Clearance limit

[InHot]

Cleared Direct

Hey manic,

Great question. I imagine each of us has had this happen at one time or another.

I don't have the "textbook"answer with references, but I hope someone does and will clue us all in.

Hey AVBUG! Where are you when we need you?


My conjecture:

In your example:

To clarify the situation on what I was filed for KSEA.SEA V4.BOI.KBOI

The controller says "cleared "direct Boise." My assumption is that you are cleared to the airport becaue he did not give any clearance beyond "Direct Boise". Had he wanted you to go direct to the VOR he would have said:' Cleared direct to Boise, then as filed." (Boise VOR, Direct KBOI).

Of course, my .02 and I don't have a specific reference.

As to the issue of lost comm when cleared direct to an airport, that is covered explicitly in FAR 91.185 IFR operations: Two-way radio communications failure, sub para (c) (3):

Leave clearance limit.
(i) When the clearance limit is a fix from which an approach begins, commence descent or descent and approach as close as possible to the expect-further-clearance time if one has been received, or if one has not been received, as close as possible to the estimated time of arrival as calculated from the filed or amended (with ATC) estimated time en route.
(ii) If the clearance limit is not a fix from which an approach begins (ie; KBOS), leave the clearance limit at the expect-further-clearance time if one has been received, or if none has been received, upon arrival over the clearance limit, and proceed to a fix from which an approach begins and commence descent or descent and approach as close as possible to the estimated time of arrival as calculated from the filed or amended (with ATC) estimated time en route.

What approach do you shoot? Well, under Lost Comm you can shoot any approach for your destionation:

...proceed to a fix from which an approach begins and commence descent or descent and approach as close as possible to the estimated time of arrival as calculated from the filed or amended (with ATC) estimated time en route.

.

OK Avbug over to you.

 

[manic66]

Thanks InHot

Well what You are writing is what I think is correct, but I got dinged by a checked airman for the above situation.

Didn't argue though but I'd like to think I am right.

M
(You fly for SWA? - I hope I get there one day)

 

[avbug]

Inhot pretty much covered it, and there's really nothing to add. The specifics of your clearance in this case, while vague, lie in the way you filed. If you filed to Boise via the VOR, then you could reasonably expect "Direct Boise" to indicate that you should fly to the VOR. However, in this case, it appears that you probably filed to the airport, as it's your destination.

If you filed to Boise Airterminal, then the clearance "Direct Boise" gives the airport as your clearance limit.

I get direct clearances like this all the time. In cases where the VOR or other navaid is colocated with the airport, it really doesn't make much difference until you're directly on top of the navaid. In Boise, the VOR is .8 nm SE of the airport, so it's not a big deal.

Generally when given direct to a VOR that might be confused with the airport, you'll hear "Direct Boise VOR."

As a sidenote, if on approaching Boise, you are "Cleared Approach, Boise," you may pick any approach, and your clearance limit becomes the missed approach fix (if provided) for the approach you select. If assigned a specific approach, your clearance limit in communication will be the missed hold or fix for the approach assigned.