Controller responding Negative to canceling radar services?

roncachamp said:
Again, you're assuming the chief counsel considered ATC instructions that violate the ATC order. There's no evidence that he did and it would be absurd to do so.
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting for you to tell us all why it violates the ATC order. You've suggested it's only valid in limited situations, but I don't read that.

Additionally, termination of radar services allows for 3 outcomes on the frequency -
1) CHANGE TO ADVISORY FREQUENCY APPROVED
2) CONTACT (frequency identification)
3) FREQUENCY CHANGE APPROVED

We rarely hear #2, but are you suggesting that if you get Squawk VFR, Contact Washington Center 118.47 that you'd be free to disregard the instruction to contact center because you're no longer under radar advisories?

How do you think that would play out when the judge asked you "91.123(b) required you to follow the instruction and you disregarded it. Why?"
 
FastEddieB said:
I'm still mystified that one can somehow look at the following words and the parse that sentiment:

Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.

Again, it seems so clear to me.
Click to expand...
The theory is that ATC only exercises control of IFR aircraft in class E. Apparently the FAA Chief Counsel's office disagrees with that theory.
 
bflynn said:
Hey, if the Chief Counsel says X and you want to convince yourself they really mean NOT X, I'm not going to argue with you. But you ARE contradicting a published opinion of the counsel's office. If you know of a more recent published opinion, please post it.

As to your canard about cancelling IFR but not cancelling radar services - of course you can cancel IFR and radar services. Then you become VFR in an area under which ATC exercises control and they may give you instructions. The fact of cancelling either doesn't remove you from the obligation to follow ATC instructions when you are talking with them. Until you get "frequency change approved", you're not released and you are liable for not following any instructions they give you even if you are not on the frequency.
Click to expand...

So basically you're saying once you start FF in controlled airspace, even if you ask to cease that service and leave the freq, in airspace that doesn't even require you to talk to them in the first place, if they say negative, you are forced to use their service?
 
Henning said:
Understand our legal principles toward inclusionary and exclusionary language in law and it becomes very clear. By law, the instruction or control of a VFR pilot in Class E or G airspace cannot exist. It is an illegal contract, therefore not something the controller is allowed to exercise.

You can't violate an instruction that does not legally exist.
Click to expand...

Be sure and let us know when you pass the bar exam! :rofl:
 
MAKG1 said:
Given that the OP could have just landed while still talking to Center, I don't see how any reasonable person could possibly characterize a frequency change as "urgent." It doesn't have to happen at all, let alone in a timely fashion...
Click to expand...

Depending on how much traffic there is in the pattern, that might not be safe.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I do not give legal opinions on Internet forums. Just another SGOTI.
Click to expand...

An SGOTI who has passed the bar exam. I do recognize the difference between general legal discussions and legal advice, however.

I also realize that in every controversy before the courts, there are at least two lawyers arguing opposite sides of the issue!
 
Velocity173 said:
So basically you're saying once you start FF in controlled airspace, even if you ask to cease that service and leave the freq, in airspace that doesn't even require you to talk to them in the first place, if they say negative, you are forced to use their service?
Click to expand...

No, you're not forced to use their services. But as I read it, you could be instructed to remain on their frequency/contact a new frequency. It practically never happens, but it can.

You still have an out - if staying causes a problem, tell the controller you need to leave. If they still insist, tie up more of their bandwidth and declare an emergency. They have instruction to cut you loose in sufficient time to allow you to join a CTAF, so if they want you to stay, they're going against their rules. But that doesn't change the reality you're looking at.

I think I said early on that if I was 5-10 miles out, I'd probably response with Unable. If I was further, I'd stick with them, they probably have a good reason. Then when I hit the 8-10 mile mark, I'd request frequency change.
 
Last edited:
bflynn said:
I'm still waiting for you to tell us all why it violates the ATC order. You've suggested it's only valid in limited situations, but I don't read that.
Click to expand...

Are you referring to REMAIN THIS FREQUENCY? It's proper phraseology where it's valid, I thought I made that clear enough. Are you seriously suggesting it's valid phraseology everywhere, even where there is no requirement to be in radio communications with ATC?

BTW, I'm still waiting for you to cite the paragraph in Order JO 7110.65 that gives controllers authority to vector VFR aircraft around parachute jump areas in Class E airspace.

We rarely hear #2, but are you suggesting that if you get Squawk VFR, Contact Washington Center 118.47 that you'd be free to disregard the instruction to contact center because you're no longer under radar advisories?
Click to expand...
I'm saying the pilot is free to disregard an instruction to contact any ATC facility where there is no requirement to be in radio communications with ATC.

