Air to air on a closed frequency

[jezbowman]

The other week I was flying across a miliray aerodrome. They were closed, and I had already asertained that they would be from my previous radio unit. I still made a single radio call in an attempt to raise them - "Cottesmore Radar, good afternoon this is G-XXXX". No reply, as expected.

Now I was left with the interesting problem of who to talk to. There was no other active airport nearby that was awfully bothered about me hanging around over Rutland Water. So I stayed on the Cottesmore frequency.

After a couple of minutes "Cottesmore Radar, this is G-ABCD". Then 20 sec later "Cottesmore Radar, this is G-ABCD". Followed 30 sec later by "Cottesmore Radar, this is G-ABCD". So I decided to talk to him "G-ABCD, this is G-XXXX, I believe Cottesmore Radar is closed. I am a C172, overhead rutland water at 5000ft on Q1020, please advice your position" and sure enough I got back "G-ABCD is a <something>, 2 miles south of Rutland Water at 3000ft on Q1020". That was all.

Then another aircraft called up "Cottesmore Radar, this is G-DCBA" so I didn't let him call three times, I called him straight back with the same message as G-ABCD had got from me. He came back with a shaky 'rodger' and I guessed he was a student as he came back a minute or so later with a standard CAP413 position call, with all the err's and umm's in it.

It was all quite splendid, we were all aware of each others position so safety was increased. As I left the frequency I just called 'All stations, G-XXXX changing to Leicester ... "

So this got me thinking - did I break any rules working the frequency? Would you do the same? Would the transmissions have been recorded at Cottesmore? Should I go and hide in a cave now?

I guess the biggest risk would have been 'what if the donkey stops' then I'd have to messed around re-tuning another frequency for the mayday. I did have 121.5 on the standby of the second radio, so this would have taken only a few seconds. In hindsight, had I have also been at 3000ft, my course may have converged with G-ABCD, increasing chances of a mid-air.

[Grainger]

Sounds like you did absolutely the right thing, jez. Everyone knew where each other was and managed to fly safe, which - after all - is the object of the exercise.

In this situation, after receiving no reply I usually give a position report to "<Name of closed station> traffic". Then at least anyone listening in knows where I am and what I'm doing.

At Cumbernauld, when A/G goes off the air, they advise everyone to make "standard calls" and we all sort each other out in the circuit. Works a charm.

[omcaree]

I agree with Grainger that you did the right thing.
As for breaking rules I think it'd only be a problem if you attempted to issue any instructions. but by simply informing people, who were obviously unaware, that a station is closed and then informing them of your position and asking for theirs sound perfectly legal, haven't got CAP413 handy but if there is a rule against it then there really shouldn't be.

As you said, if you'd been at 3000ft and ignored the other guy then things could have taken a turn for the worse.

[rotatrim]

I find it a bit irritating when I call a station and another aircraft calls up to say that the station is closed.

It's my duty to call the station to ascertain whether or not it's open and if it isn't, I make blind calls.

Cottesmore and nearby Cambridge are sometimes open when you would least expect it.

Be careful with MATZs. Outside promulgated hours the pilot should assume that the ATZ is active.

[FlyFreeWbe]

That happened to me on one of my XC's. I had made my call to a MATZ but getting no reply i transmitted my intentions and did them anyway. If the zone was active then I would have seen it in the AIC or NOTAMed. Another a/c called up about 5 mins later and did the same. Its good that he did too because his planned route intersected mine and he was at the same altitude. So I kept an even better look out going up to that point. Of course I still mentioned things like entering your zone, leaving your zone, changing frequency etc, basically position reports addressed to ATC so he would be comfortable.

I do agree that what was done was good and obivously safer, but isnt the point of transmiting blind to tell everyone your intentions and as the PIC of your a/c make choices about its safety without electing some other a/c as a controlling authority who probably wont have good enough training or an acceptable overview of the situation and who won't be there long enough to make decisions for everyone else?

No flames required, just wondering what the general concensus is
FFW

[Gertrude the Wombat]

No flames required, just wondering what the general concensus is I was taught that if you call a MATZ three times and hear nothing you transmit "nothing heard, changing to ..." and go to the next frequency. And keep out of the ATZ, which you assume is active even if the MATZ controller won't talk to you.

