Air to air frequency?

[Grob Driver]

I’ve done a search on Pprune on this but I seem to be getting conflicting information!

Is 123.45 a dedicated air to air frequency? If it’s not, is the use of 123.45 ‘tolerated’ as an air to air frequency?

There must be people out there who fly with another aircraft… What frequency (if any) do you use to talk to them? I’m not talking about holding conversations… just passing messages, info etc. If you are going somewhere as a flight of two (Which I soon will be!) what frequency can you use to talk to the pilot of the second aircraft?

Many thanks

Grob Driver

[QNH 1013]

For months now, every day's notams have included an item that says that 123.45 may not be used for such a purpose in this (UK) area; I can't remember the exact text used.
There have been requests for a dedicated air-to-air frequency but none is generally available in UK airspace as far as I know.

[Flyin'Dutch']

There is none.

As QNH says the notams read:

OTH : FROM 03/01/17 15:17 TO PERM B0148/03 E)FREQ 123.45MHZ NOT TO BE USED AS AN AIR TO AIR COMM CHANNEL WITHIN
RANGE OF ANY VHF GROUND STATION IN UK FIRS

And I have it on good authority that 'they' are listening out for any violators.

It is legitimately used for cross oceanic traffic.

Some people seem to use the gliding or ballooning frequencies, so I have heard rumours.

;)

But that would obviously not be legal either.

FD

[WestWind1950]

the official air-to-air frequency in Germany is 122,80 ... but here, too, the 123.45 is constantly being misused!


http://www.click-smilie.de/sammlung/aktion/action-smiley-072.gif Westy

[FlyingForFun]

The official air-to-air frequency in Germany is 122,80Well, at least you have one - it's more than we have!

I know there aren't enough frequencies out there. But here's an idea. If certain airfields with A/G were to share frequencies, that would free up some frequencies. Of course, all transmissions on the "shared" frequency would need to be preceeded and followed by the airfield name to avoid confusion, but I can't see that being a problem....

Hmm, I have a feeling I've seen systems like this that work in other countries.... :rolleyes:

I'm not normally one to put our system down and say that other countries' systems are better - I quite like the unique Britishness of our airspace system. But not having an Air-to-Air frequency is mad.

FFF
-----------

[BEagle]

Computer modelling of all the various ground VHF stations in the UK - or Europe for that matter - would surely be an efficient way of re-allocating frequencies? Particularly if one or two were reserved for air-to-air?

[vintage ATCO]

But here's an idea. If certain airfields with A/G were to share frequencies, that would free up some frequencies. Of course, all transmissions on the "shared" frequency would need to be preceeded and followed by the airfield name to avoid confusion, but I can't see that being a problem....

This happens now, normally an A/G freq has a DOC of 10nm/3000ft although in practice they are spaced much further apart than that. However, it does require greater discipline from the users which isn't always the case. Bourn and Popham use to share 129.8 and it wasn't unusually to hear a downwind call at Bourn which you had to assume was Popham.

I don't deny that there are legitimate uses for an air-to-air frequency (air-to-air photpgraphy springs to mind for one) but if one was so designated I fear it would be misused by the majority to the detriment of those with a real need. You only have to listen to some of the dross on 123.45 now on a 'good' day.

People have used Old Warden's freq to chat and I have to tell them to s*d off!!


VA

[flyingwysiwyg]

Are there any rules regarding the use of standard two way radios in the air? For example your bog standard Motorola GP300 which has a very good line of sight range! (About 3 - 5 Km)

The only thing is actually using them could be a little tricky, what with the noise et al :hmm: and having to remove your headset to speak :eek:

I'll get me coat!

F-Wyg

[QDMQDMQDM]

There are plenty of vacant frequencies and it is absurd that two aircraft in formation cannot talk to each other in the air. How does that promote flight safety?

If you choose to use 123.45, I suggest not to use your callsign and keep the transmissions short so as not to clog it up for everyone else. As I said, though, there are plenty of vacant frequencies.