How do you think that would play out when the judge asked you "91.123(b) required you to follow the instruction and you disregarded it. Why?"
Click to expand...
I would provide the same explanations I've presented here, but I'm confident the issue would never come before a judge.
 
Velocity173 said:
So basically you're saying once you start FF in controlled airspace, even if you ask to cease that service and leave the freq, in airspace that doesn't even require you to talk to them in the first place, if they say negative, you are forced to use their service?
Click to expand...
Depends on whether "remain this frequency" counts as an ATC instruction. If yes, the Karas opinion explicitly says exactly that.
Mark Bury said:
A pilot flying VFR in Class E airspace, which is controlled airspace, is not required to communicate with ATC;however, if a pilot is communicating with ATC and ATC issues an instruction, the pilot must comply with that instruction.
Click to expand...
The counter argument would be that the above is not an instruction because ATC is not authorized to give it -- and if that counter argument is valid, then pilots are not required to obey ANY instructions issued by ATC in Class E airspace while they are flying under VFR.
 
azure said:
The counter argument would be that the above is not an instruction because ATC is not authorized to give it -- and if that counter argument is valid, then pilots are not required to obey ANY instructions issued by ATC in Class E airspace while they are flying under VFR.
Click to expand...

What about instructions ATC is authorized to issue to VFR aircraft in Class E airspace? Such as, "remain outside Delta airspace and standby"? What about a control tower that is not in a Class B, C, or D surface area? Are instructions issued to effect spacing authorized?
 
roncachamp said:
What about instructions ATC is authorized to issue to VFR aircraft in Class E airspace? Such as, "remain outside Delta airspace and standby"? What about a control tower that is not in a Class B, C, or D surface area? Are instructions issued to effect spacing authorized?
Click to expand...
Okay, you got me on the first one. There are SOME instructions that are definitely authorized. The Class D example could also be a Class C, another case where normally only communication with the controlling ATC is required to enter. I would think a control tower outside of controlled airspace has no authority over aircraft flying in uncontrolled airspace, other than to give instructions to facilitate landing or deny landing clearances. I don't know the answer to the last one, assuming we're not talking about spacing for sequencing to land, where I suspect they are authorized.
 
Last edited:
azure said:
Depends on whether "remain this frequency" counts as an ATC instruction. If yes, the Karas opinion explicitly says exactly that.

The counter argument would be that the above is not an instruction because ATC is not authorized to give it -- and if that counter argument is valid, then pilots are not required to obey ANY instructions issued by ATC in Class E airspace while they are flying under VFR.
Click to expand...

It would be interesting to know what the acting assistant chief counsel based that opinion on, since there are currently no rules or regulations to support that opinion.
 
I find myself wondering if this controversy is really worth six pages, but I do have to admit, it's fun to argue about. :D

My practice is to follow instructions unless I have a really good reason not to. My workload is high enough without trying to figure out which instructions are valid in a manual that I have never been trained or tested on. And there is also the problem that the outer areas of class C airspace are not charted, and can deviate from the standard shape. More workload trying to figure that out: No, thanks. I also know that I am not infallible about this stuff.

And then of course, there is the problem of the Chief Counsel letter. Even if I was somehow sure that I could overcome the deference that the courts have given to agency interpretations, who the heck has the money or the time to get that done? Sorry, I have better things to do with my time and money.

Besides, if it ever got to the point where these instructions were being routinely abused, there is a no-cost solution that is easy, and available right now. "Click."

By that I mean that the 91.183 requirement to "ensure that a continuous watch is maintained on the appropriate frequency" explicitly only applies to IFR, so there is nothing stopping VFR pilots from just leaving the frequency without notice or permission if ATC practice somehow became routinely egregious.
 
Last edited:
vintage cessna said:
It would be interesting to know what the acting assistant chief counsel based that opinion on, since there are currently no rules or regulations to support that opinion.
Click to expand...
That part is easy enough, since the letter cites the regulation (91.123 (a) and (b)) that he based his opinion on.
 
Palmpilot said:
I find myself wondering if this controversy is really worth six pages, but I do have to admit, it's fun to argue about. :D

My practice is to follow instructions unless I have a really good reason not to. My workload is high enough without trying to figure out which instructions are valid in a manual that I have never been trained or tested on. And there is also the problem that the outer areas of class C airspace are not charted, and can deviate from the standard shape. More workload trying to figure that out: No, thanks. I also know that I am not infallible about this stuff.

And then of course, there is the problem of the Chief Counsel letter. Even if I was somehow sure that I could overcome the deference that the courts have given to agency interpretations, who the heck has the money or the time to get that done? Sorry, I have better things to do with my time and money.

