legalities
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Glasgow,Scotland,UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
legalities
Large european airport, alpha charlie is on radar heading for closing the ILS
"alpha charlie, your clear ILS approach, report established"
a little later
"alpha charlie, can you make your heading 275? One to clear"
"alpha charlie, willco"
275 is still a base leg.
A little later, AC closes and captures the ILS
"Alpha charlie, fully established"
Controller, yelling, "alpha charlie, I never cleared you for ILS !!"
Quid iuris?
"alpha charlie, your clear ILS approach, report established"
a little later
"alpha charlie, can you make your heading 275? One to clear"
"alpha charlie, willco"
275 is still a base leg.
A little later, AC closes and captures the ILS
"Alpha charlie, fully established"
Controller, yelling, "alpha charlie, I never cleared you for ILS !!"
Quid iuris?
I take those instructions to mean 'I'm cleared for the approach, intercept the ILS, report established' then later 'use HDG 275 to make the above happen'.
The approach clearance was never cancelled.
The approach clearance was never cancelled.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Who can say?
Posts: 1,700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Technically, I'd have to agree with Tinny.
However, given the (somewhat dubious) phraseology and a certain amount of situational awareness, I think we'd have to agree that the implication was that the approach clearance was cancelled.
However, given the (somewhat dubious) phraseology and a certain amount of situational awareness, I think we'd have to agree that the implication was that the approach clearance was cancelled.
The controller may well have intended that implication but that's not what the message says. I certainly don't & wouldn't interpret those two messages to give that meaning.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Who can say?
Posts: 1,700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sure - in a court of law, if the jury only see a transcript of the R/T, you'd be on rather sticky ground.
I would suggest that, in similar circumstances, the only safe option is to get immediate clarification.
If such clarification is not available in the time available( e.g., R/T congestion, whatever, then the only safe course is to assume you have no onward clearance - and go around.
I would suggest that, in similar circumstances, the only safe option is to get immediate clarification.
If such clarification is not available in the time available( e.g., R/T congestion, whatever, then the only safe course is to assume you have no onward clearance - and go around.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It sounds like a question of communications rather than legality.
If in doubt ask ! From the example you have given you had your approach clearence superceeded by an instruction to take up an assigned heading followed by a brief explanation.
Sounds to me like the controller could have communicated the instruction a little better and failing that you should have sought clarification if any doubt existed.
In my view you are both to blame. Mind you I wasn't there and I wouldn't be the person to cast the first stone in this greenhouse.
If in doubt ask ! From the example you have given you had your approach clearence superceeded by an instruction to take up an assigned heading followed by a brief explanation.
Sounds to me like the controller could have communicated the instruction a little better and failing that you should have sought clarification if any doubt existed.
In my view you are both to blame. Mind you I wasn't there and I wouldn't be the person to cast the first stone in this greenhouse.