David

[WestWind1950]

There are plenty of vacant frequencies

that's not quite true. Even though not published anywhere, most possible frequencies are being used somewhere for something... and if it's as a company frequency. Why do you think the new radios have to have a diffent channeling? More frequencies are needed then are available, but there should be standard frequency for particular things like air-to-air in all countries!
for example, the following are the "official" special frequencies published in the German AIP:
121.500 emergency ONLY
122.800 air-to-air
122.300 Training flights at an airfield
123.425 training flights for hanggliders, Ultralights, etc.
120.975 other flights for hanggliders, UL's, etc
122.250 balloon flights
126.725 parachuting
in glider flight we have the following:
123.500 training at an airfield
122.500 cross country glider flying
123.150 training outside of an airfield area
123.350 non-training glider flights
123.400 ground crews

Some of these above frequencies have been designated to glider airfields. I know of 5 fields within 50 km of each other that have to share the 123.150.... especially during aerobatic tows and heavy traffic days you hear almost all fields and you can't tell which is which or you get blocked out! One field has managed to finally get the 124.000. Because of fields sharing frequencies, there is normally a restriction about using it no farther then 15 NM and 3000 ft GND.

I have no idea who "officially" has the 123.45 but I know that many people use it....

http://www.click-smilie.de/sammlung/aktion/action-smiley-072.gif Westy

[ft]

Check out this thread (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=96353&perpage=15&pagenumber=4).

Especially the part saying "please, do stay off 123.45 unless you have it in print that it is the local dating hotline".

Cheers,
Fred

[david viewing]

QDM

Couldn't agree more about 123.45. It's invaluable for aircraft in loose formation, as in touring parties, etc. in the US and why shouldn't we use it here?

Also interesting that the Notam appeared just a few days after a similar discussion on another site.

[vintage ATCO]

As I said, though, there are plenty of vacant frequencies.

Such as??

I suggest you have a discussion with DAP Frequency Management who might actually disagree with you.

[flower]

It is extremely difficult to get additional frequencies , with a number of units now not operating without a spare because of the clamour for them.
Shame about 123.45 though.

[Zlin526]

David Viewing,

The reason that you just can't use 123.45 is because it's reserved for somebody else! Just the same reason that you cant use the Heathrow or Gatwick Approach frequency for 'touring parties'. As anyone who has ever tuned in to 123.45 for a laugh, touring parties tend to be people yakking for yakking's sake!

"What power setting have you got Ted?"

"2400rpm George, what about you?"

"I've got 2375rpm. What height are you at Ted?"

"I'm at 1565ft George, what about you?"

and so on..................

Radio discipline goes out of the (DV) window and it sounds like CB radio all over again.

This subject has been done to death on this forum over the past few years. People try to compare the issue with the US of A Unicom system which is ludicrous. They have been brought up with Unicom over there, using RT when required. and thay ALL know how to use it! And its the size of Europe..

IMHO, if people need an air to air frequency for formation flying etc, then they ain't doing it properly! Those who NEED an Air/Air frequency normally get one! Those who just want to compare notes really dont need one..

[Keef]

I can think of several situations where an air-to-air frequency would be useful, but they all involve flying in very inhospitable terrain or out of ground station range over the open sea, (ie mostly where 123.45 can legitimately be used.)

It might be interesting for the CAA to "create" a spare frequency for this, as a trial for a few months. My guess is that it would degenerate rapidly into a CB chat channel and be withdrawn.

Gliders and balloons in the UK have such frequencies, and from the little I've listened on them are reasonably disciplined - but they have a specific and important purpose.

[WelshFlyer]

if i can just claify the use of CB radios in the air - the citizens' band is the citizens band, and can be used for pretty much anything. If you are just chating then i see no reason why you wouldn't be allowed to use them.

I think that they could make a spare slot for "GA Chat" but then again we know the efficiancy of the CAA when it comes to anything that involves a decision - take the issue of licenses:)

WelshFlyer.

[Keef]

I'd be extremely surprised if it's permitted to use CB equipment in flight. It's certainly prohibited to use amateur equipment in flight unless it's been specifically approved for airborne use.

Not sure how they'd know, mind, unless the RA happened to be listening. I wouldn't risk it, all the same.

[QDMQDMQDM]

IMHO, if people need an air to air frequency for formation flying etc, then they ain't doing it properly! Those who NEED an Air/Air frequency normally get one! Those who just want to compare notes really dont need one..

Having just been across Europe in loose formation with another aircraft, I think your humble opinion is rather trite and way off the mark. e.g. "Don't like the look of that weather ahead, I am turning left onto XXX degrees, heading for YYY airfield." If you can't talk air to air, how precisely do you communicate that information?!

In the REAL world, talking air to air with another aircraft can / could be extremely useful and contribute to flight safety. The argument that it shouldn't be allowed because it would degenerate into crap is ridiculous. It's like saying you shouldn't fly with retractable gear because sometimes people forget to put it down. The key is education. Right now, people talking air to air do blather on about a load of crap because it's completely unregulated and a free for all. If air to air frequencies existed and there was pilot education about them and the importance of keeping transmissions brief and to the point, we might see less rubbish out there. Drive it underground and of course it's anarchy.

