121.5 monitoring by ATC

[karrank]

That's what they do overseas. If you can talk to ATC on a location-specific frequency you can also talk to ATC on 121.5 from the same location at the same altitude.

From a thread on the Dunnunda forum, here. (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=123038)

In Australia a sector can have up to 8 VHF sites, before you start combining sectors, and this guy thinks all these sites should have a reciever set to 121.5 also. How generally do you monitor guard elsewhere in the world?

Here we leave it to the sattelites & aeroplanes.

[eyeinthesky]

I think I'm correct in saying that in the UK the only Centre-based agency which is allowed to monitor 121.5 is the Distress and Diversion (D&D) cell at London and Scottish. They have the autotriangulation facilities and necessary links to ground transmitters and receivers to ensure coverage down to quite low level in most areas. (They also monitor UHF 243).

As civil controllers, we are not even able to select 121.5 on our frequency panels without being given a code by D&D. I suppose it is logical that such a function should be concentrated in one unit only, since controllers have enough to do controlling on their own frequency and any of their traffic having an emergency will report it on the sector frequency first. We do get a lot of reports of ELTs which the aircraft who monitor 121.5 hear, and we pass them on to D&D as appropriate.

If EVERY aircraft were mandated to monitor 121.5 (providing they have a second radio) then it would make getting in contact with yet another american pilot who has gone AWOL from the sector frequency for the last 100 miles a lot easier than it is at present..!:rolleyes:

In summary: Agree that it is best left to the agencies designed for the purpose and aircraft who have the will and equipment.

[M609]

Here in Norway, and I know it's the same in Sweden ALL ACC sectors, approach/radar, twr and AFIS units need to monitor 121.5. CRCs, military and joint civ/mil TWR/APP units and all ACC sectors monitor 243.0 as well. :D

[Muppit]

If memory serves, and I know someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but the UK AIP says that...


121.5 will be monitored by D&D, aircraft in oceanic airspace, and aircraft in an area where S&R ops are being carried out.

There are no requirements for individual units to have that facility, and within NATS, the ability to monitor 121.5 has already been removed from some.

I agree with eyeinethesky.....leave it to the designated agencies

:D

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<As civil controllers, we are not even able to select 121.5 on our frequency panels without being given a code by D&D. >>

That's quite extraordinary, IMHO. Is that a recent ruling?

I recall a session in Heathrow Approach (when it was in the tower building) where two of us took over a situation on 121.5 from D&D because we were a) better equipped (radar-wise) and b) had better local knowledge (of local aerodromes) to assist the pilot.

[BDiONU]

There is no restriction on monitoring 121.5, a LOT of people do! The more ears the better. D&D are the ones who will generally respond though.
As to the 'restriction' on selecting 121.5 I assume eyeinthesky is based at LACC. The restriction is engineering not operational. You can have 121.5 whenever you need it, on request.

BD

[Wombat66]

It's not a case of D&D giving a code to access 121x5 but allocating a channel number. Depending on which area of the UK coverage is required the D&D staff will select an appropriate group of forward relays and then advise the controller which channel to input into his comms.

[Lon More]

Maastricht UAC sectors all have 121.5 and 243 available,
a/c in possible R/F are often called on it.

Although no requirement to do so a large % of flights monitor 121.5 judging by the number of ELTs reported

[spekesoftly]

The UK's D&D Auto-Triangulation service hasn't always been available on 121.5 - only perhaps in the last decade?
Prior to then, D&D was reliant on bearings from a number of ATC units that were equipped, not only with 121.5 R/T,
but also the facility to select this frequency on D/F, when required.

[divingduck]

Here in Muscat (Middle East) we have 121.5 on all ATC consoles.
Problem is, the transmitter/receiver is at Muscat airfield so we are limited in range.
agree with the above statements...very handy to wake up some of our pilot friends.

[vector4fun]

In the U.S., we have both freqs available at nearly all positions, and monitor them via speaker in both Tower and TRACON. Scott would have better info on how many receiver sites the Centers have. Also, FSS also monitors the Guard freqs, and used to drive us nuts with the Monday morning checks of primary and secondary Xmittrs and Rcvrs with airborne aircraft.:yuk: :hmm:

[Scott Voigt]

Some Centers in the US, mine included do not monitor 121.5 and do not even have it available. The reason being cost. It has been established that there are enough tower, approach control and Flight Service Stations in the operating area that can cover it. We do however monitor and use 243.0 or as some of us call it, military common <G>...

regards

Scott

[Timothy]

Quite recently I called Luton for zone transit and they replied: "Do you have any problems, D & D have been trying to call you on 121.5."

This says to me that they were monitoring 121.5. It actually made me feel quite nurtured to know that there were people keeping an eye out for me.

I never did find out why they wanted me, mind you!:confused:

Timothy

[SirToppamHat]

Interesting that US regard 243.00 as 'Mil Common'.

In the UK it is UHF Guard, and monitored by a number of organisations including the 2 D&D Cells. They 'own' the frequency from a ground perspective, and I would not transmit on it (under normal circumstances) without calling them first. The most usual reason for us transmitting on 243.00 is to correct a mis-dialled frequency change. Since all mil ac monitor UHF Guard this is extremely useful to sort out a lost comms situation.

