Pop-up IFR from Clearance Delivery

"Brad Z" wrote in message
news:Pdr7c.55839$_w.891264@attbi_s53...

It may not be a clearance delivery position. Here at FCI, the RCO
puts us in contact with a Potomac Tracon controller, not the class C
Richmond CD controller located 11 miles away. Its the same guy
who answers our calls on the departure frequency is the same guy
answering the RCO for getting
clearances.


The Class C Richmond clearance delivery controller located 11 miles away?
Wasn't Richmond approach one of the facilities combined to create Potomac
approach? The clearance delivery position at RIC is a tower position, not a
TRACON position.

Although many use RCO, Remote Communications Outlet, to refer to any remote
FAA radio, it's actually a tool of FSS. Terminal ATC facilities use RTRs,
Remote Transmitter/Receivers, and Centers use RCAGs, Remote Communications
Air/Ground facilities.

"John Clonts" wrote in message
...

Indeed. To Andrew it was interesting enough to prompt him to post
a usenet question about it!


I think most of you folks are thinking of this clearance delivery frequency
as being a separate position in the TRACON. That's extremely unlikely. Any
airport with enough traffic to justify such a position is an airport needing
a control tower. This frequency is almost certainly just an RTR located at
the field because the normal approach control frequency for that area does
not reach aircraft on the ground. It's probably labeled as a clearance
delivery frequency instead of an approach frequency because some other
facility not so far away also uses that frequency and airborne use of it
would interfere.

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
om...

The frequency I called was the definitely the clearance delivery
frequency for the uncontrolled field, not the approach control
frequency. However, now that you mention it, it seems quite possible
that the approach controller could have been the guy handling the CD
RCO frequency.


Exactly. There's simply no reason to have a dedicated clearance delivery
position at an uncontrolled field.



However, that does not explain the strangeness of this
situation. Had he asked me to call FSS and left it at that, I would
not have considered that strange. But he asked me to call FSS OR call
approach once airborne, which implied that in order to give a
clearance on the ground I would have to file with FSS, but an airborne
clearance could be had without filing with FSS.


If he can work up a clearance for you once you're in the air he can do it
when you're on the ground.

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
om...

The frequency I called was the definitely the clearance delivery
frequency for the uncontrolled field, not the approach control
frequency. However, now that you mention it, it seems quite possible
that the approach controller could have been the guy handling the CD
RCO frequency. However, that does not explain the strangeness of this
situation. Had he asked me to call FSS and left it at that, I would
not have considered that strange. But he asked me to call FSS OR call
approach once airborne, which implied that in order to give a
clearance on the ground I would have to file with FSS, but an airborne
clearance could be had without filing with FSS.

I understand the confusion over the phrase 'pop-up' so I will avoid
using that.


Where did this happen and where were you trying to go to?

Roy Smith wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Andrew Sarangan) wrote:

The frequency I called was the definitely the clearance delivery
frequency for the uncontrolled field, not the approach control
frequency. However, now that you mention it, it seems quite possible
that the approach controller could have been the guy handling the CD
RCO frequency. However, that does not explain the strangeness of this
situation. Had he asked me to call FSS and left it at that, I would
not have considered that strange. But he asked me to call FSS OR call
approach once airborne, which implied that in order to give a
clearance on the ground I would have to file with FSS, but an airborne
clearance could be had without filing with FSS.

Let me respond to this in two parts.

First, the regulatory issue. The FARs (91.something or other) say that
UNLESS OTHERWISE AUTHORIZED BY ATC, you need to file a flight plan to
get an IFR clearance. Giving a pop-up is authorization, but the
controller doesn't have to do it. So, he's certainly within his rights
to refuse to issue you an IFR clearance if you havn't filed with FSS
first.

Roy,

The paragraph you refer to is FAR 91.173. Interestingly, it does not
say "unless otherwise authorized by ATC". It simply says that you must
file a flight plan. There are no exceptions. However, it does not say
that you must file that flight plan with FSS. One could call ATC, tell
them their aircraft type, equipment and destination, and you are
considered to have filed a flight plan.

FAR 91.169 lists all the information you must provide in a flight
plan. This is where it says "unless otherwise authorized by ATC". So
they could waive the requirement to file an alternate, or fuel on
board, people on board etc.. This is what the ATC is waiving every
time you get a 'pop-up'.

This was my impression. Correct me if I am wrong.





Now, on to reality. We all know that pop-ups get issued all the time,
so clearly the authorization we're talking about above gets done quite
routinely. So routinely, in fact, that many pilots don't even realize
it's something special.

Now, the question is, why is he willing to "otherwise authorize" you in
the air, but not on the ground? If he issues you a clearance (well,
technically, a release) on the ground at a non-towered field, he's got
to reserve a pretty big hunk of airspace for you until he gets you in
radar contact. If you ask for a popup in the air, he can get you radar
identified before he issues you your clearance, so the impact to his
traffic flow is a lot smaller. From his point of view, an in-air pop-up
is easier on his.

So, it sounds like you've got a little bit of one-sided horse trading
going on here. What the controller is really saying is, "If you do me a
favor by letting me get radar contact before issuing your clearance,
I'll do you a favor by not making you talk to FSS".

From your point of view, the question you need to ask yourself is, "How
likely is it that I can provide my own visual separation from terrain
and other traffic and maintain legal VFR until I'm in radio and radar
contact?". If you're comfortable with the answer, then go ahead and
take the deal the controller is offering. If you don't think you can do
it, then you've got to do things the official way and talk to FSS.

Of course, if you're worried about terrain, there's nothing that
prevents you from flying the IFR DP on your own. Yo don't need a
clearance to do that. But, yes, I understand that that's sort of
peripheral to your original question.

In article ,
(Andrew Sarangan) wrote:

The paragraph you refer to is FAR 91.173. Interestingly, it does not
say "unless otherwise authorized by ATC". It simply says that you must
file a flight plan. There are no exceptions. However, it does not say
that you must file that flight plan with FSS. One could call ATC, tell
them their aircraft type, equipment and destination, and you are
considered to have filed a flight plan.

FAR 91.169 lists all the information you must provide in a flight
plan. This is where it says "unless otherwise authorized by ATC". So
they could waive the requirement to file an alternate, or fuel on
board, people on board etc.. This is what the ATC is waiving every
time you get a 'pop-up'.

This was my impression. Correct me if I am wrong.

Ok, you got me.

The point remains the same, however. It's less disruptive to the
traffic flow to handle you as a pop-up under radar coverage than as a
non-radar IFR departure. ATC can't refuse to handle you as a non-radar
departure, but he can try to bribe you into agreeing to do things his
way :-)

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message link.net...
"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
om...

The frequency I called was the definitely the clearance delivery
frequency for the uncontrolled field, not the approach control
frequency. However, now that you mention it, it seems quite possible
that the approach controller could have been the guy handling the CD
RCO frequency. However, that does not explain the strangeness of this
situation. Had he asked me to call FSS and left it at that, I would
not have considered that strange. But he asked me to call FSS OR call
approach once airborne, which implied that in order to give a
clearance on the ground I would have to file with FSS, but an airborne
clearance could be had without filing with FSS.

I understand the confusion over the phrase 'pop-up' so I will avoid
using that.


Where did this happen and where were you trying to go to?

This was at Richmond, IN (RID) and we were going to Dayton (20 miles away).

Yes, but clearance delivery at Richmond is a position in the tower. Using
RTR (thank you for your clarification) you are talking to an approach
controller at Potomac Tracon. The point I was trying to make is that at
least at Chesterfield, the guy you talk to on the "clearance delivery"
frequency is not simply the local CD person in the nearby Class C tower, but
an approach controller actively controlling aircraft in his sector. Point
being, he doesn't have to coordinate anything-- it's his airspace.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Brad Z" wrote in message
news:Pdr7c.55839$_w.891264@attbi_s53...

It may not be a clearance delivery position. Here at FCI, the RCO
puts us in contact with a Potomac Tracon controller, not the class C
Richmond CD controller located 11 miles away. Its the same guy
who answers our calls on the departure frequency is the same guy
answering the RCO for getting
clearances.


The Class C Richmond clearance delivery controller located 11 miles away?
Wasn't Richmond approach one of the facilities combined to create Potomac
approach? The clearance delivery position at RIC is a tower position, not
a
TRACON position.

Although many use RCO, Remote Communications Outlet, to refer to any
remote
FAA radio, it's actually a tool of FSS. Terminal ATC facilities use RTRs,
Remote Transmitter/Receivers, and Centers use RCAGs, Remote Communications
Air/Ground facilities.

"Brad Z" wrote in message
news:frO7c.61209$1p.1020168@attbi_s54...

Yes, but clearance delivery at Richmond is a position in the tower.


Yes, and it has nothing to do with operations at Chesterfield.



Using
RTR (thank you for your clarification) you are talking to an approach
controller at Potomac Tracon. The point I was trying to make is that at
least at Chesterfield, the guy you talk to on the "clearance delivery"
frequency is not simply the local CD person in the nearby Class C tower,
but an approach controller actively controlling aircraft in his sector.
Point
being, he doesn't have to coordinate anything-- it's his airspace.


I believe I said that.

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
om...

This was at Richmond, IN (RID) and we were going to Dayton
(20 miles away).


RID is a Dayton satellite airport, being just 20 miles away radar coverage
is probably quite good in the Richmond area. There's no reason at all not
to issue an impromptu IFR clearance to an aircraft on the ground there.