This is happening all the time, every day and it's time the authorities woke up and saw sense.

[WelshFlyer]

I'd be surprised if it was not allowed - trying to use a 50 quid transciver from argos to contact london information would be CRIMINAL. but for chat i shoudn't think it matters.

These devices are for people to keep in touch with out useing there mobile 'phones - and so they can go 'round with a hissing box tryin' to look important. so for air-to-air chat use i really see no problem.

Also let us consider the frequency these things use - a multiplex on 418Mhz - it's not going to bother people how these things are used as long as, like i said before you don't try to do something stupid - like, god forbid try and use one as you're main transceiver (you'd have a job trying to make them run on 108 - 140 mhz anyway, and they don't use fm, they use binary code decimal:))

Maybee one of us would like to try seeing if they can make a headset run in one of these things - if you can, fair play to you and don't forget to tell us all how it goes!

WelshFlyer.

[Evo]

Had some pillock yesterday who was attempting to chat to someone on 123.45 but had tuned the radio to Goodwood on 122.45 instead. Only getting the usual aerodrome RT calls in reply wasn't enough to stop Bloggs constantly trying get position reports from his mate and telling everbody what he wanted for lunch... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :ouch:

But even the pros were doing it yesterday - as I was taxing to the hold, I heard "***, FL270, heading 010, blah blah" as someone tuned in to Goodwood information rather than London on 132.45 :)

[wher2guv]

Maybee one of us would like to try seeing if they can make a headset run in one of these things - if you can, fair play to you and don't forget to tell us all how it goes!

It would'nt be too difficult to connect to a head set you can buy adapters for mobile phones from transair, the problem is licencing.

Radio's work by line of sight so a low powered tx in a built up area
would probably be picked up upto radius of 3-4Km.

It would certainly annoy the people that want to look important though. :E

[WelshFlyer]

That's the cool thing though - these things run on a licence exempt frequency. 418mhz. and if you are not above a city there is nothing to stop you!

even the ground staff at my aerodrome have these things - helps them keep in touch without useing 122.25. and they can use them as they see fit. (or not as the case may be!)

even above a city the nature of these radios - multiplex transmission with lots of sub channels means that it is very unlikely that someone else is going to get pissed:)

also; it's a free country - the normal R/T rules and regs DO NOT APPLY to these el cheepo trancievers.

WelshFlyer.

just as an afterthought; using such equipment is not all that different from gabbing on a moblile phone inflight, and lots of people do that. 'ts what said mobile phone headset adaptors are for!

Remember; they arn't certified for inflight use, but a hell of a lot of people do it though:)

WelshFlyer.

[Flyin'Dutch']

Hi WF,

I suspect that it says somewhere in the ANO that you can only use approved radios in aircraft. Don't know the ANO verbatim but am sure it does.

Those who are intending to use these would be well adviced to check chapter and verse.

FD

[GTOTO]

I believe 118.00 is an air to air frequency read it in a book bought at the PFA rally a few year ago, can any one confirm.

The family radios are good but would need to be plumbed into your head set. Low power transmitters.

Mobile phones are not a good idea, can affect the avionics, also seeing a cell phone moving at over a hundred could trigger the shut down of the phone or impolite letters to you.

A cell phone in the air can affect the system by hitting multiple cells as well. They also transmit every 7 to 11 minutes.

Could be used by the CAA to track you, has been done by the police retrospectively, as the phone companies keep a record of what cells the phone has contacted.

Sobbering thought.

[ATCbabe]

If certain airfields with A/G were to share frequencies, that would free up some frequencies.


If you think popham and bournemouth hear each others calls sometimes, then edinburgh and amsterdam will amaze. Under certain weather conditions, aircraft inbound to edi can pick up interference with amsterdam. Seems we both share an approach frequency!

[WelshFlyer]

People useing mobile 'phones on airfields is exceedingly anoying, if not damned right dangerous.

Every time someone starts gabbing on one of these liabilitys, you get a howling screem of binary comong through whatever the you're comm radio is tuned to - sounds like the effect created when you play one of those old data tapes from 80's computers in an audio deck.

Mobile phones are very useful, but NOT REPEAT NOT ON AIRFIELDS.

WelshFlyer.

[ShyTorque]

Mobile phones in aircraft? Whatever next! :O

I am now waiting for a police speeding ticket due to my wife leaving her phone (registered in my name) switched on all the way to Greece a couple of weeks back - in a B737. When she landed, to her horror, she had text messages welcoming her to Switzerland and a couple of other countries on route. Oops! :D

BTW, I thought that folks used 121.5 for chat, giving the Captain's welcome passenger chat etc (BA out of EGCC really had bad finger trouble that day; it went on for about 2 minutes, we got the full works).

