Does anyone have a reference to the paragraph of the Handbook where the prohibition appears? I tried looking, even searching for "VFR" appearing within 30 words of "heading", "altitude" or "assign" and couldn't find it.
I thought the question had to do with avoiding the Chief Counsel's dictum regarding adherence to ATC instructions by removing yourself from the situation. Obviously, if there's no ATC instruction pending, there's nothing in that regard to stop you from saying goodbye any more than when you cancel IFR.
Controlled Airspace defined (same handbook)
AIM
I've done the same. There is no such prohibition. There are statements that tell controllers to assign headings and altitudes in various situations, and there is nothing ordering them to do that for VFR aircraft outside Class B and a couple of other situations, but none prohibiting them from doing it when they feel it is required for safety. In fact, up in the front of FAA Order 7110.65, it says, "Controllers are required to be familiar with the provisions of this order that pertain to their operational responsibilities and to exercise their best judgment if they encounter situations not covered by it." So, if a situation arises where the controller feels that safety requires them to give an instruction to a VFR aircraft with whom they have communication in a situation not specifically addressed in that Order, they have the authority to do that, and by the letter cited above, the FAA Chief Counsel will back their play.
Oh I've read all that.
Whether that is true or not, that is an issue only between the controller and the facility manager -- it's not an issue for pilots (other than perhaps to complain about it later). The Chief Counsel interpretation does not allow the pilot receiving the instruction to consider whether or not the instruction was "valid" or "authorized" or anything else like that. The only reason a pilot is allowed to disobey an ATC instruction is safety -- either an emergency, or violation of other safety-based regulation (like busting B-space without authorization, thus compromising the positive separation provided in B-space, which is a safety issue).
I personally thought the reason for the quietness was because you guys were off measuring your appendages.
(which is very close to KISP Class-C)
Occupational hazard.
So when he vectored me around those two jets landing at TEB, what should I have done? I wasn't in Bravo but was within the mode-C veil. I had just departed from CDW (Caldwell).
It wasn't that much of an inconvenience really. Just a couple of westbound headings and then I was allowed to proceed on my merry way. If I remember correctly, he even offered me a Bravo clearance although I hadn't requested it. I was prepared to fly back to FRG underneath Bravo.
In fact, now that I think about it, I've never had a bad experience with ATC while receiving FF. That's probably why I never hesitate to request it, even when I'm just playing around in the practice area
Good points all, but unless safety is compromised by following the instruction, the time for a pilot to debate this is after obeying the instruction, landing, and picking up the telephone.
Henry David Thoreau felt much the same, but he accepted the fact that he would be punished for his disobedience. Are you willing to risk that yourself, or only to suggest others take that chance?Why, that is just mighty generous of you - ya know, speaking for all VFR pilots out there who don't really care for being pushed around the airspace with no regard for regs. Yes, a big fat 'thank you' is in order cuz you are the arbiter of good pilotage. And not playing the game, and not knuckling under is simply veddy, veddy - bad form I say. Those ****-ant pilots should just do as ATC says, and damn the regs!
You don't need a clearance to operate in the Mode C veil, but you are in controlled airspace there (unless you're very low). In that case, you do what the controller says unless it will either cause a collision hazard (or other emergency) or take you into the actual B-space without a clearance.
....
That may be your opinion, but I see it otherwise, specifically, that these rules are here to enhance safety.I think you missed the point of the direction of this thread...
It appears the "RULES" are a moving target in favor of ATC.....
What question? There is no link to the one to which you refer. In any event, the question of a vector into B-space without a B-space clearance was answered by the Chief Counsel in the Doremire letter linked above. That said, when I get a vector like that into B-space without the clearance, I just read it back "Left 270, understand cleared into Bravo". That has always had the appropriate and necessary effect.Also... You never answered the question about the guy in Miami who was vectored into the Bravo and didn't hear those magic words.....
....No, I'm not saying that. And I didn't say that, either. What I said was the rules require that when in controlled airspace, you obey controllers' instructions unless that will compromise safety. I don't think that's a very complicated concept, nor one which requires a pilot to carry and refer to a bunch of books in flight. If a pilot can't figure that out in flight without referring to a book, that pilot shouldn't be operating in the US National Airspace System.So..............
What you are saying is , not only is a pilot needing to carry a FAR book to follow proper FAA rules....... They need to carry and read instantly ANY and ALL finding by the Chief Counsel and act accordinglyl...
