code does not
>> match the computer assigned beacon code, the code
>> generated will be displayed in the data block. When the
>> aircraft changes to the assigned discrete code, the code
>> disappears from the data block. In this instance, the
>> observance of code removal from the data block satisfies
>> confirmation requirements.
>> 3. You observe the numeric display of a discrete
>> code that an aircraft has been instructed to squawk or
>> reports squawking.
>> g. Initiate verbal coordination prior to accepting
>> control of a track when "CST", "NAT", "NT",
>> "NONE", "NB", "NX", "OLD", "OL", "AMB",
>> "AM", or "TU" is displayed in the data block.
>> 1. When an automated interfacility handoff
>> action is initiated and "AMB" or "AM" is displayed
>> in the full data block, advise the other facility that a
>> disparity exists between the position declared by their ...
>>
>>
>>
>> 5-4-10. PREARRANGED COORDINATION
>> Prearranged coordination allowing aircraft under
>> your control to enter another controller's area of
>> jurisdiction may only be approved provided
>> procedures are established and published in a facility
>> directive/LOA in accordance with FAAO 7210.3,
>> para 3-7-7, Prearranged Coordination.
>> NOTE-
>> Under no circumstances may one controller permit an
>> aircraft to enter another's airspace without proper
>> coordination. Coordination can be accomplished by
>> several means; i.e., radar handoff, automated information
>> transfer, verbal, point-out, and by prearranged
>> coordination procedures identified in a facility directive
>> that clearly describe the correct application. Airspace
>> boundaries should not be permitted to become barriers to
>> the efficient movement of traffic. In addition, complete
>> coordination, awareness of traffic flow, and understanding
>> of each position's responsibility concerning penetration of
>> another's airspace cannot be overemphasized.
>> REFERENCE-
>> FAAO 7110.65, Coordinate Use of Airspace, Para 2-1-14.
>> FAAO 7110.65, Transfer of Radar Identification, Methods, Para
>>5-4-3.
>> FAAO 7110.65, Automated Information Transfer (AIT), Para 5-4-8.
>> FAAO 7210.3, Prearranged Coordination, Para 3-7-7.
>>
>>
>>
>>I'll let you do the work of interpreting the above and continuing the
>>search for pertinent sections....
>>
>>Where's Mr. McNicoll when you need him? :-)

Jose

April 20th 07, 01:53 PM

> What is a Class B clearance?

Why is this a hard question? A class B clearance is a clearance
permitting legal entry into Class B airspace.

The topic at hand is VFR Class B clearances - a clearance permitting a
VFR flight to enter class B airspace legally. The contention is there
do (or do not) exist "implied" clearances of this type - that is,
clearances that are granted (and legally upheld) which do not contain
the magic words "Cleared into the class Bravo", or something very close
to that.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 20th 07, 02:44 PM

"Jose" > wrote in message
t...
>
> Why is this a hard question?
>

I didn't know that it was.

>
> A class B clearance is a clearance
> permitting legal entry into Class B airspace.
>

Like "Cleared to Love Field..." issued at a point outside of the Dallas
Class B airspace? That didn't seem very hard.

>
> The topic at hand is VFR Class B clearances - a clearance permitting a VFR
> flight to enter class B airspace legally. The contention is there do (or
> do not) exist "implied" clearances of this type - that is, clearances that
> are granted (and legally upheld) which do not contain the magic words
> "Cleared into the class Bravo", or something very close to that.
>

Like "Cleared for takeoff" issued to a VFR aircraft at Love Field?

Jose

April 20th 07, 02:56 PM

> Like "Cleared to Love Field..." issued at a point outside of the Dallas
> Class B airspace? That didn't seem very hard.

Well, that's the question. Would a VFR aircraft get a clearance that
says "cleared to Love Field"? That sounds like an IFR clearance, or at
least the beginning of one. Is such a (VFR) clearance sufficient for
entry into the Bravo, and successful avoidance of prosecution? Has this
been demonstrated in case law yet?

> Like "Cleared for takeoff" issued to a VFR aircraft at Love Field?

No, at that point one is already =in= the Bravo, having never actually
entered it, since the flight originates in the Bravo.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Larry Dighera

April 20th 07, 03:21 PM

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:44:57 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote in
et>:

>
>What is a Class B clearance?

It's an instruction issued (or implied?) by ATC, and the resulting
separation of the cleared aircraft from other flights, and vice versa,
afforded by ATC personnel.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 20th 07, 03:21 PM

"Jose" > wrote in message
t...
>
> Well, that's the question. Would a VFR aircraft get a clearance that says
> "cleared to Love Field"?
>

No.

>
> That sounds like an IFR clearance, or at least the beginning of one.
>

It is. The regulation requiring a clearance to operate an aircraft in Class
B airspace is among the General Flight Rules, it does not differentiate
between VFR and IFR operations.

>
> Is such a (VFR) clearance sufficient for entry into the Bravo, and
> successful avoidance of prosecution? Has this been demonstrated in case
> law yet?
>

It's not a VFR clearance, it's considered sufficient for entry into the
Bravo for IFR aircraft.

>
> No, at that point one is already =in= the Bravo, having never actually
> entered it, since the flight originates in the Bravo.
>

One is in the airspace when on the surface? Suppose you were based at an
uncontrolled field in a Class B surface area and you needed to taxi your
airplane to a maintenance shop. How would you obtain the required
clearance?

Jose

April 20th 07, 03:28 PM

>> Well, that's the question. Would a VFR aircraft get a clearance that says
>> "cleared to Love Field"?
> No.

Then it's irrelevant. We're talking about VFR aircraft entering the
Bravo on an "implied" clearance.

>> No, at that point one is already =in= the Bravo, having never actually
>> entered it, since the flight originates in the Bravo.
> One is in the airspace when on the surface?

Yes. Bravo goes to the surface at the primary airport (and maybe some
surrounding fields)

> Suppose you were based at an
> uncontrolled field in a Class B surface area and you needed to taxi your
> airplane to a maintenance shop. How would you obtain the required
> clearance?

Interesting question. I presume that class B clearance is only required
for =flight=, at any altitude, including two inches. If I am correct,
you would not need a clearance to taxi at an uncontrolled airport in the
Bravo surface area (*), but you =would= need a clearance to hover-taxi a
helicopter under the same circumstances.

Something for the FAA lawyers to take up on some hapless pilot.

Jose
(*) by this I mean the portion of the Bravo airspace that extends to the
surface.
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Roy Smith

April 20th 07, 03:58 PM

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote:

> What is a Class B clearance?

Steve,

If you're going to continue to ask inane questions, can't you at least
please try and be a little creative about it?

A jump plane orbiting at 12,000 MSL above Central Park receives the
clearance, "Cleared to the LaGuardia Airport". At that point, the jumpers
all jump out. Are the jumpers cleared into the Class B?

This being an exhibition of extreme jumping, each of the jumpers is holding
a piece of an J-3 Cub. On the way down, they assemble the Cub and at 5000
AGL (within the CBAS), they get the job done, one of them climbs in, slaps
an "EXPERIMENTAL" placard on it, starts up the motor, and flies away. Is
this newly-assembled Cub still cleared to the LaGuardia Airport?

Before the Cub can land, the jump plane has dove down, caught up with the
Cub, and extends a tow line from a drum winch in the tail. The Cub pilot
picks up the tow, turns off the motor, sets the autopilot to "auto-tow",
jumps out, and continues his jump under reserve canopy. Is the jump plane
and tow still operating under a proper clearance?

Larry Dighera

April 20th 07, 05:08 PM

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 16:17:50 -0600, Newps > wrote
in >:

>
>Larry Dighera wrote:
>> In the discussion below, I stated that there are times when a Class B
>> clearance is implied. Can one of the ATC personnel among the
>> readership of this newsgroup respond to that?
>
>
>The FAA tells pilots that class B clearances are never implied.

That's consistent with what I was taught by my CFII, but I recall
there being some "weasel clause" that may affect the necessity to
receive the Class B clearance explicitly. Unfortunately, I don't
recall what the circumstances were.

>However many pilots have gotten off during the investigation because the
>controller vectored them into the class B.

I understand the reasoning behind such decisions; the controller was
providing vectors and separation at the time of the alleged violation,
so safety was not compromised; it was merely a breach of 7110.65
phraseology committed by the controller, not the pilot. Is that about
right?

>But it would sure be a pain in the ass to be right in this situation.

It certainly would.

I suppose, if a pilot made it a practice of explicitly _requesting_
clearance into Class B airspace every time (instead of saying "with
you" or some such), it would be even clearer that the violation caused
by the controller's omission of the "cleared into Class Bravo" phrase
was not the fault of the pilot. Does that sound like a useful habit
to get into?

flynrider via AviationKB.com

April 20th 07, 05:56 PM

Jose wrote:
>
>> Like "Cleared for takeoff" issued to a VFR aircraft at Love Field?
>
>No, at that point one is already =in= the Bravo, having never actually
>entered it, since the flight originates in the Bravo.
>

At class B primary airports, clearance into the class B airspace for VFR
flights is typically given when the pilot calls Clearance Delivery. At
least that's how they've done it at every class B field I've ever flown out
of. The first phrase of the clearance from CD is "Cleared into the class
Bravo airspace".

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/aviation/200704/1

A Guy Called Tyketto

April 20th 07, 07:30 PM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Newps > wrote:
>
>
> Larry Dighera wrote:
>> In the discussion below, I stated that there are times when a Class B
>> clearance is implied. Can one of the ATC personnel among the
>> readership of this newsgroup respond to that?
>
>
>
> The FAA tells pilots that class B clearances are never implied. However
> many pilots have gotten off during the investigation because the
> controller vectored them into the class B. But it would sure be a pain
> in the ass to be right in this situation.

A bit of a related question, and I don't know if it is even
possible, but I'll ask anyway.

Is there or has there ever been a time where a Class D
airport's pattern altitude has been above the floor of Class B
airspace? If so, would any departure out of that Class D airport imply
or include the call for being cleared into the Class B airspace?

BL.

- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGKQbZyBkZmuMZ8L8RAomnAJ9a7z4rNyy5w7UZZ04bHg Zm8o+5oQCgwRqs
9TMUJ7r5TWWM93NHeTcozRU=
=oxKA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

April 20th 07, 10:13 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Roy Smith writes:
>
>> The GPS really lets you get lazy. It's got all the CBAS boundaries,
>> so I knew exactly where we were, but it doesn't have the floor
>> altitudes. I know the floor of the outer ring is 3000, but I sure
>> don't have memorized the floors of all the inner segments. I had to
>> go scrambling for a sectional to figure out if we were good or not.
>
> Which GPS was it? Some units will give you the vertical limits of the
> airspace as well.
>

What's it matter to you? You can't fly.

Bertie

john smith[_2_]

April 20th 07, 10:41 PM

In article >,
A Guy Called Tyketto > wrote:

> Is there or has there ever been a time where a Class D
> airport's pattern altitude has been above the floor of Class B
> airspace? If so, would any departure out of that Class D airport imply
> or include the call for being cleared into the Class B airspace?

In this situation, there would be "cut-out" for the CDAS.
Letters of Agreement would exist between the Class D and Class B ATC
operators to define operation to and from the CDAS.