Seriously though. If a formation wants to talk to each other, they could adopt the military procedures. e.g. Use a relevant formation callsign such as the lead aircraft's registration plus "Combine", nominate a leader and brief properly. The latter is an ANO requirement anyway. Leader only does the r/t, giving details of each individual aircraft to ATC as required.

Call number 2 across to the next ATC freq. by transmitting, for example, "G-ABCD combine, 123.4, 123.4 - GO!" Number 2 ought to find this no great surprise if the trip has been properly briefed with regard to diversion airfields etc. Use London Info for longer legs away from airfields, or use the nearest field for Flight Information where available. And obviously keep the chat to the minimum, no nattering on someone's frequency, keep that for the bar.

You might feel a bit self-conscious but it works.

[Tinstaafl]

After years & years of pilots using 123.45 as their air-to-air frequency (at least 20 years ie at least since I learnt to fly), the Oz authority finally went with the flow & promulgated as the official air-to-air frequency.

[Big Hilly]

IMHO, if people need an air to air frequency for formation flying etc, then they ain't doing it properly! Those who NEED an Air/Air frequency normally get one! Those who just want to compare notes really dont need one..

Hmm. . . . an unusual post from a "Barnstormer extraordinaire" - Obviously made by someone who has never experienced trans-oceanic, late night patter. :rolleyes:

Air to air frequencies are essential, so what if they turn into friendly banter? We've all experienced non CAP 413 R/T in our time. you know: "Congrats on your first Solo" etc etc - if one day they save a life - "Jeff Look out, mate" - then so be it. To condem them on these grounds alone is naive in the extreme.

[Zlin526]

Big Hilly,

Just because my profile says 'Barnstormer extraordinaire', doesnt mean to say that I need an Air/Air freq to chat to one & all, and by your inference, mean that I know nuffink about trans-atlantic oceanic waffle! Maybe I just prefer to do my barnstorming in silence? Thats the beauty of Pprune, you can be whoever you want to be. Look at it this way. How many profiles say 'ATPL' or 'Instructor', yet the views that flow from certain people would be fit only to come from a 5 year old child!:confused:

GTOTO,

118.00 has been used by certain 'teams' in the past, and some spotters books do say that it's an official air/air freq, but I think they speak with forked tongue.....:E

Heard a classic tale of woe once. 2 air display teams on the same (unauthorised) frequency. The leader of one says "Echelon port, go" and 50 miles away, the No.2 of the other team, also displaying, gently slides into an almost inevitable collision with his No.3! Fortunately, he didnt.

Have a nice day :ok:

[Big Hilly]

Zlin526,

An excellent post.

Just because my profile says 'Barnstormer extraordinaire', doesnt mean to say that I need an Air/Air freq to chat to one & all, and by your inference, mean that I know nuffink about trans-atlantic oceanic waffle!

In which case, Sir, you will know only too well the importance of such 'Air/Air waffle'

[greatorex]

IMHO, if people need an air to air frequency for formation flying etc, then they ain't doing it properly!

Blimey, I tell you chaps, next thing you know, them Red Arraz Boys will be asking to chat to each other in the air! :D ;)

[robin]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMHO, if people need an air to air frequency for formation flying etc, then they ain't doing it properly! Those who NEED an Air/Air frequency normally get one! Those who just want to compare notes really dont need one..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quite - its because of not doing it right we might need to communicate dreckly with each other and not via an ATCO, and how else to you learn to do it properly

In one notable instance a formation I was in lost the leader - he forgot to look to see where we all were and ploughed on regardless. That was his mistake and there was no way of calling him back except via the ATCO

There is a lot of dross on 123.45 but a dedicated frequency is useful

[Flash0710]

To lighten........


I remember once when i was having FUN in an aeroplane which once upon a time most people did now its all got anal, anyway....

Meeting a mate to share a nice evening flight togther down to the coast from a london field great wx etc his initial call on 123.45 was 123.42 EGTF

P1 " You there big boy?

EGTF : " Station calling Big boy ?"

Keep it safe and fun.........:ok:

[niknak]

Allocate a frequency, but make accessible only by pre paid credit card subscription at £1 per minute, (I am reliable informed by the head honcho from our knobs and spanners department that this is possible), this is only way R/T will be used in the way it designed to be used - stand up - speak up - shut up. :rolleyes: