"No such thing as a taxi clearance"?

mcmanigle

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
518
Display Name

Display name:
John McManigle
I've seen thrown around on this board and elsewhere that there's "no such thing as a taxi clearance," and that instead we're issued "taxi instructions." Fair enough; ATC never uses the word "cleared" to taxi. But is that the only reason? Or is it because you won't get violated if they tell you to taxi somewhere and you just sit still for a while instead? And then FAR 91.129(i) seems to refer to taxi clearances? Is not using the word "clearance" by ATC because it's not a clearance, or just so that there's no way it can be mistaken for a takeoff clearance?

I guess I'm just confused. If I'm going to go around saying there's no such thing as a taxi clearance, I want to be able to justify what that actually means, and right now I definitely can't. Help please?
 
I've seen thrown around on this board and elsewhere that there's "no such thing as a taxi clearance," and that instead we're issued "taxi instructions." Fair enough; ATC never uses the word "cleared" to taxi. But is that the only reason? Or is it because you won't get violated if they tell you to taxi somewhere and you just sit still for a while instead? And then FAR 91.129(i) seems to refer to taxi clearances? Is not using the word "clearance" by ATC because it's not a clearance, or just so that there's no way it can be mistaken for a takeoff clearance?

I guess I'm just confused. If I'm going to go around saying there's no such thing as a taxi clearance, I want to be able to justify what that actually means, and right now I definitely can't. Help please?

Yes, we have taxi clearances, they just don't contain the word "cleared".
 
What about "cleared to cross runway 15?"
 
What about "cleared to cross runway 15?"

The book phraseology is "Cross runway 15." The book also says:

Do not use the word “cleared” in conjunction
with authorization for aircraft to taxi or equipment/
vehicle/personnel operations. Use the prefix “taxi,”
“proceed,” or “hold,” as appropriate, for aircraft
instructions and “proceed” or “hold” for equipment/
vehicles/personnel.

See Order JO 7110.65 Air Traffic Control, Chapter 3, Section 7, Taxi and Ground Movement Procedures
 
Usually there is reason for this kind of thing. I suspect the very good reason is reserving the very important word "cleared" for very important things, such as taking off or landing. Things you no ambiguity on.
 
What about "cleared to cross runway 15?"
I don''t think that's standard phraseology for controllers. Just the instructions to "hold short" or "cross". As well as the instruction to "taxi to" not "cleared to taxi to."

OTOH, it's hard to say that a phrase, "taxi clearance", used in a bunch of FAA publications, including the Controller Handbook is "no such thing."
 
I don''t think that's standard phraseology for controllers. Just the instructions to "hold short" or "cross". As well as the instruction to "taxi to" not "cleared to taxi to."

OTOH, it's hard to say that a phrase, "taxi clearance", used in a bunch of FAA publications, including the Controller Handbook is "no such thing."
Mark's right -- there is such thing as a "taxi clearance" , but, for the reasons mentioned (avoidance of confusion with a takeoff clearance), the words "cleared"/"clearance" aren't part of a "taxi clearance".
 
You get enroute tax instructions, you may be told to holdshort on a taxiway intersection, you may also get a RW holdshort instruction with the taxi instructions.

You are expected to move. If you sit, you may get a radio call from ground asking why...
 
Mark's right -- there is such thing as a "taxi clearance" , but, for the reasons mentioned (avoidance of confusion with a takeoff clearance), the words "cleared"/"clearance" aren't part of a "taxi clearance".
Tenerife fallout?
 
Is taxiing at your own will to wherever you want on the airport gonna get someone to yell at you? If you answered yes...its a clearance.
 
Tenerife fallout?
No, the big change to taxi clearances came out only four years ago, and Tenerife was 1977. This came out of analysis of runway incursion reports since the FAA made runway incursions a big issue maybe ten years ago. I think the wreck at Sarasota in 2001 was probably more of a trigger to all the runway incursion interest here than the Tenerife accident.
 
This thread needs R&W's 'OMG....Who Cares?' meme.
That can be said of a lot of threads. But you can't account for the questions that come up in aviation trivia discussions. so it's best to be prepared :D :yes:
 
Back
Top