What I don't understand is why Civvy aircraft are not required to monitor VHF Guard. In the current climate, I would think it at least a wise precaution, especially given certain 'airlines' seem rather lax in checking-in when changing from sector to sector during transits.

If you are trying to check-in with the next sector, what is the procedure if they don't respond? Go back to previous? VHF Guard? Some people just seem to plough-on regardless!

I thought it was mandatory to be in receipt of a radar service in Class A/B airspace? How can you if you haven't established 2-way with ATC for the sector?

[eyeinthesky]

BDiONU & Wombat66:

Thanks for the further info. (HD: From what I remember it was also the case when I was in TC 8 years ago...)

The fact remains (at Swanwick at least) that we are unable to select 121.5 on any sector as a matter of course and monitor it just in case, even should we have the will to (which we don't for the reasons already specified).

We can of course deal with an aircraft on 121.5 if that is necessary, subject to the interventions regarding transmitter relays and so on already mentioned. But that was not the question. It was whether we routinely monitor 121.5: No we do not at LACC.

As Sir Toppham says: If we could be sure everyone was monitoring 121.5 it would be a lot easier to get hold of the ones not talking to us without all the hassle of phoning companies for ACARs links, or even sending up a couple of fighters to get their attention!..

[spekesoftly]

Sir Toppam,

I think Scott's comment about 243.0 sometimes being called 'military common' in the US, might have been written in jest - possibly a humorous dig at its misuse by some? ;)

[SirToppamHat]

Spekesoftly

Possibly, but I wasn't criticising them in any case. If the UHF freq is only used by the US military, then it's really up to them how they use it.

STH

[Scott Voigt]

Actually we call it military common due to some of the rubbish radios that some of the military aircraft had in the past and the only one that seemed to work was Guard...

regards

Scott

[Little One]

Here in SA most of the consoles in the major centers have 121.5 on and we select it to monitor on our headsets, but the moment there's interference or some idiot with the wrong freq we deselect as it becomes annoying. At the out stations (smaller Airfields) there's usually a handheld or Dittel radio permanantly on and monitoring 121.5. It isn't monitored by all and is usually a personal preference to select it or not although management does try insist that all keep it monitored.
The RX/TX site is at the major centre base so again limited range on no more than 60nm but most often the elt's are reported by acft in flight and we don't usually hear them on our RX. Any ELT report gets logged and a check done that no one has any acft missing in their sectors but thats where it ends from ATC point but we do have a satelite (SARSAT) that monitors as well and gives us a co-ord of the ELT. it monitors 121.5, 243 and the encoded freq (i think its 406MHZ or something) That gives the acft reg as well with the ELT

[FWA NATCA]

Like others have stated, in the U.S. most of the towers and tracons (approach controls) have the capability to monitor and transmit on 121.5 and 243.0 .

Since 9/11 the majority of calls on 121.5 are from aircraft that are on the wrong frequency because they missed a frequency change and are trying to figure out who they should be talking to.

Mike
NATCA FWA

[dvdr]

As far as I am aware NATS pays the RAF to monitor 121.5 in D and D. They have excecuitive control of all emergencies in UK airspace and delegate operational control as they see fit. At scottish no sectors have 121.5, you request D and D to pass messages on it if required. I wouldnt fancy working my sector and monitor 121.5 with a PLB going off for hours on end.

[FWA NATCA]

DVDR,

When I worked in Northern Michigan, it wasn't uncommon for the Coast Guard or the Civil Air Patrol to launch when an ELT went off only to find that it was coming from a boat tied to the dock at the marina or sitting in the owners driveway.

Mike
NATCA FWA

[karrank]

I read somewhere the first ELT detected by the SARSAT was in a cardboard box in the back of a Canadian delivery van...

[dvdr]

Thats why 121.5 should be monitored by specialists, eg coast guard, distress and diversion cells. Not every ATCO and not every workstation. Response should be controlled and effective.

[Spitoon]

If anyone pays the mil to monitor 121.5 I would expect it to be the CAA on behalf of the UK.

[dvdr]

I think you are more likely to find the CAA tell NATS that they are responsible and therefore pay it.

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Hey Little One, you mean there are still controllers in Sth Africa??? Thought they were all working here in the UAE!!!

By the way, here in UAE we also have on all the consoles, 121.5 and 243.0, but generally we have it selected to come out of loud speaker, and if we get a persistent beacon that goes on for days (which happens often here) we just turn down the loud speaker. 243.0 is handy to get those "cloth eared" Yank Military pilots! I've always wondered whether they forget to do hearing tests on American pilots when they first do their medicals. And Scott, "rubbish radios American military had in the past"????? I must be livin in the past here, cos all yank military planes here (maybe except for the KC135's and the B52's) have crap radios!

[APP Radar]

In Portugal all ATC units, both civil and military, are able to monitor and transmit in 121.50
Some TWR and the ACC/APP are also able to monitor and transmit on 243.00

Calls on 121.50 are often used to try contact with aircrafts which have not changed frequency when leaving previous sector.

[Scott Voigt]

I sometimes think that they turn down Guard so that it doesn't bother them...

Scott

[Hippy]

A friend of mine who works D&D London told me that London & Scottish are the only FIRs worldwide who have a dedicted controller(s) to monitor 121.5/243.0, hence the replies from others around the world that it is common for most ATCOs in other countries to monitor those freqs; they simply don't have a D&D suite.