Radio call: XYZ changed to ABC CTAF 126.7

[AerocatS2A]

We all know the "changing to MBZ/CTAF" call is required when inbound to the relevant MBZ or CTAF, however, is this call required when transiting an MBZ or CTAF?

What about when we have 2 x VHF and can continue monitoring the Centre frequency?

[topdrop]

Single VHF, you must report changing CTAF.
Twin VHF, you can report changing CTAF if you wish, traffic info will be suspended til you report out the other side.
If you just broadcast on one and stay with ATS on the other, you'll continue to get traffic info.

[Macrohard]

Topdrop, however you will not have a confirmation that you will be monitoring the correct frequency.

[No Further Requirements]

Macrohard, you are indeed correct that ATC cannot inform you if you are not on the correct CTAF/MBZ frequency. However, if the pilot chooses to do this (ie, monitor both) ATC cannot hold their hand all the time.

At some stage they have to take responsibility for themselves. ATC don't adjust their fuel mixtures or suggest a descent point. All I'm saying is that if you don't wish to inform ATC that you are monitoring the CATF/MBZ, try and get the frequency right!

Rant over.

NFR.

[Icarus2001]

Macrohard so how do you think that ATC provide...a confirmation that you will be monitoring the correct frequency. Saying one frequency on the radio and tuning up another is possible is it not?
We need to assume a level of competence on the part of pilot don't we?

[Kelly Slater]

Read the book boys. If you are not intending to or unable to monitor both ATC and MBZ the " changing to (location) MBZ/CTAF " call is mandatory for all IFR aircraft. If you are able to and intending to monitor both frequencies, the call is not required, it is not optional, just simply not required and so not made. The frequency has been dropped from the call alltogether so there is no longer any protection offered in that department.

[John Citizen]

You wrote :

Read the book boys

But have you read the book yourself ? Which book are you reading ? :confused:

I just read the AIP Book (http://www.airservices.gov.au/publications/current/aip/enr/111110.pdf) and the Jeppesens. Both of these Book say the exact same thing :

AIP ENR 1.1 63.2
Jeppesen AU719 6.5.2

A pilot of an IFR aircraft must report when changing to MBZ frequency or CTAF. This report must include the MBZ or CTAF location and frequency.

Even very recently, I have heard ATC asking an aircraft to "confirm changing to (MBZ/CTAF) (frequency)". If it wasn't a requirement to make this call to ATC, then why would ATC be asking us ? :confused:

[Kelly Slater]

Read a current copy of the Jepps

[John Citizen]

Now you write :

Read a current copy of the Jepps

Yes, I am reading a current copy of the Jepps (amended today) :

AASD04 Revision 6 March 25 2005

The AIP I used is also a current copyAIP Book 17 March 2005 (http://www.airservices.gov.au/publications/aip.asp?pg=20&vdate=17-Mar-2005&ver=1)

[Bill Smith]

It would seem that there is a little contradictory information in the Jepps.
As stated by JC, AU 719 6.5.2 states pilot must report changing to MBZ blah blah

Then AU 902 1.2.17 states that reports are required when the ATC frequency will not or can not be monitored.

Why don't they put the bloody things in the same place so that it is not ambiguous?

[John Citizen]

Well said Bill Smith.

Looks like we are all right due the contradictory information in the "books".

However looks like the most recent amendment of both the above pages is page AU902 (11 March 2005) which says :

...required only when ATC frequency will/can not be monitored.

Looks like you are right Kelly Slater if we go by the latest amendment (most recent page of the 2 that contradict). Its just a shame they didn't bother amending the other pages as well.

I just checked the AIP ENR 1.1 21.1.7 (http://www.airservices.gov.au/publications/current/aip/enr/111110.pdf). It has the exact same wording / contradiction.

[AerocatS2A]

It all becomes clear in the end.

Thanks for your help.

[chief wiggum]

...required only when ATC frequency will/can not be monitored.

I may be wrong about this, but it was my understanding that this clause refers to when you are SUPPOSED to be on an ATC freq, and then, for some reason, you have to switch off it for a few minutes ie call company, chat to mate , switch on runway lights etc etc.

then the call will be " ML CTR, ABC going off frequency for 5 mins"


The switch to CTAF/MBZ IS a required call... stupid though it may be.... even when you have 2 comms, and you are right, that traffic information STOPS when one makes that call.

[AerocatS2A]

The change was in the last ammendment Chief Wiggum, it is in the Jepp 900 series "1.2 Summary of Report and Broadcast Requirements" and reads (bolding mine):

1.2.1.7
Reports of "CHANGING TO (location) MBZ" or "CHANGING TO (location) CTAF" are required by IFR pilots when inbound to an MBZ or CTAF area when the ATC frequency will not, or cannot be monitored.

Seems pretty clear to me, and has no relation to the requirements for calling when going off frequency to talk to another aircraft etc.

[swh]

From memory the history of the call goes back when two aircraft were in IMC in a MBZ, one changed to the incorrect frequency.

Cannot remember all the details, might have been a dash 8 and PA31 at Tamworth and came very close in the hold, from memory one might have been in a right hold, one in a left.

I think the report recommended CASA to implement a compulsary reporting of change of frequency so that flight service/controllers can copy the correct frequwncy so IFR aircraft can talk to each other on the same frequency and for the use of aerodrome frequency response units.

Maybe something on the ATSB site will clarify this.

[chief wiggum]

Sorry, don't have jepps, and my AIP is at work.

HOWEVER, I did say that it IS a required call. I also said it was STUPID requirement!

What gets me though, is that one doesn't need to "CHANGE" to CTAF/MBZ... one can listen on BOTH!!!! ergo "Change" is a misleading word to use!

[Roger Standby]

This topic has been a focus for our (ATC) check and stardards people recently. Both controllers and pilots have for a long time been accepting the terms "monitoring" and "changing to" as having the same basic meaning. Monitoring can only be done if two radios are carried and ATC will provide traffic to IFR aircraft because we know you are listening. "Changing to" indicates only one radio or simply the pilot is no longer listening to the area frequency and traffic will no longer be passed.

If the wording stated above is sounds right to me- I need to know if you are changing to another frequency. In fact if you are just monitoring the ctaf/mbz, I suppose it doesn't really matter whether you tell us or not.

Its a tough one to get right, coz both ATC's and pilots have been mixing trhe two phrases up for such a long time. We've certainly had it rammed home to us recently.

Cheers,

R_S.

[AerocatS2A]

chief wiggum my point was that it is NOT now a required call, provided you are continuing to monitor the ATC frequency. Which is how it should be.

So the stupid requirement part of it has been removed and that little bit of the AIP now makes sense (lets just forget for the moment that the ammendment hasn't been carried through the entire document :suspect:.)