Could you have climbed to FL105?
I could have but I would have had to file it this way, as other mentioned the flight plan never made it to London so once airborne it’s too late, London info offered to try to get me a new clearance but that didn’t work, from other posts it seems if you didn’t file it, it will never work
But was the initial clearance only to ORIST??
I find the clearance in uk rarely explicit about their limit. I usually get a “clear to enter CAS” but without much more detail.
in france I would typically get “cleared to destination” but does not change that if you enter UK via OCAS you will not get your clearance back, so it’s not really to destination either…
Don’t know how it works in other countries?
Peter wrote:
Can you think of any practical ones?
IFR comfailure procedures should still apply as they refer to the flight plan and not the clearance. At least the CF procedures in AIP-UK say nothing else. Indeed they say “It should be noted that the use of loss of two-way communications procedures may result in aircraft flying outside controlled airspace.” Which must imply that that it is ok to reenter controlled airspace if that is in accordance with the flight plan.
And of course if IFR then you can fly in IMC, which you can’t if you’re VFR…
“Cleared to destination” is standard phraseology worldwide, probably as old as airliners, but it refers only to airline flights and similar flights e.g. jets which fly in CAS and the whole system is set up around that.
In this type of “classic IFR” you have an implicit “whole route” clearance all the way. That incidentally enables the “lost comms” procedure (fly non-radio all the way and land), notwithstanding that in modern times an airliner would get a fighter escort if this actually happened, and may well get shot down. If it does not get shot down, what is the point of an intercept? It also enables the magic words “request xx left/right to avoid” which ATC are not allowed to refuse (although some do screw you around still).
GA and OCAS does not really feature in aviation (as far as “proper ATC” is concerned; it is “tolerated” on the fringes, with a lot of people in the system moaning about the <2000kg route charge exemption) so nobody in the system cares about the bogus meaning of “cleared to destination”. It will confuse a new IR holder (because the old farts in the €100k FTO have never even flown a kite) but nobody cares about him either! If you stay in CAS (which GA tends to not do, but it can do so if flying on the right track and high enough, and on a validated Eurocontrol FP) then you do indeed have that implied whole-route clearance, and that makes IFR very nice because ATC just helps you along, and you do not have to argue with them or beg for clearances. Some ATC will argue that you don’t actually have that clearance, and they can refuse your onward flight; we’ve had threads on that too, and there are “interesting ways” to deal with that.
Regarding re-instatement of the IFR clearance upon leaving and re-entering CAS, the UK tends to dump your CAS clearance and you need to do some pretty active radio work to get back in (and often you will never get back in by the time you need to descend and land), while most other countries in Europe tend to be casual about it.
roznet wrote:
I find the clearance in uk rarely explicit about their limit. I usually get a “clear to enter CAS” but without much more detail.
Well, that is… disconcerting. I’m pretty sure the clearance limit, even if not always paid much attention to by crews, is a fundamental, non optional, part of any clearance.
As said above, and in my limited experience in Benelux, France, Germany, the clearance was always to the destination airport. (could be some other point on an Y FP, I guess)
roznet wrote:
in france I would typically get “cleared to destination” but does not change that if you enter UK via OCAS you will not get your clearance back, so it’s not really to destination either…
From all discussed so far, this seems to be the worst! How can a controller, on departure, clear you to the destination airport, and later sectors pretend no such clearance was issued?
Peter wrote:
Cleared to destination” is standard phraseology worldwide, probably as old as airliners, but it refers only to airline flights and similar flights e.g. jets which fly in CAS and the whole system is set up around that.
Even in the UK you have some airports fully OCAS (Exeter EGTE, New Quay EGHQ, Norwich EGSH).
I’ve been “cleared to destination” in the UK, and I am pretty sure it was the Scilly Isles EGHE 
because the old farts in the €100k FTO have never even flown a kite
I resemble the second part of that statement :) first part is fair enough. Not sure how many types some of my colleagues have flown, but they range from classic night cargo in Beech 18’s in Texas, to Electric Lightnings, and F-35’s, via F-15’s, to the usual suspects on the airlines.
True; I should have said “some” 
But it is not taught, which is why it has been an enduring topic for the 20 years that I’ve had the IR. And why is it not taught? Perhaps because most students are heading for the airlines…
@Airborne_Again is correct with respect to loss of communication, although if VMC the expectation is to also recover no radio VMC. Not unusual for a candidate to have to explain loss of communication procedures on their IR.