Newps

April 20th 07, 11:30 PM

Larry Dighera wrote:

>
>
>>However many pilots have gotten off during the investigation because the
>>controller vectored them into the class B.
>
>
> I understand the reasoning behind such decisions; the controller was
> providing vectors and separation at the time of the alleged violation,
> so safety was not compromised; it was merely a breach of 7110.65
> phraseology committed by the controller, not the pilot. Is that about
> right?

It's still a bust by the pilot, no doubt about it. But the FAA led him
down the path and should have known better.

>
>
>>But it would sure be a pain in the ass to be right in this situation.
>
>
> It certainly would.
>
> I suppose, if a pilot made it a practice of explicitly _requesting_
> clearance into Class B airspace every time (instead of saying "with
> you" or some such), it would be even clearer that the violation caused
> by the controller's omission of the "cleared into Class Bravo" phrase
> was not the fault of the pilot. Does that sound like a useful habit
> to get into?

Probably although I don't know why I always here about this stuff. What
the hell is the controller thinking about? He knows better than anyone
the VFR pilot needs a clearance and he gives him a vector that brings
him in there. What a putz.

Ron Natalie

April 21st 07, 12:45 PM

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

>
> Like "Cleared for takeoff" issued to a VFR aircraft at Love Field?
>
Dunno at Dulles, we always got from clearance delivery a "psuedu-IFR"
speak clearance prior to taxi:

5327K cleared into the class B via fly runway heading at or below 1500
feet expect 4,500 ten minutes after departure, departure frequency
125.8, squawk 4425.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 21st 07, 03:15 PM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>
> It's an instruction issued (or implied?) by ATC, and the resulting
> separation of the cleared aircraft from other flights, and vice versa,
> afforded by ATC personnel.
>

What's your source for that?

Steven P. McNicoll

April 21st 07, 03:24 PM

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
>
> If you're going to continue to ask inane questions, can't you at least
> please try and be a little creative about it?
>

Why do you consider it inane?

>
> A jump plane orbiting at 12,000 MSL above Central Park receives the
> clearance, "Cleared to the LaGuardia Airport". At that point, the jumpers
> all jump out. Are the jumpers cleared into the Class B?
>

No, nor do they need to be. Clearance to operate within Class B airspace
applies to aircraft. But they do need authorization required by Part 105.

>
> This being an exhibition of extreme jumping, each of the jumpers is
> holding
> a piece of an J-3 Cub. On the way down, they assemble the Cub and at 5000
> AGL (within the CBAS), they get the job done, one of them climbs in, slaps
> an "EXPERIMENTAL" placard on it, starts up the motor, and flies away. Is
> this newly-assembled Cub still cleared to the LaGuardia Airport?
>
> Before the Cub can land, the jump plane has dove down, caught up with the
> Cub, and extends a tow line from a drum winch in the tail. The Cub pilot
> picks up the tow, turns off the motor, sets the autopilot to "auto-tow",
> jumps out, and continues his jump under reserve canopy. Is the jump plane
> and tow still operating under a proper clearance?
>

Now you're just being silly.

Larry Dighera

April 21st 07, 03:38 PM

On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 14:15:13 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote in
et>:

>
>"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> It's an instruction issued (or implied?) by ATC, and the resulting
>> separation of the cleared aircraft from other flights, and vice versa,
>> afforded by ATC personnel.
>>
>
>What's your source for that?
>
>

It's a guess from knowledge gained over the years. Am I close?

Matt Barrow[_4_]

April 21st 07, 04:31 PM

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
> Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
>
>>
>> Like "Cleared for takeoff" issued to a VFR aircraft at Love Field?
> Dunno at Dulles, we always got from clearance delivery a "psuedu-IFR"
> speak clearance prior to taxi:
>
> 5327K cleared into the class B via fly runway heading at or below 1500
> feet expect 4,500 ten minutes after departure, departure frequency 125.8,
> squawk 4425.

I always wondered why it's ten minutes.

Ten minutes later, I'm 20-25 miles downrange.

Luke Skywalker

April 21st 07, 04:54 PM

On Apr 20, 11:08 am, Larry Dighera > wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 16:17:50 -0600, Newps > wrote
>
> I suppose, if a pilot made it a practice of explicitly _requesting_
> clearance into Class B airspace every time (instead of saying "with
> you" or some such), it would be even clearer that the violation caused
> by the controller's omission of the "cleared into Class Bravo" phrase
> was not the fault of the pilot. Does that sound like a useful habit
> to get into?

emphatically YES.

If you are working a "controlling authority" in Bravo airspace, a good
practice to get into somewhere in the initial exchange is to ask for
clearance into the Bravo. Backhome I use to fly a lot from Pearland
Regional to College Station (Houston) and routinly as I went to Hobby
tower on my Trek to Gods Country (college Station) was "route etc,
"requesting clearance into the Bravo"...having transited a lot of
Class B's VFR (Mem, etc) on a handoff from Center to the appropriate
approach control..my first call is "Weedwhacker 8789Yankee with you at
6500 requesting clearance through the Bravo".

Robert

Larry Dighera

April 21st 07, 05:22 PM

On 21 Apr 2007 08:54:44 -0700, Luke Skywalker >
wrote in . com>:

>On Apr 20, 11:08 am, Larry Dighera > wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 16:17:50 -0600, Newps > wrote
>>
>> I suppose, if a pilot made it a practice of explicitly _requesting_
>> clearance into Class B airspace every time (instead of saying "with
>> you" or some such), it would be even clearer that the violation caused
>> by the controller's omission of the "cleared into Class Bravo" phrase
>> was not the fault of the pilot. Does that sound like a useful habit
>> to get into?
>
>
>emphatically YES.
>
>If you are working a "controlling authority" in Bravo airspace, a good
>practice to get into somewhere in the initial exchange is to ask for
>clearance into the Bravo. Backhome I use to fly a lot from Pearland
>Regional to College Station (Houston) and routinly as I went to Hobby
>tower on my Trek to Gods Country (college Station) was "route etc,
>"requesting clearance into the Bravo"...having transited a lot of
>Class B's VFR (Mem, etc) on a handoff from Center to the appropriate
>approach control..my first call is "Weedwhacker 8789Yankee with you at
>6500 requesting clearance through the Bravo".
>
>Robert
>

I was taught that it is important to hear the "cleared into Class B"
phrase before entering Class B, but I wasn't taught how to insure that
it was uttered by ATC aside from explicitly asking if I were so
cleared. Reading FAAO 7111.65 provides a clue to what ATC is
expecting from pilots:

> Section 9. Class B Service Area- Terminal
>
> 7-9-2. VFR AIRCRAFT IN CLASS B AIRSPACE
> a. VFR aircraft must obtain an ATC clearance to
> operate in Class B airspace.
> REFERENCE-
> FAAO 7110.65, Operational Requests, Para 2-1-18.
> FAAO 7110.65, Airspace Classes, Para 2-4-22.
> PHRASEOLOGY-
> CLEARED THROUGH/TO ENTER/OUT OF BRAVO
> AIRSPACE,
>
>
>
> 2-1-18. OPERATIONAL REQUESTS
> Respond to a request from another controller, a pilot
> or vehicle operator by one of the following verbal
> means:
> a. Restate the request in complete or abbreviated
> terms followed by the word “APPROVED.” The
> phraseology “APPROVED AS REQUESTED” may
> be substituted in lieu of a lengthy readback.
> PHRASEOLOGY-
> (Requested operation) APPROVED.
> or
> APPROVED AS REQUESTED.
> b. State restrictions followed by the word
> “APPROVED.”
> PHRASEOLOGY-
> (Restriction and/or additional instructions, requested
> operation) APPROVED.
> c. State the word “UNABLE” and, time permitting,
> a reason.
> PHRASEOLOGY-
> UNABLE (requested operation).
> and when necessary,
> (reason and/or additional instructions.)
> d. State the words “STAND BY.”
> NOTE-
> “STAND BY” is not an approval or denial. The controller
> acknowledges the request and will respond at a later time.
> REFERENCE-
> FAAO 7110.65, Traffic Advisories, Para 2-1-21.
> FAAO 7110.65, Route or Altitude Amendments, Para 4-2-5.
> FAAO 7110.65, Methods, Para 7-9-3.
>

So when handed off by approach control to the Class B controller, it's
best to say, "Cessna 1234 request transit through bravo airspace,"
rather than, "Cessna 1234 with you," and hoping to hear the controller
explicitly issue the bravo clearance. This technique does at least
two things:

1. It alerts the controller to the fact that you are not yet
cleared into bravo airspace, perhaps unlike much of the other
traffic s/he is handling.

2. It clearly places the onus on the controller to comply with
FAAO 7110.65 paragraph 2-1-18, thus insuring that the
controller will be unlikely to file a Form 8020-17
Preliminary Pilot Deviation Report, because it's not in
his/her best self-interest.

So the technique of _explicitly_ requesting clearance through bravo
airspace on initial radio contact with the Class B controller should
be taught by CFIs.

Newps

April 21st 07, 05:37 PM

Matt Barrow wrote:
> "Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
> m...

>>
>>5327K cleared into the class B via fly runway heading at or below 1500
>>feet expect 4,500 ten minutes after departure, departure frequency 125.8,
>>squawk 4425.
>
>
> I always wondered why it's ten minutes.

At BIL we use no time element for the expect altitude because we have a
departure SID. So we say.....maintain 12,000, expect flight level 330,
squawk 1234.

Matt Barrow[_4_]

April 21st 07, 08:10 PM

"Newps" > wrote in message
. ..
>
>
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>> "Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
>> m...
>
>>>
>>>5327K cleared into the class B via fly runway heading at or below 1500
>>>feet expect 4,500 ten minutes after departure, departure frequency 125.8,
>>>squawk 4425.
>>
>>
>> I always wondered why it's ten minutes.
>
>
>
> At BIL we use no time element for the expect altitude because we have a
> departure SID. So we say.....maintain 12,000, expect flight level 330,
> squawk 1234.

At COS (Springs Two) they use,Maintain 10,000'. Expect clearance to filed
altitude 10 minutes after departure.

Mxsmanic

April 21st 07, 08:42 PM

Luke Skywalker writes:

> If you are working a "controlling authority" in Bravo airspace, a good
> practice to get into somewhere in the initial exchange is to ask for
> clearance into the Bravo. Backhome I use to fly a lot from Pearland
> Regional to College Station (Houston) and routinly as I went to Hobby
> tower on my Trek to Gods Country (college Station) was "route etc,
> "requesting clearance into the Bravo"...having transited a lot of
> Class B's VFR (Mem, etc) on a handoff from Center to the appropriate
> approach control..my first call is "Weedwhacker 8789Yankee with you at
> 6500 requesting clearance through the Bravo".

How long is the clearance valid, and how far away from the Bravo airspace can
you request it?

If you are 100 nm and 40 minutes away from the Class B, is that too soon or
too far away to request a clearance into it? If so, what's the threshold?

If you request and receive a clearance into the Class B, for how long is the
clearance valid? And are you obligated to actually enter the Class B within
some specific time period?

IFR clearances are often only valid for certain periods of time, but I don't
recall hearing anyone place such a limit on a Class B clearance. At the same
time, the clearance obviously cannot be valid indefinitely, or you could just
request one the first time you approach the airport, and then use it for the
rest of your life.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Maxwell

April 21st 07, 10:34 PM

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Luke Skywalker writes:
>
> How long is the clearance valid, and how far away from the Bravo airspace
> can
> you request it?
>
> If you are 100 nm and 40 minutes away from the Class B, is that too soon
> or
> too far away to request a clearance into it? If so, what's the threshold?
>
> If you request and receive a clearance into the Class B, for how long is
> the
> clearance valid? And are you obligated to actually enter the Class B
> within
> some specific time period?
>
> IFR clearances are often only valid for certain periods of time, but I
> don't
> recall hearing anyone place such a limit on a Class B clearance. At the
> same
> time, the clearance obviously cannot be valid indefinitely, or you could
> just
> request one the first time you approach the airport, and then use it for
> the
> rest of your life.
>

Clearances are not required for flying a desk, don't sweat it.

Newps

April 22nd 07, 02:50 AM

Matt Barrow wrote:
> "Newps" > wrote in message
> . ..
>
>>
>>Matt Barrow wrote:
>>
>>>"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>>
>>>>5327K cleared into the class B via fly runway heading at or below 1500
>>>>feet expect 4,500 ten minutes after departure, departure frequency 125.8,
>>>>squawk 4425.
>>>
>>>
>>>I always wondered why it's ten minutes.
>>
>>
>>
>>At BIL we use no time element for the expect altitude because we have a
>>departure SID. So we say.....maintain 12,000, expect flight level 330,
>>squawk 1234.
>
>
> At COS (Springs Two) they use,Maintain 10,000'. Expect clearance to filed
> altitude 10 minutes after departure.

As of approx six months ago every facility has to state the actual
expect altitude. We never did this because our SID states to expect it
within 40 miles. So if COS is still saying it the way you stated they
are not in compliance.

Ron Natalie

April 22nd 07, 12:30 PM

Matt Barrow wrote:

> I always wondered why it's ten minutes.
>
> Ten minutes later, I'm 20-25 miles downrange.
>
>
It's a lost comm thing. I've never gotten anywhere near
ten minutes before they give me higher.

Luke Skywalker

April 22nd 07, 03:57 PM

On Apr 21, 2:42 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Luke Skywalker writes:
> > If you are working a "controlling authority" in Bravo airspace, a good
> > practice to get into somewhere in the initial exchange is to ask for
> > clearance into the Bravo. Backhome I use to fly a lot from Pearland
> > Regional to College Station (Houston) and routinly as I went to Hobby
> > tower on my Trek to Gods Country (college Station) was "route etc,
> > "requesting clearance into the Bravo"...having transited a lot of
> > Class B's VFR (Mem, etc) on a handoff from Center to the appropriate
> > approach control..my first call is "Weedwhacker 8789Yankee with you at
> > 6500 requesting clearance through the Bravo".
>
> How long is the clearance valid, and how far away from the Bravo airspace can
> you request it?

Hello

I am told by some FSDO people (who will go on the record wtih the
comment) that the clearance is valid as LONG as you are under the
controlling authority.

So for instance lets say you are coming into Houston from College
station and dail up Houston Approach and get "cleared into the Bravo"
but dont actually penetrate the Bravo until your destination
(Hobby)...as long as you are under the control of Houston Approach or
HObby tower you can say you have clearance into the bravo.

I have done this in practice a lot. Frequently I get cleared into the
Bravo by Hou Approach and then when they pump me to Hobby tower
(because thats on the way to Pearland) I get "cleared into the Bravo"
again... It is there airspace I am going through.

I actually discussed this with a FSDO person the other day and was
told what I expected...although he/she cautioned that this is not
official FAA policy)...most if not all enforcement actions are done on
someone who penetrates the Bravo without chatting to anyone.

He/she had seen several bravo penetration events and everyone was
because someone just decided to do it "their way".

That would confirm a discussion I had when I was in Safety school at
OKC...

Robert

john smith[_2_]

April 22nd 07, 05:45 PM

I had a situation yesterday (Saturday, 21 APR) where I was talking to
LEX APPR. The controller asked me how long I wanted to remain at 9,500.
I was 80 nm from my destination of KISZ/Cincinnati Blue Ash.
0DM: "Another 30 miles.
0DM: "A better question would be where will Cincinnati want me?"
He responded that CVG would probably want me down lower.
0DM: "How long before you hand me off to Cincinnati?"
LEX: "About 20 miles."
0DM: "Okay, where do you want me to go?"
He cleared me down to 5,500.
I was handed off to CVG APPR.
CVG instructed me to descend to 3,500.
As my flightpath would take me through the CBAS and the controller had
not said the magic words, I took preemptive action.
0DM: "Are you going to clear me through the Bravo airspace and vector
me?"
At first he said he wasn't going to, but then changed his mind and
issued the clearance and told me he may have to turn me east as I got
closer. As it turned out, I didn't have to turn and I cancelled
advisories five miles from my destination.

Mxsmanic

April 22nd 07, 06:00 PM

Luke Skywalker writes:

> I am told by some FSDO people (who will go on the record wtih the
> comment) that the clearance is valid as LONG as you are under the
> controlling authority.
>
> So for instance lets say you are coming into Houston from College
> station and dail up Houston Approach and get "cleared into the Bravo"
> but dont actually penetrate the Bravo until your destination
> (Hobby)...as long as you are under the control of Houston Approach or
> HObby tower you can say you have clearance into the bravo.

Thanks.

> I have done this in practice a lot. Frequently I get cleared into the
> Bravo by Hou Approach and then when they pump me to Hobby tower
> (because thats on the way to Pearland) I get "cleared into the Bravo"
> again... It is there airspace I am going through.

Hmm ... but does that mean that if they don't explicitly clear you into the
Class B again, your previous clearance is no longer valid?

> I actually discussed this with a FSDO person the other day and was
> told what I expected...although he/she cautioned that this is not
> official FAA policy)...most if not all enforcement actions are done on
> someone who penetrates the Bravo without chatting to anyone.

Like someone who tries to sneak through, or someone who doesn't know what he's
doing, or someone who just miscalculates the borders of the airspace, or what?

I have to admit in looking at sectionals that I don't know how pilots keep
track of where they are in relation to these airspaces if they don't have
moving-map GPS or something. Looking at the Class B around Houston, there's a
flat spot on the north side of the inner chunk around HUB, but it's not clear
exactly what path that line follows. I guess you'd just have to steer way
clear if you don't have something that can tell you exactly where you are.
I'm sure you can cut it closer by looking at the chart, but that would mean
staring at the chart an awful lot when it might be safer to look out the
window or check the instruments. If it were all just concentric circles, that
might be different, but with so many little chunks to worry about it seems
hard to manage. Perhaps the idea is that VFR pilots with only a chart to go
by shouldn't be loitering around such areas in the first place.

> That would confirm a discussion I had when I was in Safety school at
> OKC...

What is safety school?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Larry Dighera

April 22nd 07, 07:01 PM

On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 12:45:06 -0400, john smith >
wrote in >:

>I had a situation yesterday (Saturday, 21 APR) where I was talking to
>LEX APPR. The controller asked me how long I wanted to remain at 9,500.
>I was 80 nm from my destination of KISZ/Cincinnati Blue Ash.
>0DM: "Another 30 miles.
>0DM: "A better question would be where will Cincinnati want me?"
>He responded that CVG would probably want me down lower.
>0DM: "How long before you hand me off to Cincinnati?"
>LEX: "About 20 miles."
>0DM: "Okay, where do you want me to go?"
>He cleared me down to 5,500.
>I was handed off to CVG APPR.
>CVG instructed me to descend to 3,500.
>As my flightpath would take me through the CBAS and the controller had
>not said the magic words, I took preemptive action.
>0DM: "Are you going to clear me through the Bravo airspace and vector
>me?"
>At first he said he wasn't going to, but then changed his mind and
>issued the clearance and told me he may have to turn me east as I got
>closer. As it turned out, I didn't have to turn and I cancelled
>advisories five miles from my destination.

It would seem that FAAO 7110.65 2-1-16 b might apply in this case:

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/air_traffic_orders/media/7110.65R.pdf
2-1-16. SURFACE AREAS
a. Coordinate with the appropriate nonapproach
control tower on an individual aircraft basis before
issuing a clearance which would require flight within
a surface area for which the tower has responsibility
unless otherwise specified in a letter of agreement.

b. Coordinate with the appropriate control tower
for transit authorization when you are providing radar
traffic advisory service to an aircraft that will enter
another facility’s airspace.
NOTE-
The pilot is not expected to obtain his/her own
authorization through each area when in contact with a
radar facility.

c. Transfer communications to the appropriate
facility, if required, prior to operation within a surface
area for which the tower has responsibility.

Jose

April 22nd 07, 09:33 PM

> I have to admit in looking at sectionals that I don't know how pilots keep
> track of where they are in relation to these airspaces if they don't have
> moving-map GPS or something.

When you are in a real airplane, you can look around far better than you
can on a computer screen, even with a hat switch. In many small
aircraft you can just about look straight down just by moving your head,
and maybe banking a bit. You can take in the entire vista in a glance,
rather than just one badly placed screen at a time. You can focus on
any direction you want just by looking.

In some areas it can be a challenge, especially down low, but that's why
you do preflight planning and set up waypoints to look for, and
estimated times between them. In other areas, and from higher up, it's
drop dead simple. Although I will admit that, having learned to fly in
California, lakes made great landmarks. I started flying on the East
coast with the same idea, and found that there were lakes everywhere!

It takes some practice in real aircraft, but it's not hard at all.

Jos
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Mxsmanic

April 22nd 07, 11:10 PM

Jose writes:

> When you are in a real airplane, you can look around far better than you
> can on a computer screen, even with a hat switch. In many small
> aircraft you can just about look straight down just by moving your head,
> and maybe banking a bit. You can take in the entire vista in a glance,
> rather than just one badly placed screen at a time. You can focus on
> any direction you want just by looking.

You still have to look at the chart. And you cannot look at the chart and out
the window at the same time.

> In some areas it can be a challenge, especially down low, but that's why
> you do preflight planning and set up waypoints to look for, and
> estimated times between them. In other areas, and from higher up, it's
> drop dead simple. Although I will admit that, having learned to fly in
> California, lakes made great landmarks. I started flying on the East
> coast with the same idea, and found that there were lakes everywhere!
>
> It takes some practice in real aircraft, but it's not hard at all.

Even with perfect visibility outside the aircraft and perfect visibility for
your charts, how do you find airspace boundaries when nothing on the sectional
indicates their exact location?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Maxwell

April 22nd 07, 11:22 PM

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Jose writes:
>
>> When you are in a real airplane, you can look around far better than you
>> can on a computer screen, even with a hat switch. In many small
>> aircraft you can just about look straight down just by moving your head,
>> and maybe banking a bit. You can take in the entire vista in a glance,
>> rather than just one badly placed screen at a time. You can focus on
>> any direction you want just by looking.
>
> You still have to look at the chart. And you cannot look at the chart and
> out
> the window at the same time.
>
>> In some areas it can be a challenge, especially down low, but that's why
>> you do preflight planning and set up waypoints to look for, and
>> estimated times between them. In other areas, and from higher up, it's
>> drop dead simple. Although I will admit that, having learned to fly in
>> California, lakes made great landmarks. I started flying on the East
>> coast with the same idea, and found that there were lakes everywhere!
>>
>> It takes some practice in real aircraft, but it's not hard at all.
>
> Even with perfect visibility outside the aircraft and perfect visibility
> for
> your charts, how do you find airspace boundaries when nothing on the
> sectional
> indicates their exact location?
>

Clearly too basic to be considered "on topic" for this group.

[email protected]

April 22nd 07, 11:55 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Jose writes:

> > When you are in a real airplane, you can look around far better than you
> > can on a computer screen, even with a hat switch. In many small
> > aircraft you can just about look straight down just by moving your head,
> > and maybe banking a bit. You can take in the entire vista in a glance,
> > rather than just one badly placed screen at a time. You can focus on
> > any direction you want just by looking.

> You still have to look at the chart. And you cannot look at the chart and out
> the window at the same time.

In real life you turn your head; you don't have to push a key to get
a new 2 dimensional limited view.

In real life you get an almost 360 degree view all at once without
any keypresses.

> > In some areas it can be a challenge, especially down low, but that's why
> > you do preflight planning and set up waypoints to look for, and
> > estimated times between them. In other areas, and from higher up, it's
> > drop dead simple. Although I will admit that, having learned to fly in
> > California, lakes made great landmarks. I started flying on the East
> > coast with the same idea, and found that there were lakes everywhere!
> >
> > It takes some practice in real aircraft, but it's not hard at all.

> Even with perfect visibility outside the aircraft and perfect visibility for
> your charts, how do you find airspace boundaries when nothing on the sectional
> indicates their exact location?

This thead is about class B; in class B you use a TAC, not a sectional.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic

April 23rd 07, 02:06 AM

writes:

> In real life you turn your head; you don't have to push a key to get
> a new 2 dimensional limited view.

You still cannot look at two things at once.

> In real life you get an almost 360 degree view all at once without
> any keypresses.

Only about one degree of that field is sharp and clear.

> This thead is about class B; in class B you use a TAC, not a sectional.

The TAC doesn't define the boundaries precisely, either.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

April 23rd 07, 02:25 AM

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
> "Roy Smith" > wrote in message
> ...
>> If you're going to continue to ask inane questions, can't you at least
>> please try and be a little creative about it?
>>
>
> Why do you consider it inane?
>
>
>> A jump plane orbiting at 12,000 MSL above Central Park receives the
>> clearance, "Cleared to the LaGuardia Airport". At that point, the jumpers
>> all jump out. Are the jumpers cleared into the Class B?
>>
>
>
> Now you're just being silly.
>

Hmm, could a parachute be an aircraft?

Cheers

[email protected]

April 23rd 07, 03:15 AM

Mxsmanic > wrote:
> writes:

> > In real life you turn your head; you don't have to push a key to get
> > a new 2 dimensional limited view.

> You still cannot look at two things at once.

Yet another true but absolutely worthless statement from the master
of worthless statements.

You look at the chart then look out the window. It takes less than
a second to shift one's view.

> > In real life you get an almost 360 degree view all at once without
> > any keypresses.

> Only about one degree of that field is sharp and clear.

If that's true, you need to see a doctor.

My clear field of vision is about 20 degrees and the peripheral is
about 45 and I'm older than dirt. It takes milliseconds for the eyes
to shift.

But all of this is quite irrelevant.

Real people look at real charts and out real windows and correlate the two
on a daily basis.

Just because you can't chew gum and walk at the same time doesn't
mean the rest of the world is in such pitiful shape.

> > This thead is about class B; in class B you use a TAC, not a sectional.

> The TAC doesn't define the boundaries precisely, either.

Yes, a TAC does. That's why they exist.

Show of hands; is there anyone out there that has a problem with
the Class B boundaries on a TAC besides our resident Microsoft
flying game player with tunnel vision?

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Luke Skywalker

April 23rd 07, 04:52 AM

On Apr 22, 12:00 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:

The easy one first...Safety school is where you learn officially to do
things like Audits etc...it is a great school...the best FAA school I
have been to...besides fell in love with OKC (there for a month) but
cant find a job that would let me live there.

When I switch from Houston Approach to Hobby I always play the same
game...ie asking if I am cleared into the Bravo...UNLESS I AM already
in it.

BAsed on this thread I've talked to some people to see, and I think
that if one controller (the radar) clears you then you are "OK"...you
are probably OK if the tower hands you off to the radar...but I alwasy
ask every controller...it is just a habit thing.

IN practice steering clear of the Class B's is easier then one thinks
but it is not as simple as just flying along looking at a map,
particularly with the curves.

Awhile back (some years) I was ferrying a plane that had a non
functioning Xponder on a ferry permit from College Station to
GLS...and I ws VERY VERY Careful to clear the Mode C line. I probably
spent about 15 minutes more then I could have with a moving map, but I
was very very careful.

the most interesting time I have ever had with a radar facility on a
"Class" event actually was at Austin. I was ferrying a "glider" to
CLS in tow...Had I never told them I was ferrying something like this
there is no way that they would have known, having told them it seemed
to just cause a "tilt" in the Force...What was fascinating is that San
Antonio had handed me off and THEY knew I was ferry a glider so I
assume that they told the Austin people...

Some words went back and forth. The days of me standing saluting on
every whim of ATC ended at the 10,000 hour mark (or sooner) in fact I
told the Controller "See the problem is I know the regs better then
you do. We can all met down at the Houston FSDO and have a chat." I
requested a phone number and we pressed on and after landing at
Coulter field had a chat with the Supervisor who had kind words and
seemed to indicate that they would "fix" this...and I let it drop.

Robert

Jim Logajan

April 23rd 07, 06:26 AM

DR > wrote:
> Hmm, could a parachute be an aircraft?

Doesn't matter because in the U.S. parachute operations are covered by Part
105 of the FARs. In this case, specifically:

§ 105.25 Parachute operations in designated airspace.

Mxsmanic

April 23rd 07, 10:49 AM

Luke Skywalker writes:

> the most interesting time I have ever had with a radar facility on a
> "Class" event actually was at Austin. I was ferrying a "glider" to
> CLS in tow...Had I never told them I was ferrying something like this
> there is no way that they would have known, having told them it seemed
> to just cause a "tilt" in the Force...What was fascinating is that San
> Antonio had handed me off and THEY knew I was ferry a glider so I
> assume that they told the Austin people...

So what was the problem?

> Some words went back and forth. The days of me standing saluting on
> every whim of ATC ended at the 10,000 hour mark (or sooner) in fact I
> told the Controller "See the problem is I know the regs better then
> you do. We can all met down at the Houston FSDO and have a chat." I
> requested a phone number and we pressed on and after landing at
> Coulter field had a chat with the Supervisor who had kind words and
> seemed to indicate that they would "fix" this...and I let it drop.

Excellent.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

April 25th 07, 04:50 AM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

>
> I have to admit in looking at sectionals that I don't know how pilots
> keep track of where they are in relation to these airspaces if they
> don't have moving-map GPS or something.

Now there's a surprise.

Bertie

Steven P. McNicoll

April 27th 07, 02:36 PM

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> Dunno at Dulles, we always got from clearance delivery a "psuedu-IFR"
> speak clearance prior to taxi:
>
> 5327K cleared into the class B via fly runway heading at or below 1500
> feet expect 4,500 ten minutes after departure, departure frequency 125.8,
> squawk 4425.
>

The Dulles SOP requires the Clearance Delivery position to issue the
following to VFR departures:

1) A clearance to depart the Class Bravo airspace.

2) Assign runway heading.

3) An altitude at or below 3,000 feet.

4) The appropriate departure control frequency.

FAAO 7110.65 does not specifically address VFR departures from controlled
airports within a Class B surface area. In the section on Class B service
it states, "VFR aircraft must obtain an ATC clearance to operate in Class B
airspace." That's consistent with FAR 91.131, which states, "The operator
must receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility having jurisdiction for
that area before operating an aircraft in that area." Well, a takeoff
clearance is an ATC clearance, so if you're cleared for takeoff at an
airport within Class B airspace you've obtained an ATC clearance prior to
operating within Class B airspace.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 27th 07, 02:53 PM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>
> It's a guess from knowledge gained over the years. Am I close?
>

Beats me. I've never seen "Class B clearance" defined anywhere. A Google
search on that term suggests there is fairly wide consensus among pilots
that VFR aircraft must obtain a specific clearance to enter Class B
airspace. I assume that is what is meant by "Class B clearance". I do not
know what inspired that idea. FAR 91.131 says only, "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
distinguish between VFR or IFR operations, why do most pilots believe it
applies only to VFR aircraft?

Steven P. McNicoll

April 27th 07, 03:00 PM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>
> I was taught that it is important to hear the "cleared into Class B"
> phrase before entering Class B, but I wasn't taught how to insure that
> it was uttered by ATC aside from explicitly asking if I were so
> cleared. Reading FAAO 7111.65 provides a clue to what ATC is
> expecting from pilots:
>
>> Section 9. Class B Service Area- Terminal
>>
>> 7-9-2. VFR AIRCRAFT IN CLASS B AIRSPACE
>> a. VFR aircraft must obtain an ATC clearance to
>> operate in Class B airspace.
>> REFERENCE-
>> FAAO 7110.65, Operational Requests, Para 2-1-18.
>> FAAO 7110.65, Airspace Classes, Para 2-4-22.
>> PHRASEOLOGY-
>> CLEARED THROUGH/TO ENTER/OUT OF BRAVO
>> AIRSPACE,
>>
>>
>>
>> 2-1-18. OPERATIONAL REQUESTS
>> Respond to a request from another controller, a pilot
>> or vehicle operator by one of the following verbal
>> means:
>> a. Restate the request in complete or abbreviated
>> terms followed by the word "APPROVED." The
>> phraseology "APPROVED AS REQUESTED" may
>> be substituted in lieu of a lengthy readback.
>> PHRASEOLOGY-
>> (Requested operation) APPROVED.
>> or
>> APPROVED AS REQUESTED.
>> b. State restrictions followed by the word
>> "APPROVED."
>> PHRASEOLOGY-
>> (Restriction and/or additional instructions, requested
>> operation) APPROVED.
>> c. State the word "UNABLE" and, time permitting,
>> a reason.
>> PHRASEOLOGY-
>> UNABLE (requested operation).
>> and when necessary,
>> (reason and/or additional instructions.)
>> d. State the words "STAND BY."
>> NOTE-
>> "STAND BY" is not an approval or denial. The controller
>> acknowledges the request and will respond at a later time.
>> REFERENCE-
>> FAAO 7110.65, Traffic Advisories, Para 2-1-21.
>> FAAO 7110.65, Route or Altitude Amendments, Para 4-2-5.
>> FAAO 7110.65, Methods, Para 7-9-3.
>>
>
> So when handed off by approach control to the Class B controller, it's
> best to say, "Cessna 1234 request transit through bravo airspace,"
> rather than, "Cessna 1234 with you," and hoping to hear the controller
> explicitly issue the bravo clearance. This technique does at least
> two things:
>
> 1. It alerts the controller to the fact that you are not yet
> cleared into bravo airspace, perhaps unlike much of the other
> traffic s/he is handling.
>
> 2. It clearly places the onus on the controller to comply with
> FAAO 7110.65 paragraph 2-1-18, thus insuring that the
> controller will be unlikely to file a Form 8020-17
> Preliminary Pilot Deviation Report, because it's not in
> his/her best self-interest.
>
> So the technique of _explicitly_ requesting clearance through bravo
> airspace on initial radio contact with the Class B controller should
> be taught by CFIs.
>

For all operations, or just VFR operations?

Steven P. McNicoll

April 27th 07, 03:15 PM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>
> It would seem that FAAO 7110.65 2-1-16 b might apply in this case:
>
>
> http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/air_traffic_orders/media/7110.65R.pdf
> 2-1-16. SURFACE AREAS
> a. Coordinate with the appropriate nonapproach
> control tower on an individual aircraft basis before
> issuing a clearance which would require flight within
> a surface area for which the tower has responsibility
> unless otherwise specified in a letter of agreement.
>
> b. Coordinate with the appropriate control tower
> for transit authorization when you are providing radar
> traffic advisory service to an aircraft that will enter
> another facility's airspace.
> NOTE-
> The pilot is not expected to obtain his/her own
> authorization through each area when in contact with a
> radar facility.
>
> c. Transfer communications to the appropriate
> facility, if required, prior to operation within a surface
> area for which the tower has responsibility.
>

What part of this case might that apply to?

Larry Dighera

April 27th 07, 03:36 PM

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:15:18 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote in
et>:

>
>"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> It would seem that FAAO 7110.65 2-1-16 b might apply in this case:
>>
>>
>> http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/air_traffic_orders/media/7110.65R.pdf
>> 2-1-16. SURFACE AREAS
>> a. Coordinate with the appropriate nonapproach
>> control tower on an individual aircraft basis before
>> issuing a clearance which would require flight within
>> a surface area for which the tower has responsibility
>> unless otherwise specified in a letter of agreement.
>>
>> b. Coordinate with the appropriate control tower
>> for transit authorization when you are providing radar
>> traffic advisory service to an aircraft that will enter
>> another facility's airspace.
>> NOTE-
>> The pilot is not expected to obtain his/her own
>> authorization through each area when in contact with a
>> radar facility.
>>
>> c. Transfer communications to the appropriate
>> facility, if required, prior to operation within a surface
>> area for which the tower has responsibility.
>>
>
>What part of this case might that apply to?
>

I was thinking that 2-1-16 (b) might apply, as the OP was receiving
Radar Traffic Advisory Service at the time; but I'm unfamiliar with
the airspace in question, so it's difficult to be certain.

Larry Dighera

April 27th 07, 03:47 PM

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 13:53:06 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote in
et>:

>
>"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> It's a guess from knowledge gained over the years. Am I close?
>>
>
>Beats me. I've never seen "Class B clearance" defined anywhere. A Google
>search on that term suggests there is fairly wide consensus among pilots
>that VFR aircraft must obtain a specific clearance to enter Class B
>airspace. I assume that is what is meant by "Class B clearance". I do not
>know what inspired that idea. FAR 91.131 says only, "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
>distinguish between VFR or IFR operations, why do most pilots believe it
>applies only to VFR aircraft?
>

I can't speak for those pilots whom your research disclosed, but it is
clear to me, that regulations mandate that all operators of aircraft
within Class B airspace must have received ATC clearance, either
explicitly or implied, prior to entering.

With your experience as an ATC controller, are you able to think of a
situation in which an ATC clearance into B airspace might be implied
rather than explicit?

Steven P. McNicoll

April 27th 07, 03:48 PM

"Jose" > wrote in message
t...
>
> Then it's irrelevant. We're talking about VFR aircraft entering the Bravo
> on an "implied" clearance.
>

How was this discussion limited to VFR aircraft?

>
> Yes. Bravo goes to the surface at the primary airport (and maybe some
> surrounding fields)
>

All surface areas go to the surface everywhere within the lateral limits of
the surface area. I have always felt that only airborne operations needed
to be concerned about airspace. Upon what do you base your assertion that
operations conducted solely on the surface are also affected by the class of
the overlying airspace?

>
> Interesting question. I presume that class B clearance is only required
> for =flight=, at any altitude, including two inches. If I am correct, you
> would not need a clearance to taxi at an uncontrolled airport in the Bravo
> surface area (*), but you =would= need a clearance to hover-taxi a
> helicopter under the same circumstances.
>

I presumed the same, but in your last message you said a VFR aircraft
operating on the surface at Love Field, not in flight, was already in Class
B airspace.

Larry Dighera

April 27th 07, 03:49 PM

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:00:35 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote in
et>:

>> So when handed off by approach control to the Class B controller, it's
>> best to say, "Cessna 1234 request transit through bravo airspace,"
>> rather than, "Cessna 1234 with you," and hoping to hear the controller
>> explicitly issue the bravo clearance. This technique does at least
>> two things:
>>
>> 1. It alerts the controller to the fact that you are not yet
>> cleared into bravo airspace, perhaps unlike much of the other
>> traffic s/he is handling.
>>
>> 2. It clearly places the onus on the controller to comply with
>> FAAO 7110.65 paragraph 2-1-18, thus insuring that the
>> controller will be unlikely to file a Form 8020-17
>> Preliminary Pilot Deviation Report, because it's not in
>> his/her best self-interest.
>>
>> So the technique of _explicitly_ requesting clearance through bravo
>> airspace on initial radio contact with the Class B controller should
>> be taught by CFIs.
>>
>
>For all operations, or just VFR operations?

I'm sorry. I was referring to VFR operations.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 27th 07, 03:52 PM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>
> I'm sorry. I was referring to VFR operations.
>

Why do you exclude IFR operations?

Jose

April 27th 07, 03:59 PM

> How was this discussion limited to VFR aircraft?

I think the original question was for VFR aircraft, and in any case I
will buy that an IFR clearance which goes through the Bravo is an
implied Bravo cliearance. All IFR operations in controlled airspace (in
the US) must be on an IFR clearance. Since this is not so for VFR
operations, that's where the question about implied clearances lies.

> Upon what do you base your assertion that
> operations conducted solely on the surface are also affected by the class of
> the overlying airspace?

I don't recall such an assertion, and if I did assert it, I retract it
(subject to actual ground contact).

> I presumed the same, but in your last message you said a VFR aircraft
> operating on the surface at Love Field, not in flight, was already in Class
> B airspace.

Oh yes, now I remember. It was something about a takeoff clearance
within the Bravo being "implied". I was willing to give you that one
based on the idea that you're in the Bravo when on the surface.
Retracting that, we lose that possible implied clearance (and in fact
other posters have stated that they recieve explicit Bravo clearances
even on takeoff).

So, I'm still trying to find a case where, VFR, a clearance into the
Bravo is "implied", and such an implied clearance is sufficient to
escape prosecution. I suspect there is no such animal.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 27th 07, 11:29 PM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>
> I was thinking that 2-1-16 (b) might apply, as the OP was receiving
> Radar Traffic Advisory Service at the time; but I'm unfamiliar with
> the airspace in question, so it's difficult to be certain.
>

No. Imagine some Class D airspace 8 to 10 miles or so in diameter, the
airspace surrounding the Class D is "owned" by a single ARTCC or TRACON
position. The radar controller is working a VFR aircraft that will go
through the Class D airspace about 2000' AGL. Instead of having the VFR
aircraft switch to tower frequency before entering the Class D airspace and
back to the radar controller upon exiting, the aircraft stays on
center/approach frequency and the radar controller coordinates the transit
of the Class D airspace with the tower controller. That's the intent of
2-1-16(b).

Mxsmanic

April 27th 07, 11:57 PM

Steven P. McNicoll writes:

> Beats me. I've never seen "Class B clearance" defined anywhere. A Google
> search on that term suggests there is fairly wide consensus among pilots
> that VFR aircraft must obtain a specific clearance to enter Class B
> airspace. I assume that is what is meant by "Class B clearance". I do not
> know what inspired that idea. FAR 91.131 says only, "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
> distinguish between VFR or IFR operations, why do most pilots believe it
> applies only to VFR aircraft?

Because IFR flights are already under ATC control, so the Class B clearance is
implicit in a more general clearance that requires entry into the Class B.

VFR flights do not necessarily have any specific clearance, so they often need
one in order to enter the Class B, which cannot be entered without any
clearance at all.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic

April 27th 07, 11:58 PM

Larry Dighera writes:

> With your experience as an ATC controller, are you able to think of a
> situation in which an ATC clearance into B airspace might be implied
> rather than explicit?

Any IFR flight that touches the Class B airspace as part of the overall IFR
clearance (as a destination or departure airport, for example).

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic

April 28th 07, 12:00 AM

Jose writes:

> So, I'm still trying to find a case where, VFR, a clearance into the
> Bravo is "implied", and such an implied clearance is sufficient to
> escape prosecution. I suspect there is no such animal.

There is no such animal. Even if you are taking off into the airspace of a
Class B airport (VFR), you need to ask for clearance into the airspace. If
you fail to do so, you may or may not get away with it, but why take chances?

If you are IFR, the "cleared to XXX as filed" or similar initial IFR clearance
implies clearance into the Class B airspace (and clearance anywhere else
touched by the overall cleared route).

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Larry Dighera

April 28th 07, 02:11 AM

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:52:44 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote in
et>:

>
>"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> I'm sorry. I was referring to VFR operations.
>>
>
>Why do you exclude IFR operations?
>

I just figure that a clearance into Class B airspace is a non-issue
for IFR operations, as they are nearly always operating on a
clearance. Am I overlooking something?

Larry Dighera

April 28th 07, 02:36 AM

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:29:24 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote in
t>:

>
>"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> I was thinking that 2-1-16 (b) might apply, as the OP was receiving
>> Radar Traffic Advisory Service at the time; but I'm unfamiliar with
>> the airspace in question, so it's difficult to be certain.
>>
>
>No. Imagine some Class D airspace 8 to 10 miles or so in diameter, the
>airspace surrounding the Class D is "owned" by a single ARTCC or TRACON
>position. The radar controller is working a VFR aircraft that will go
>through the Class D airspace about 2000' AGL. Instead of having the VFR
>aircraft switch to tower frequency before entering the Class D airspace and
>back to the radar controller upon exiting, the aircraft stays on
>center/approach frequency and the radar controller coordinates the transit
>of the Class D airspace with the tower controller. That's the intent of
>2-1-16(b).
>

I understand. That makes sense.

However 2-1-16(b) doesn't seem to be limited exclusively to Class D
surface areas, and Class B surface areas can be significantly larger
than Class D surface areas.

Like I said, I'm not familiar with the particular Class B airspace
layout nor the destination airport in relation to the Class B, but
what specific wording prevents 2-1-16(b) from applying in the Class B
situation the OP described? What am I overlooking?

Steven P. McNicoll

April 28th 07, 12:32 PM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>
> I understand. That makes sense.
>
> However 2-1-16(b) doesn't seem to be limited exclusively to Class D
> surface areas, and Class B surface areas can be significantly larger
> than Class D surface areas.
>
> Like I said, I'm not familiar with the particular Class B airspace
> layout nor the destination airport in relation to the Class B, but
> what specific wording prevents 2-1-16(b) from applying in the Class B
> situation the OP described? What am I overlooking?
>

"Coordinate with the appropriate control tower for transit authorization
when you are providing radar traffic advisory service to an aircraft that
will enter another facility's airspace."

Show mw a Class B surface area where the controlled airspace immediately
outside of the surface area belongs to a facility other than the one
responsible for the surface area itself.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 28th 07, 01:11 PM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>
> I can't speak for those pilots whom your research disclosed, but it is
> clear to me, that regulations mandate that all operators of aircraft
> within Class B airspace must have received ATC clearance, either
> explicitly or implied, prior to entering.
>
> With your experience as an ATC controller, are you able to think of a
> situation in which an ATC clearance into B airspace might be implied
> rather than explicit?
>

Sure. Takeoff clearance from an airport in a Class B surface area.
Clearance for an approach that enters a Class B surface area.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 28th 07, 02:06 PM

"Jose" > wrote in message
...
>
> Oh yes, now I remember. It was something about a takeoff clearance within
> the Bravo being "implied". I was willing to give you that one based on
> the idea that you're in the Bravo when on the surface. Retracting that, we
> lose that possible implied clearance (and in fact other posters have
> stated that they recieve explicit Bravo clearances even on takeoff).
>
> So, I'm still trying to find a case where, VFR, a clearance into the Bravo
> is "implied", and such an implied clearance is sufficient to escape
> prosecution. I suspect there is no such animal.
>

How did we lose that implied clearance? FAR 91.131 states, "The operator
must receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility having jurisdiction for
that area before operating an aircraft in that area." Is a takeoff
clearance not an ATC clearance? We seem to agree that one is not in the
Class B airspace until airborne, and the takeoff clearance obviously
precedes becoming airborne, it looks to me like every element of the
regulation is complied with. What am I missing?

Now about other posters' stating that they receive explicit clearances into
Class B before departing VFR. There is no requirement for that in FAAO
7110.65, but I think I can guess why a facility would choose to insert such
a requirement in their SOP. How many messages in just this thread referred
to the "magic words", "cleared to enter bravo airspace"? If you believed
that was required, and you were departing VFR from a controlled field in
Class B airspace, you'd probably ask for explicit clearance into Class B
airspace at takeoff if it hadn't been previously issued. If you were a
controller there you'd soon notice that VFR departures tended to make that
request, and you'd probably just start issuing it before they requested.
You might even suggest it be issued to departing aircraft before they
switched to tower frequency. So it becomes a duty of the clearance delivery
position in the SOP.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 28th 07, 02:12 PM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>
> I just figure that a clearance into Class B airspace is a non-issue
> for IFR operations, as they are nearly always operating on a
> clearance. Am I overlooking something?
>

But aren't they nearly always operating on an implied clearance?

Ron Natalie

April 28th 07, 02:41 PM

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
> "Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
> ...
>> I just figure that a clearance into Class B airspace is a non-issue
>> for IFR operations, as they are nearly always operating on a
>> clearance. Am I overlooking something?
>>
>
> But aren't they nearly always operating on an implied clearance?
>
>
>
They're always operating on an explicit clearance if they are legally
in controlled airspace.

Jose

April 28th 07, 02:51 PM

> They're always operating on an explicit clearance if they are legally
> in controlled airspace.

He meant an implied class B clearance.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 28th 07, 03:34 PM

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> They're always operating on an explicit clearance if they are legally
> in controlled airspace.
>

But aren't they nearly always operating on an implied Class B clearance?

Larry Dighera

April 28th 07, 04:39 PM

On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 11:32:05 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote in
et>:

>
>"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> I understand. That makes sense.
>>
>> However 2-1-16(b) doesn't seem to be limited exclusively to Class D
>> surface areas, and Class B surface areas can be significantly larger
>> than Class D surface areas.
>>
>> Like I said, I'm not familiar with the particular Class B airspace
>> layout nor the destination airport in relation to the Class B, but
>> what specific wording prevents 2-1-16(b) from applying in the Class B
>> situation the OP described? What am I overlooking?
>>
>
>"Coordinate with the appropriate control tower for transit authorization
>when you are providing radar traffic advisory service to an aircraft that
>will enter another facility's airspace."
>
>Show mw a Class B surface area where the controlled airspace immediately
>outside of the surface area belongs to a facility other than the one
>responsible for the surface area itself.
>

If I recall correctly, the OP was headed to a Class D field adjacent
to a Class B area. In an earlier article you indicated that Class Ds
are owned by ARTCCs. Isn't the Class B tower a different facility
than the ARTCC? What am I missing?

Larry Dighera

April 28th 07, 04:42 PM

On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 12:11:25 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote in
t>:

>
>"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> I can't speak for those pilots whom your research disclosed, but it is
>> clear to me, that regulations mandate that all operators of aircraft
>> within Class B airspace must have received ATC clearance, either
>> explicitly or implied, prior to entering.
>>
>> With your experience as an ATC controller, are you able to think of a
>> situation in which an ATC clearance into B airspace might be implied
>> rather than explicit?
>>
>
>Sure. Takeoff clearance from an airport in a Class B surface area.
>Clearance for an approach that enters a Class B surface area.
>

You're referring to an IFR approach, right?

Other than the takeoff clearance you mention above, you are unable to
think of a situation where a VFR flight might receive an implied
clearance into Class B airspace?

Mxsmanic

April 28th 07, 06:50 PM

Steven P. McNicoll writes:

> How did we lose that implied clearance? FAR 91.131 states, "The operator
> must receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility having jurisdiction for
> that area before operating an aircraft in that area." Is a takeoff
> clearance not an ATC clearance?

A take-off clearance does not extend beyond take-off, and thus does not
include a clearance into the Class B. An IFR clearance to destination on the
ground does include the Class B of the departure airport, so the effect of the
take-off clearance is unimportant. A VFR flight has no IFR clearance to cover
the Class B, however.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 29th 07, 12:51 PM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>
> If I recall correctly, the OP was headed to a Class D field adjacent
> to a Class B area. In an earlier article you indicated that Class Ds
> are owned by ARTCCs. Isn't the Class B tower a different facility
> than the ARTCC? What am I missing?
>

Class D airspace in the US is a child begat by the marriage of Control Zone
and Airport Traffic Area some fourteen years ago during Airspace
Reclassification. It is the Control Zone heritage of Class D airspace that
is owned by the overlying ARTCC/TRACON. When a radar controller coordinates
transit through Class D airspace he is paying homage to the Airport Traffic
Area heritage.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 29th 07, 12:54 PM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>
> You're referring to an IFR approach, right?
>

I'm referring to an SIAP.

>
> Other than the takeoff clearance you mention above, you are unable to
> think of a situation where a VFR flight might receive an implied
> clearance into Class B airspace?
>

I can also think of clearance for an approach that enters a Class B surface
area.

Jose

April 29th 07, 03:14 PM

>> Other than the takeoff clearance you mention above, you are unable to
>> think of a situation where a VFR flight might receive an implied
>> clearance into Class B airspace?
> I can also think of clearance for an approach that enters a Class B surface
> area.

Since that's an IFR procedure, it doesn't get issued to a VFR flight,
right? But how about a VFR flight that wants a pop-up (real IFR)
approach clearance or a practice IFR approach into a Bravo airport while
they are outside Bravo airspace? They don't hear the magic words
"cleard into the class Bravo" but they do get the appropriate approach
clearance ("five miles from the outer marker, cleard for the ILS 24
approach, maintain 2600 until established...")

In the case of the pop-up, once they get the IFR clearance, they =are=
IFR, right? Thus they would fall under the IFR cover. In the case of a
practice VFR approach, they are not IFR and can't rely on the IFR
clearance as an implied Bravo clearance. I suspect that a practice
approach clearance is not sufficient to avoid prosecution, should the
FAA which to hoover you.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Newps

April 29th 07, 04:03 PM

Jose wrote:

>
> Since that's an IFR procedure, it doesn't get issued to a VFR flight,
> right? But how about a VFR flight that wants a pop-up (real IFR)
> approach clearance or a practice IFR approach into a Bravo airport while
> they are outside Bravo airspace? They don't hear the magic words
> "cleard into the class Bravo" but they do get the appropriate approach
> clearance ("five miles from the outer marker, cleard for the ILS 24
> approach, maintain 2600 until established...")

When you are IFR there's no such thing as a class B clearance. There's
no such thing as class B for that matter. It is irrelevant to the IFR
pilot.

>
> In the case of the pop-up, once they get the IFR clearance, they =are=
> IFR, right?

Yes.

Thus they would fall under the IFR cover. In the case of a
> practice VFR approach, they are not IFR and can't rely on the IFR
> clearance as an implied Bravo clearance.

Right, although due to the negligence of class B approach controllers
quite a few VFR pilots have gotten out of class B busts.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 29th 07, 06:58 PM

"Jose" > wrote in message
. net...
>
> Since that's an IFR procedure, it doesn't get issued to a VFR flight,
> right?

Wrong. VFR aircraft are frequently cleared for IAPs.

>
> But how about a VFR flight that wants a pop-up (real IFR) approach
> clearance or a practice IFR approach into a Bravo airport while they are
> outside Bravo airspace?

That's what I just said.

>
> In the case of the pop-up, once they get the IFR clearance, they =are=
> IFR, right?

Yes. What of it?

>
> Thus they would fall under the IFR cover.

What's the IFR cover?

>
> In the case of a practice VFR approach, they are not IFR and can't rely on
> the IFR clearance as an implied Bravo clearance.

Why not?

>
> I suspect that a practice approach clearance is not sufficient to avoid
> prosecution, should the FAA which to hoover you.
>

Please explain how it does not satisfy the requirements of FAR 91.131.

Jose

April 30th 07, 12:38 AM

> When you are IFR there's no such thing as a class B clearance. There's no such thing as class B for that matter. It is irrelevant to the IFR pilot.

Well, class B doesn't "go away". Your IFR clearance just allows you to
ignore the boundaries. You are implicitly cleared into the Bravo if
your IFR clearance takes you in. That is the implied clearance that was
mentioned before. The remaining question is whether there is any such
thing as an "implied Bravo clearance" for VFR aircraft.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose

April 30th 07, 12:50 AM

>> Since that's an IFR procedure, it doesn't get issued to a VFR flight,
>> right?
> Wrong. VFR aircraft are frequently cleared for IAPs.

Ok, on a technicality. The aircraft is VFR when the clearance is
issued, and IFR when the clearance is accepted. Nit score: one to
nothing, your favor. :)

>> In the case of the pop-up, once they get the IFR clearance, they =are=
>> IFR, right?
> Yes. What of it?

Then they become a case that we have all already agreed on, so no
further dicussion of that case is needed.

>>Thus they would fall under the IFR cover.
> What's the IFR cover?

What I just mentioned. IFR clearances contain within them, implicitly,
any necessary Bravo clearances.

>> In the case of a practice VFR approach, they are not IFR and can't rely on
>> the IFR clearance as an implied Bravo clearance.
> Why not?

Because they are not IFR. You don't get an implied Bravo clearance
through the mechanism of an IFR clearance if you are not given an IFR
clearance.

A clearance for a practice approach under VFR is not an IFR clearance.
Ok, technically it might not even be a "clearance", but in any case I
don't see how it covers you to enter Bravo.

>> I suspect that a practice approach clearance is not sufficient to avoid
>> prosecution, should the FAA which to hoover you.
> Please explain how it does not satisfy the requirements of FAR 91.131.

The same way that "holding out" puts one in violation of 61.117.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Mxsmanic

April 30th 07, 03:37 AM

Jose writes:

> The remaining question is whether there is any such
> thing as an "implied Bravo clearance" for VFR aircraft.

No.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 30th 07, 04:43 AM

"Jose" > wrote in message
. net...
>
> Ok, on a technicality. The aircraft is VFR when the clearance is issued,
> and IFR when the clearance is accepted. Nit score: one to nothing, your
> favor. :)
>

No, the aircraft is VFR when the clearance is issued, and VFR when the
clearance is accepted.

>
> Then they become a case that we have all already agreed on, so no further
> dicussion of that case is needed.
>

You're the one that brought it up again.

>
> Because they are not IFR. You don't get an implied Bravo clearance
> through the mechanism of an IFR clearance if you are not given an IFR
> clearance.
>

Why can't they rely on the approach clearance?

>
> A clearance for a practice approach under VFR is not an IFR clearance. Ok,
> technically it might not even be a "clearance", but in any case I don't
> see how it covers you to enter Bravo.
>

It covers you to enter Bravo because it meets all the clearance requirements
to enter Bravo

>
> The same way that "holding out" puts one in violation of 61.117.
>

They're not the same at all.

Jose

April 30th 07, 05:09 AM

> No, the aircraft is VFR when the clearance is issued, and VFR when the
> clearance is accepted.

You're telling me that when I am VFR and want an IFR approach into
Columbus to get through a layer, and I request the ILS 26, and I hear
N423TA, maintain at or above 4000 until VECHY, cleared for the Columbus
ILS 26 approach", and I read that back, that I'm still VFR?

> You're the one that brought it up again.

No, you asked me what it meant. Let's stick with VFR.

> Why can't they rely on the approach clearance?

I don't know. This is the question. =I= would not rely on the (VFR
practice) approach clearance; I'm trying to figure out whether (and why)
I'm paranoid, or whether I'm just excercising good judgement of the FAA.

> [A practice ILS under VFR] covers you to enter Bravo because it meets
> all the clearance requirements to enter Bravo

Does it? The requirement is to receive "a clearance". So, technically,
=any= clearance anywhere would meet the letter of the law. But such an
interpretation would be clearly silly. The rule does not mean exactly
what it says it means. You need to receive an =appropriate= clearance,
where the FAA gets to decide whether your interpretation of
"appropriate" was... er... appropriate. After the fact. So, I'm
looking for actual cases, either way, where the FAA upheld or struck
down the idea that you must receive an explicit clearance into the Bravo
if you are VFR.

> They're not the same at all.

They are the same inasmuch as 61.117 does =not= prohibit holding out,
yet the FAA does. If I am "holding out" (say, posting an offer of an
airplane ride home from college on a ride board where others post
automobile rides home), I am not violating any of the words or sentences
of 61.117. However, the FAA will claim I am running a commercial
operation, and from what I have heard and read, they will succeed.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Bertie the Bunyip

April 30th 07, 10:24 AM

On 28 Apr, 18:50, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Steven P. McNicoll writes:
> > How did we lose that implied clearance? FAR 91.131 states, "The operator
> > must receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility having jurisdiction for
> > that area before operating an aircraft in that area." Is a takeoff
> > clearance not an ATC clearance?
>
> A take-off clearance does not extend beyond take-off, and thus does not
> include a clearance into the Class B. An IFR clearance to destination on the
> ground does include the Class B of the departure airport, so the effect of the
> take-off clearance is unimportant. A VFR flight has no IFR clearance to cover
> the Class B, however.

How th efjukkwouold you know terrorsit boi?

Bertie

Steven P. McNicoll

April 30th 07, 11:16 AM

On 28 Apr, 18:50, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>
> A take-off clearance does not extend beyond take-off, and thus does not
> include a clearance into the Class B.
>

It meets the requirements of FAR 91.131.

Mxsmanic

April 30th 07, 04:19 PM

Steven P. McNicoll writes:

>
> On 28 Apr, 18:50, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> >
> > A take-off clearance does not extend beyond take-off, and thus does not
> > include a clearance into the Class B.
> >
>
> It meets the requirements of FAR 91.131.

This is what 91.131 says:

a) Operating rules. No person may operate an aircraft within a Class B
airspace AREA except in compliance with Sec. 91.129 and the following rules:

(1) The operator must receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility
having jurisdiction for that AREA before operating an aircraft in that AREA.

Emphasis mine. The "area" is the Class B. The wording is ambiguous, but I
interpret it to mean that explicit clearance for the Class B is required. You
won't have to worry about a PD if you request clearance explicitly when you
don't have to, but you may well have to deal with one if you fail to request
clearance when you're required to. Given the ambiguity of the regulation, I'd
prefer not to press my luck.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Larry Dighera

April 30th 07, 04:32 PM

On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 11:51:50 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote in
et>:

>
>"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> If I recall correctly, the OP was headed to a Class D field adjacent
>> to a Class B area. In an earlier article you indicated that Class Ds
>> are owned by ARTCCs. Isn't the Class B tower a different facility
>> than the ARTCC? What am I missing?
>>
>
>Class D airspace in the US is a child begat by the marriage of Control Zone
>and Airport Traffic Area some fourteen years ago during Airspace
>Reclassification. It is the Control Zone heritage of Class D airspace that
>is owned by the overlying ARTCC/TRACON. When a radar controller coordinates
>transit through Class D airspace he is paying homage to the Airport Traffic
>Area heritage.
>

That makes some sense, I guess. But it doesn't address the issue I
raised, does it?

In the OP's case, why wouldn't FAAO 7110.65 2-1-16(b) apply? It
doesn't seem to be limited exclusively to Class D surface areas.

Like I said, I'm not familiar with the particular Class B airspace
layout nor the destination airport in relation to the Class B, but are
you able to provide the specific wording that prevents 2-1-16(b) from
applying in the Class B situation the OP described?

Maxwell

April 30th 07, 04:37 PM

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Steven P. McNicoll writes:
>
>>
>> On 28 Apr, 18:50, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>> >
>> > A take-off clearance does not extend beyond take-off, and thus does not
>> > include a clearance into the Class B.
>> >
>>
>> It meets the requirements of FAR 91.131.
>
> This is what 91.131 says:
>
> a) Operating rules. No person may operate an aircraft within a Class B
> airspace AREA except in compliance with Sec. 91.129 and the following
> rules:
>
> (1) The operator must receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility
> having jurisdiction for that AREA before operating an aircraft in that
> AREA.
>
> Emphasis mine. The "area" is the Class B. The wording is ambiguous, but
> I
> interpret it to mean that explicit clearance for the Class B is required.
> You
> won't have to worry about a PD if you request clearance explicitly when
> you
> don't have to, but you may well have to deal with one if you fail to
> request
> clearance when you're required to. Given the ambiguity of the regulation,
> I'd
> prefer not to press my luck.
>

What a nit picking moron.

Mxsmanic

April 30th 07, 10:21 PM

Maxwell writes:

> What a nit picking moron.

That's not the way the FAA sees it.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

April 30th 07, 10:23 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

Given
> the ambiguity of the regulation, I'd prefer not to press my luck.

So you just won't fly at all.

Bertie >

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

April 30th 07, 10:24 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Jose writes:
>
>> The remaining question is whether there is any such
>> thing as an "implied Bravo clearance" for VFR aircraft.
>
> No.
>

How the fjukk would you know, moron?

Bertei

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

April 30th 07, 10:56 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Maxwell writes:
>
>> What a nit picking moron.
>
> That's not the way the FAA sees it.

You have no idea what the FAA sees. In fact, I'll e-mail the thread to
an FAA friend of mine so he can laugh at you too!

I'll forward his Bwwahahwahwhahwhahwhs to you.

Bertie

Steven P. McNicoll

April 30th 07, 11:01 PM

"Jose" > wrote in message
t...
>
> You're telling me that when I am VFR and want an IFR approach into
> Columbus to get through a layer, and I request the ILS 26, and I hear
> N423TA, maintain at or above 4000 until VECHY, cleared for the Columbus
> ILS 26 approach", and I read that back, that I'm still VFR?
>

No, I'm telling you when you request a practice instrument approach while
VFR and you're subsequently cleared for the approach with the caveat to
maintain VFR that you're still VFR.

>
> No, you asked me what it meant. Let's stick with VFR.
>

No, you brought it up again when you wrongly assumed a clearance for a
practice SIAP issued to a VFR aircraft was an IFR clearance. I WAS sticking
with VFR.

>
> I don't know. This is the question. =I= would not rely on the (VFR
> practice) approach clearance; I'm trying to figure out whether (and why)
> I'm paranoid, or whether I'm just excercising good judgement of the FAA.
>

You're paranoid. If you receive a clearance that meets the requirements of
FAR 91.131 you can enter Class B airspace.

>
> Does it?
>

Yes.

>
> The requirement is to receive "a clearance". So, technically,
> =any= clearance anywhere would meet the letter of the law.
>

No. The requirement is, "The operator must receive an ATC clearance from
the ATC facility having jurisdiction for that area before operating an
aircraft in that area." So, technically, a clearance issued anywhere does
not meet the letter of the law. It has to be issued by the ATC facility
having jurisdiction for the Class B area. For example, an IFR clearance
issued by Chicago ARTCC to O'Hare Airport does not meet the letter of the
law, while a clearance for a practice instrument approach that penetrates
the Chicago Class B airspace issued to a VFR aircraft by Chicago approach
does meet the letter of the law.

>
> But such an
> interpretation would be clearly silly. The rule does not mean exactly
> what it says it means.
>

If the FARs don't mean what they say they don't mean anything.

>
> You need to receive an =appropriate= clearance,
> where the FAA gets to decide whether your interpretation of "appropriate"
> was... er... appropriate. After the fact. So, I'm looking for actual
> cases, either way, where the FAA upheld or struck down the idea that you
> must receive an explicit clearance into the Bravo if you are VFR.
>

Why do conclude that you need an explicit clearance to enter Bravo while VFR
but not while IFR? FAR 91.131 does not differentiate between IFR and VFR
operations.

Steven P. McNicoll

April 30th 07, 11:10 PM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>
> That makes some sense, I guess. But it doesn't address the issue I
> raised, does it?
>

It does.

>
> In the OP's case, why wouldn't FAAO 7110.65 2-1-16(b) apply? It
> doesn't seem to be limited exclusively to Class D surface areas.
>

What surface are in the OP's case do you imagine being transited?

>
> Like I said, I'm not familiar with the particular Class B airspace
> layout nor the destination airport in relation to the Class B, but are
> you able to provide the specific wording that prevents 2-1-16(b) from
> applying in the Class B situation the OP described?
>

There is no specific wording, simple logic prevents 2-1-16(b) from applying
in the Class B situation the OP described.

Jose

April 30th 07, 11:36 PM

> No, I'm telling you when you request a practice instrument approach while
> VFR and you're subsequently cleared for the approach with the caveat to
> maintain VFR that you're still VFR.

Yes, I know this.

> No, you brought it up again when you wrongly assumed a clearance for a
> practice SIAP issued to a VFR aircraft was an IFR clearance. I WAS sticking
> with VFR.

I did not wrongly assume. I presented both cases separately. Somehow
they got confused.

Sticking with VFR if I request a practice approach, and I hear "practice
ILS 32 approach approved, maintain VFR, report VICHY inbound", is that
a clearance? Not all ATC instructions count as clearances, what is the
rule that determines what a clearance is? (i.e. under VFR flight
following, ATC doesn't give vectors or clearances, they give suggestions)

> You're paranoid. If you receive a clearance that meets the requirements of
> FAR 91.131 you can enter Class B airspace.

I may be paranoid (but that doesn't mean they aren't out to get me. :)
Do you know of any cases where the FAA has actually ruled the way you
believe?

> [to meet the letter of the law, a clearance] has to be issued by the ATC facility
> having jurisdiction for the Class B area. For example, an IFR clearance
> issued by Chicago ARTCC to O'Hare Airport does not meet the letter of the
> law, while a clearance for a practice instrument approach that penetrates
> the Chicago Class B airspace issued to a VFR aircraft by Chicago approach
> does meet the letter of the law.

So I get my clearance in Cleveland for an IFR flight to JFK. Amazingly,
throughout the entire flight, there are no route changes. At what point
prior to hearing "cleared for the ILS..." have I received a clearance
=from= the ATC facility having jurisdiction over the NY Bravo? Is it
when I say to NY approach "N426RC, level at six point five" and they say
"6RC roger. NY altimeter 28.32"?

> If the FARs don't mean what they say they don't mean anything.

I agree. Nonetheless, they don't mean what they say.

> Why do conclude that you need an explicit clearance to enter Bravo while VFR
> but not while IFR? FAR 91.131 does not differentiate between IFR and VFR
> operations.

Because I have heard from many sources that an IFR clearance counts.
I've heard from many sources that otherwise, you must hear the magic
words. I suspect that it is just us pilots being a little on the
"fearful of the FAA" side, and the FAA thinking that's just ducky. But
if the FAA is comfortable enough with this (we've had TCAs since almost
thirty years ago), it becomes the rule until somebody risks their ticket.

And wins.

So, I'm looking for more than opinion, even if well founded. I'm
looking for cases, if there are any.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Mxsmanic

May 1st 07, 03:14 AM

Jose writes:

> So I get my clearance in Cleveland for an IFR flight to JFK. Amazingly,
> throughout the entire flight, there are no route changes. At what point
> prior to hearing "cleared for the ILS..." have I received a clearance
> =from= the ATC facility having jurisdiction over the NY Bravo? Is it
> when I say to NY approach "N426RC, level at six point five" and they say
> "6RC roger. NY altimeter 28.32"?

If you have IFR clearance to your destination, clearance into Bravo airspaces
is implied in this. If you have IFR clearance to an enroute fix (rare these
days), clearances into Bravo airspaces beyond that fix are not implied.

> Because I have heard from many sources that an IFR clearance counts.
> I've heard from many sources that otherwise, you must hear the magic
> words. I suspect that it is just us pilots being a little on the
> "fearful of the FAA" side, and the FAA thinking that's just ducky.

An explicit clearance into Bravo airspace is always required if you are VFR.
If you are IFR, an explicit clearance is required only if you do not already
have any other IFR clearance that implies a Bravo clearance (such as IFR
clearance to your destination).

> So, I'm looking for more than opinion, even if well founded. I'm
> looking for cases, if there are any.

Why bother? Just request a clearance explicitly and you're safe.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

May 5th 07, 04:53 AM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Jose writes:
>
>> So I get my clearance in Cleveland for an IFR flight to JFK.
>> Amazingly, throughout the entire flight, there are no route changes.
>> At what point prior to hearing "cleared for the ILS..." have I
>> received a clearance =from= the ATC facility having jurisdiction over
>> the NY Bravo? Is it when I say to NY approach "N426RC, level at six
>> point five" and they say "6RC roger. NY altimeter 28.32"?
>
> If you have IFR clearance to your destination, clearance into Bravo
> airspaces is implied in this. If you have IFR clearance to an enroute
> fix (rare these days), clearances into Bravo airspaces beyond that fix
> are not implied.
>
>> Because I have heard from many sources that an IFR clearance counts.
>> I've heard from many sources that otherwise, you must hear the magic
>> words. I suspect that it is just us pilots being a little on the
>> "fearful of the FAA" side, and the FAA thinking that's just ducky.
>
> An explicit clearance into Bravo airspace is always required if you
> are VFR. If you are IFR, an explicit clearance is required only if you
> do not already have any other IFR clearance that implies a Bravo
> clearance (such as IFR clearance to your destination).
>
>> So, I'm looking for more than opinion, even if well founded. I'm
>> looking for cases, if there are any.
>
> Why bother? Just request a clearance explicitly and you're safe.

how th e**** would you know you moron?

bertie

Phil

May 12th 07, 12:59 AM

C Booth wrote:
.... deleted stuff ...

> B-2. All of a sudden out of the blue she calls me and asks me if I
> have class B clearance. I gulp hard a couple of times, in all the
> vectors and hand offs I realize that I have not received clearance...I
> fess up and say noooo. She says "Well, you're right smack in the
> middle of Class B airspace". That's it, no instructions. I say,
> "Well..., can I get clearance now, or do you want me to go somewhere?"
> She gives me the clearance.

.... deleted ...

>
> Cbooth
> SEL MEL Instrument

SEL MEL Instrument NB/NBE (no brain, or no brain engaged) would be a
better by-line.

Oh yeah, let's see. You are just the kind of guy we all love to fly with.
--
"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool."
—- Voltaire

Steven P. McNicoll

June 8th 07, 06:24 PM

"Jose" > wrote in message
t...
>
> Yes, I know this.
>

I don't think you do. If you knew it you wouldn't have said that clearances
for IAPs don't get issued to VFR aircraft.

>
> Sticking with VFR if I request a practice approach, and I hear "practice
> ILS 32 approach approved, maintain VFR, report VICHY inbound", is that a
> clearance? Not all ATC instructions count as clearances, what is the rule
> that determines what a clearance is? (i.e. under VFR flight following,
> ATC doesn't give vectors or clearances, they give suggestions)
>

All ATC instructions that contain the word "cleared" are clearances. The
common practice of clearing VFR aircraft for practice IAPs has been
described in the AIM for many years. See AIM paragraph 4-3-21. Here is an
example of a Letter to Airmen described in 4-3-21.c:

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
GREEN BAY AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER
2077 AIRPORT DRIVE
GREEN BAY, WISCONSIN

ISSUE: MAY 1, 2007

EFFECTIVE: June 1, 2007

Facility Name: Green Bay Air Traffic Control Tower

Letter to Airman No. 07-1

SUBJECT: RADAR SERVICES TO VFR AIRCRAFT CONDUCTING PRACTICE APPROACHES AT
AIRPORTS WITHIN THE GREEN BAY APPROACH CONTROL AIRSPACE.

CANCELLATION DATE: June 1, 2009

Green Bay Approach Control provides approach control and radar service for
the following airports in the Green Bay Approach Control airspace. Austin
Straubel International Airport Green Bay (GRB), Appleton Outagamie County
Airport (ATW), Menominee-Marinette Twin County Airport (MNM), Manitowoc
County Airport (MTW), and Sturgeon Bay/Door County Cherryland Airport (SUE).

Green Bay Approach Control will provide radar services and IFR
lateral/longitudinal or 500 feet vertical separation from all IFR traffic
and other VFR aircraft practicing instrument approach procedures at Austin
Straubel International Airport Green Bay (GRB) and Appleton Outagamie County
Airport (ATW) during the respective published hours of operation. Aircraft
practicing instrument approach procedures at Menominee-Marinette Twin County
Airport (MNM), Manitowoc County Airport (MTW) and Sturgeon Bay/Door County
Cherryland Airport (SUE) will be provided IFR lateral/longitudinal or 500
feet vertical separation from all IFR and VFR practice instrument approach
aircraft from the time approach clearance is issued until the aircraft is
over the final approach fix or 5 miles from the airport, whichever is closer
to the airport. Separation services will not be provided to the surface at
Menominee-Marinette (MNM), Manitowoc County (MTW) and Sturgeon Bay (SUE)
Airports due to the limitations of radar coverage in those areas. Radar
services to VFR aircraft practicing instrument approach procedures at
Menominee-Marinette (MNM), Manitowoc (MTW) and Sturgeon Bay (SUE) will be
provided on a workload permitting basis.

Pilots requesting a VFR practice approach at any of the airports listed
above should advise Green Bay Approach Control of their intentions after
completion of the approach; e.g., full stop, stay in pattern, another
approach, etc. Pilots may expect to receive a clearance for the VFR
practice approach with the following phraseology:

"Maintain VFR, Cleared (type approach), (other instructions as required)."

Pilots requesting VFR practice approaches at the following airports should
contract Green Bay Approach Control on the frequencies listed below:

Austin Straubel International Green Bay (GRB) 119.4 VHF or 338.2 UHF

Appleton Outagamie County (ATW) 126.3 VHF or 338.2 UHF

Menominee-Marinette (MNM) 119.5

Manitowoc County (MTW) 120.2

Sturgeon Bay (SUE) 119.25

It must be clearly understood, however, that even though the controller may
be providing separation, pilots are required to comply with Visual Flight
Rules (FAR 91.113). Application of air traffic control procedures or any
action taken by the controller to avoid air traffic conflictions does not
relieve the pilot of the responsibility to see and avoid other traffic and
to maintain terrain and obstruction clearance while operating in VFR
conditions.

Jeffrey Koppa
Air Traffic Manager
Green Bay Air Traffic Control Tower

>
> I may be paranoid (but that doesn't mean they aren't out to get me. :) Do
> you know of any cases where the FAA has actually ruled the way you
> believe?
>

I don't believe there have been any cases to rule on. Why would there be?
Every element of the regulatory requirement has clearly been met.

>
> So I get my clearance in Cleveland for an IFR flight to JFK. Amazingly,
> throughout the entire flight, there are no route changes. At what point
> prior to hearing "cleared for the ILS..." have I received a clearance
> =from= the ATC facility having jurisdiction over the NY Bravo? Is it when
> I say to NY approach "N426RC, level at six point five" and they say "6RC
> roger. NY altimeter 28.32"?
>

That's my point, in the case of IFR operations the letter of the law is NOT
followed, yet nobody questions it.

>
> Because I have heard from many sources that an IFR clearance counts. I've
> heard from many sources that otherwise, you must hear the magic words. I
> suspect that it is just us pilots being a little on the "fearful of the
> FAA" side, and the FAA thinking that's just ducky. But if the FAA is
> comfortable enough with this (we've had TCAs since almost thirty years
> ago), it becomes the rule until somebody risks their ticket.
>
> And wins.
>
> So, I'm looking for more than opinion, even if well founded. I'm looking
> for cases, if there are any.
>

I don't think you'll find one.