Besides, if it ever got to the point where these instructions were being routinely abused, there is a no-cost solution that is easy, and available right now. "Click."

By that I mean that the 91.183 requirement to "ensure that a continuous watch is maintained on the appropriate frequency" explicitly only applies to IFR, so there is nothing stopping VFR pilots from just leaving the frequency without notice or permission if ATC practice somehow became routinely egregious.
Click to expand...

It's pretty much what everyone does, why wouldn't I? It's not worth arguing about. It does happen that controllers mis-word a request as an instruction, not a lot, but in 25+ years it's happened a few times. I really don't care, I would likely oblige the request, if not, I deal with it from there and advise them of what I am willing do to achieve the result. If it sounds like someone is having a bad day, I'll just comply if it's not a big ask.
 
If your general experience is to call up and say Cessna 1234 airport in sight, and get reply advisory services terminated, squawk VFR, frequency change approved.

But instead get (anything else)

What's your first plan of action? For me, I'm gonna comply with the (anything else) until I know what's going on. Sure, if you're on fumes and have to get down, or something that would cause you to declare, THEY NEED to know that too.

But to throw the "you're not the boss of me" card doesn't seem like the safest way to continue.
 
roncachamp said:
What about instructions ATC is authorized to issue to VFR aircraft in Class E airspace? Such as, "remain outside Delta airspace and standby"? What about a control tower that is not in a Class B, C, or D surface area? Are instructions issued to effect spacing authorized?
Click to expand...


Hmmmm..
I am an old person now and my memory " might" be failing.. But... Other then military bases.. What airport with a tower is not at least a Delta:confused::confused:....:dunno:
 
azure said:
That part is easy enough, since the letter cites the regulation (91.123 (a) and (b)) that he based his opinion on.
Click to expand...

Let me see if I have this correct. A VFR in Class E does not have to communicate with ATC. But if in communication with ATC, a VFR in class E must comply with ATC instructions. However, since the VFR pilot is not required to maintain a continuous frequency watch, an instruction may have been given by ATC but not received by the pilot. In which case, the pilot is in trouble?

Every controller that knows their job knows that you do not issue mandatory instructions to VFR pilots in Class E airspace, that would be assuming authority and responsibility that does not belong to them. Telling a pilot to remain clear of B,C or D airspace is not instructing a pilot to do something in E airspace. It is just informing the pilot that permission or clnc has not be granted to enter the airspace.

That is not to say that some ATC facilities don't develop a culture where authority is routinely abused.
 
N801BH said:
Hmmmm..
I am an old person now and my memory " might" be failing.. But... Other then military bases.. What airport with a tower is not at least a Delta:confused::confused:....:dunno:
Click to expand...

That's not the point, the point is the plane is in E or G Airspace when being called. It's actually simple because the instruction/prohibition does not begin until crossing the airspace boundary. He is calling you with an advisory that if you cross the airspace boundary you will be in violation. Until you hit that boundary you can do whatever to remain clear.
 
Henning said:
That's not the point, the point is the plane is in E or G Airspace when being called. It's actually simple because the instruction/prohibition does not begin until crossing the airspace boundary. He is calling you with an advisory that if you cross the airspace boundary you will be in violation.
Click to expand...

I agree with both sides.....

I just want to know which towered airports are NOT at least a Delta??
 
N801BH said:
I agree with both sides.....

I just want to know which towered airports are NOT at least a Delta??
Click to expand...

The ones that are charted with a blue airport symbol but without the dashed blue line around the airport symbol. The ones I have seen are new contract towers that started operation before they got their Class D designation, or reserve/National Gurard airports that use a Tower infrequently.
 
N801BH said:
I agree with both sides.....

I just want to know which towered airports are NOT at least a Delta??
Click to expand...

There will be a few, I'm not particularly familiar though. There's always some oddball situation out there.
 
vintage cessna said:
Every controller that knows their job knows that you do not issue mandatory instructions to VFR pilots in Class E airspace, that would be assuming authority and responsibility that does not belong to them.
Click to expand...

That is not true, and was the subject of this year's latest recurrent training syllabus. Pilots are expected to comply with any instructions ATC issues, however the PIC needs to advise ATC if compliance will result in the aircraft entering IMC or an unsafe situation. The PIC is always the final authority when it comes to the operation of the aircraft.
 
MarkZ said:
That is not true, and was the subject of this year's latest recurrent training syllabus. Pilots are expected to comply with any instructions ATC issues, however the PIC needs to advise ATC if compliance will result in the aircraft entering IMC or an unsafe situation. The PIC is always the final authority when it comes to the operation of the aircraft.
Click to expand...

