Silly controller

"Christopher C. Stacy" wrote in message
...

I you have filed (phone, DUATS, or "pop-up" on the radio) an IFR flight
plan to an airport, and along the way you ask for a practice approach
to some other airport, then the destination of your plan has not changed.
Yes, that would be the destination airport you said originally.

The scenario I've been talking about is where you come out nowhere VFR
and tell the controller you want an IFR approach to some airport
(which is usually real close, but could be some ways off).


I understand completely. The example you provided did not contain a
clearance limit, thus it was not an IFR clearance. An IFR clearance must
have a clearance limit.

"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:

"Christopher C. Stacy" wrote in message
...

I you have filed (phone, DUATS, or "pop-up" on the radio) an IFR flight
plan to an airport, and along the way you ask for a practice approach
to some other airport, then the destination of your plan has not changed.
Yes, that would be the destination airport you said originally.

The scenario I've been talking about is where you come out nowhere VFR
and tell the controller you want an IFR approach to some airport
(which is usually real close, but could be some ways off).


I understand completely. The example you provided did not contain a
clearance limit, thus it was not an IFR clearance. An IFR clearance must
have a clearance limit.

In the case of a VFR pop-up requesting an approach,
it's the airport, according to the local TRACON.
Why don't you think it's a clearance limit?

(I specifically addressed that in my my other message that you
seem to have already read but ignored. I believe I was the one
who brought up having been given a clearance limit as part of
my argument.)

"Christopher C. Stacy" wrote in message
...

In the case of a VFR pop-up requesting an approach,
it's the airport, according to the local TRACON.


Then the local TRACON is wrong.



Why don't you think it's a clearance limit?


Because it wasn't preceded by "cleared to".



(I specifically addressed that in my my other message that you
seem to have already read but ignored. I believe I was the one
who brought up having been given a clearance limit as part of
my argument.)


I didn't ignore it, I responded to it, review the thread. What you believed
to be a clearance limit was not.