Clearance amended/clearance limit

[GravityHater]

Thanks for filling us in VFF, about atc no longer needing to reiterate the remainder of the previous clearance.
As I was trying to suggest, I have never heard atc ambiguously 'drop' anyone at a VOR without some kind of plan. They will quite distinctly give you a hold and EFC, or (where I fly) reiterate/reissue the continuing clearance. Unlike Chperplit's experience, where I fly (south central US) they have time to give you the "rest unchanged" or "then as filed". This part may be a regional thing.
Mattpilot, I think we are agreeing but it just doesnt seem so because of the nature of this medium... I do not fly a lot of non-radar myself but I am on the same frequency hearing what is happening. Originally when we were talking about being 'dropped' at a vor, no mention was made of either a hold, nor an EFC being involved until you did, in post #9. If this was previously assumed I apologize. In fact, I agree with your lost comm comments.

 

[U of I Tweak]

I was being vectored to the first VOR when I was instructed to fly to direct to another VOR.

It seems to me that you weren't ever given a clearance other than your original when you began your flight. Say you cleared "N61750 you are cleared to KABC via DEF VOR, V-45, then direct....blah"

Enroute you are told, "Proceed direct GHI VOR," which happens to be on V-45. Your clearance was never changed, you are still cleared to KABC, you just received a vector to get there a little different way.

If you were told, "N750, you are cleared to the GHI VOR, proceed direct." That's a new clearance and a new clearance limit. That's how I would interpret it. If I don't hear the magic words that say 'I'm cleared to' something new, then the original clearance limit applies, even if the route changed.

 

[A Squared]

As I was trying to suggest, I have never heard atc ambiguously 'drop' anyone at a VOR without some kind of plan.

You get that every once in a while. Typical situation is an approach that has a fairly lengthy transition or arc. There's preceeding traffic and ATC won't be able to clear you for the approach before you hit the IAF or transition fix. ATC will clear you to a fix further down the approach with an altitude assignment which will keep you above the aircaft on approach, and above the missed approcah procedure should he go missed, THis allows you to effectively begin the approach without being cleared for the approach, and it keeps you clear of the other traffic Now, ATC probably *should* give you an EFC, or at least a "no delay expected" but I've received a ammended clearnce limit without that more than once.

 

[TIS]

If your clearance limit changes you'll know it. The phraseology is, "You're cleared to the ABC VOR... ," or some other fix as applicable. If they say, "Cleared direct to ABC VOR," and say nothing about holding instructions then it is only shorcut routing.

TIS

 

[enigma]

This weekend on an IFR flight, I was cleared RV to the VOR, then the Victor airway, then direct.

Anne, I assume that this was the clearance you picked up before departure. To what point were you given "direct" after the Victor airway?

I was being vectored to the first VOR when I was instructed to fly to direct to another VOR.

The controller gave you a shortcut, not an amended clearance.

Now this second VOR is on the airway. The airway traverses through several VORS. As I was approaching the VOR I asked if that was my clearance limit and did I need further clearance, and he said he had me down for the Victor airway then direct to the airport.

He was saying ("he had me down") that his paperwork showed the airport as your clearance limit.

I was expecting since he changed what I had in the first place and the clearance was only to the VOR,

Your intro seems to indicate that your destination airport was your clearance limit. What was the original clearance? Were you cleared to destination via some route, or to a VOR with an EFC?

that my clearance limit was at the VOR. I didn't want to just assume I should continue on the victor airway.

Any comments?

Again, we need to know the details of the original clearance.

enigma

 

[Anne]

As I read these replies, I believe I had my routing change, not my clearance limit. I was given a shortcut along my route, and should have expected to continue my route as given after the shortcut.


My original clearance was:

RV to MHT then V141 then direct KBTV

The shortcut was to LEB, and I was not given an EFC time.