Did your training tell you what instructions you should issue to VFR aircraft in Class E? Or does the airspace the aircraft is in does not matter? Do you sometimes assume responsibility for VFR aircraft separation in Class E and sometimes not?
 
MarkZ said:
That is not true, and was the subject of this year's latest recurrent training syllabus. Pilots are expected to comply with any instructions ATC issues, however the PIC needs to advise ATC if compliance will result in the aircraft entering IMC or an unsafe situation. The PIC is always the final authority when it comes to the operation of the aircraft.
Click to expand...


Interesting recurrent topic...:rolleyes:
 
N801BH said:
Interesting recurrent topic...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I don't even know why it is a topic. If I had been in the OP situation, as soon as the controller said don't call me I'll call you, I would have reset the transponder to 1200 and changed to CTAF.
 
vintage cessna said:
Did your training tell you what instructions you should issue to VFR aircraft in Class E? Or does the airspace the aircraft is in does not matter? Do you sometimes assume responsibility for VFR aircraft separation in Class E and sometimes not?
Click to expand...

The only difference between different classifications of controlled airspace is the VFR radar separation minima.

Class E, D, C, or B...it doesn't matter...

...ATC is authorized to issue vectors in controlled airspace at any altitude, and in uncontrolled airspace only on pilot request. If ATC issues an altitude and a vector to a VFR, the altitude must be AOA the sector's MVA.

If I think a VFR I'm working will merge at the same altitude with a 1200 code aircraft, and the aircraft I'm talking to doesn't see the other, I will vector and/or issue an altitude the the aircraft I'm working.
 
vintage cessna said:
I don't even know why it is a topic. If I had been in the OP situation, as soon as the controller said don't call me I'll call you, I would have reset the transponder to 1200 and changed to CTAF.
Click to expand...

If that is your attitude, why bother getting radar services?

The OP also said the controller was busy, and very soon after that transmission, the controller acknowledged the OP's request and terminated radar services.
 
MarkZ said:
The only difference between different classifications of controlled airspace is the VFR radar separation minima.

Class E, D, C, or B...it doesn't matter...

...ATC is authorized to issue vectors in controlled airspace at any altitude, and in uncontrolled airspace only on pilot request. If ATC issues an altitude and a vector to a VFR, the altitude must be AOA the sector's MVA.

If I think a VFR I'm working will merge at the same altitude with a 1200 code aircraft, and the aircraft I'm talking to doesn't see the other, I will vector and/or issue an altitude the the aircraft I'm working.
Click to expand...

You can go to your .65 and find references to cite about vectoring IFR aircraft and VFR aircraft in B and C, but you won't find any references telling you to assign headings or altitudes to VFR aircraft in Class E.
 
MarkZ said:
If that is your attitude, why bother getting radar services?

The OP also said the controller was busy, and very soon after that transmission, the controller acknowledged the OP's request and terminated radar services.
Click to expand...

I don't much bother any more with some facilities. In the same amount time the controller took to say all that he could have said sqwawk (sp) 1200 frequency changed approved.
 
vintage cessna said:
I don't much bother any more with some facilities. In the same amount time the controller took to say all that he could have said sqwawk (sp) 1200 frequency changed approved.
Click to expand...

Right, so if he felt it worthwhile to do something abnormal that was extra effort, wouldn't you consider and question the reason behind the act? Do you think he would do this just to annoy and inconvenience you?:dunno:
 
Lol! Steven will be here shortly. :yes:
 
vintage cessna said:
Because my priority is a safe flight, not focusing on a cranky controller.
Click to expand...

You think you need to be on CTAF 10-12 miles out?:dunno: I call 3-5 out from an uncontrolled field.:dunno: That means I have a couple of minutes to spare at 180 and I'll slow down in the mean time. The system is a too great a resource to opt out of over ego issues IMO. They aren't my competition or nemesis.
 
Henning said:
Right, so if he felt it worthwhile to do something abnormal that was extra effort, wouldn't you consider and question the reason behind the act? Do you think he would do this just to annoy and inconvenience you?:dunno:
Click to expand...

The controller didn't say something like "stay with me, you have traffic" or something of that nature. You don't play I've got a secret.
 
Henning said:
You think you need to be on CTAF 10-12 miles out?:dunno: I call 3-5 out from an uncontrolled field.:dunno: That means I have a couple of minutes to spare at 180 and I'll slow down in the mean time. The system is a too great a resource to opt out of over ego issues IMO. They aren't my competition or nemesis.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter whether you think it is 3 or 5 miles or I think it is 15. You are just getting traffic advisories, and when the pilot decides it is time to switch, it is time to switch, that is not the controllers call.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top