The "Class C Loophole" - Use it or no?

[brianshell]

A while back, I mentioned something in the context of another thread (viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3280) where I was happy to get a pointer from a controller on a particular topic.... I want to re-visit that topic briefly.

Here's what I said:

Yesterday I was flying towards KSMO airspace.. I had contacted the tower about a minute out, and was told to "standby". As I got closer to the airspace I still hadn't heard back, so I veered away and skimmed the edge because I hadn't received clearance. The controller came back shortly after, saw what I was doing, and explained that because it was not Class-B airspace, and because I had been acknowledged, that I could assume I was cleared into the airspace unless I heard otherwise. I had NO idea!

I've recently been reading the book "Say again, please" by Bob Gardner (http://www.amazon.com/Say-Again-Please- ... ain+please) which covers ATC communications for pilots.

One of the top of page 7-8, this exact topic is discussed... and the author of the book had a somewhat different opinion on this. I wanted to get the take of some real-world pilots and, of course, PE controllers, on this scenario.

[Ryan Geckler]

If we say your call sign, you have established communications, thereby meeting the requirement. If we say "aircraft calling, standby", you cannot enter. The book is correct.

[Pieces]

The controller is well aware replying with a callsign establishes communication and therefore allows the calling aircraft to enter the airspace. If there is some reason he doesn't want you to enter he will intentionally respond with no callsign or respond and say "remain clear of the airspace".

The notes in the book strike me as a bit odd. 1) You should call up prior to 10 miles from a class C. 2) If you intend to land at the main airport... why would you remain clear? I feel like turning around at that point would cause more confusion and problems then just heading in. There are plenty of reasons that the controller will ask an aircraft to standby. It does not necessarily mean that the airspace is crazy busy.

Now, with all things, there is an aspect of decision making and situational awareness required by the pilot. If you are monitoring the frequency before calling up and the airspace is incredibly busy, maybe heading to a nearby airport is a better idea. You should have some idea what to expect heading in, though.

[Keith Smith]

Edit: got beat by a post there while I was on the phone!

He's calling it a loophole as if controllers don't KNOW about it. I think he's way off on that one. If a controller says "standby" AND uses the callsign, then he/she is FULLY AWARE that you can now proceed through the airspace.

It could just be that he needs to issue a couple of other higher priority instructions (like a time-sensitive vector to final, followed by a couple of other instructions) before banging out a squawk code and waiting for your reply. During all of that, though, you might be the only target to the west of the class C, and not in conflict with any of the controller's traffic, so he has no reason to keep you out of the class c, but he doesn't have time to issue your code at that second.

I disagree with the author of the book on that one. It's overly conservative and makes assumptions which I consider to be unreasonable, namely that just because a controller says to standby, that he/she doesn't want you in the airspace. I also challenge the underlying assertion that the controller isn't aware of the implication of saying "[callsign], standby" regarding the implicit permission to enter the Charlie.

[rogers55]

If you call a real world Class C controller and state your intentions and he communicates positively with you using your call sign the last thing he expects is for you to do a 360. Also when you do a practical exam for your pilot's rating the FAA Examiner will definitely ask this very question and he will want to hear a correct positive answer, not something about doing a 360 and loopholes.