[FlyFreeWbe]

I had made my call to a MATZ but getting no reply i transmitted my intentions and did them anyway
I didn't go into the ATZ, so Im safe! Seriously though there must be some standard as to what you can do with the RT when you're in such a situation. One time after the flight I mentioned before, I was pleasantly surprised to hear another ground station take over the MATZ frequency even though I'd already transmitted :confused: so there must be some sort of rule

[jezbowman]

I cant help but think that if I'd have done NOTHING then neither would the other aircraft. Particularly the latter one. I'd justify myself as far to say I took control of the situation for my own good, as PIC of the aircraft I was flying. When the second aircraft came on frequency, me asking him to report position benifited the other aircraft I'd already spoken to. I didn't go as far as to tell him about other aircraft I was aware of! But I'm sure G-CD could have spoken to G-BA if he felt the need to.

I wish we had MBZ / CTAF like they do in Oz. That system works so well and doesn't require a ground controller!

[Cusco]

Beware that the MATZ is not the same as the ATZ

Even if , for example, Lakenheath let you through their MATZ, they will get seriously arsey if you try to go anywhere near their ATZ.

And OK, if its a Sunday afternoon and they don't want to talk to you and you assume your God-given right to go through a MATZ, you would be seriously stupid to enter the ATZ.

:oh:

[J.A.F.O.]

I was going to keep out of this one but come on guys and gals - radios don't keep aeroplanes in the air but two things that sometimes do are common sense and good airmanship.

I think what Jez did was spot on:

1. Called and got no answer so gave a report

2. Showed sound airmanship by assuring separation with others

As long as he remained clear of the ATZ (which I'd assumed he did), what's wrong with that?

[down&out]

Jez I think you did fine.

As Grainger said a number of airfields advise position reports if flying in after the tower/ info/ radio have closed.

My understanding is, without checking in CAP413, is the correct thing to say is:

xxxxxx traffic - G-ABCD position report and intentions.

(xxxxxx being the airfield name)

One evening, when flying back to a certain airfield, this proved V useful for me as I discovered another a/c in similar position and height - so I let him descend first until we were visual.

[MichaelJP59]

Interesting... just to take this a step further, if you make your calls and say in the above instance you found you were both at 3000ft on the same QNH.

Obviously if you have no visual it would be wise then to change altitude, but should you then make the call e.g. "G-xxxx climbing to 3500ft" ?

- Michael

[Fuji Abound]

"I find it a bit irritating when I call a station and another aircraft calls up to say that the station is closed."

I dont agree.

It is your duty to call up in the first place. It is very helpful of another aircraft to report the frequency appears closed if they have already tried rather than leaving you wondering if you have the wrong frequency or the box has failed.

I also think Jez was absolutely correct. There can be nothing lost in the two pilots exchanging as much information as possible if that reduces the chances of a collision. I see nothing wrong for example in saying I am at 2500 on 1008 five miles to the west of XYZ routing north. If the other aircraft is in the same area he might well respond I will descend / ascend to x to maintain seperation. In that brief exchange the chance of a collision between those two aircraft has been avoided.

On a wider issue I find it strange how often you will hear a pilot report his position to an A/G for example with at 2,500, 1008 ten miles to run form the south. Another aircraft shortly after will report himself to be at a similiar altitude and it is quite obvious form the call both might conflict and yet neither responds with "in view of the other aircraft I will descend / ascend to x to maintain seperation. It just seems common sense never mind the courtesy.

[niknak]

Its commensense, courtesy and good airmanship to call.

At the risk of offending the few "know it all's" who lurk in the shadows, it's worth reminding everyone that although a lot of military airfields are "closed" at the weekend, other flying activities take place within the ATZ.

Additionally, when a civilian airport/aerodrome is closed, so is it's associated ATZ, but it's still a good idea to call just in case it's been reactivated at short notice.

However, at military/government aerodromes (all of which are lited in the UKAIP, Pooleys etc), the ATZ is active H24 , and must not be penetrated without permission from the operating authority.

[jezbowman]

Just to clarify the situation, I wasn't anywhere near the ATZ, and indeed at 5000ft was considerably higher than the vertical limits of the MATZ.

Thanks for the feedback - I'll probably head over that way again without fear of being shot down! :E

[bcfc]

This happens to me quite a bit at weekend with Yeovilton. Tend to make blind calls, stay at 3000' or so and will see no-one. Then one sunday I went up with my brother who was stationed there and after getting no one on radar, we tried the tower and got a response immediatley informing us they had a four ship recovery later on.

So the moral of the story is just because they don't answer on VHF, doesn't mean they're all in the bar.

[FlyFreeWbe]

My understanding is, without checking in CAP413, is the correct thing to say is:
xxxxxx traffic - G-ABCD position report and intentions
It is your duty to call up in the first place. It is very helpful of another aircraft to report the frequency appears closed if they have already tried rather than leaving you wondering if you have the wrong frequency or the box has failed

This makes sense to me. Sorry if it seemed that I was arguing you did the wrong thing jez, there was nothing wrong with what you did, and I'm not complaining.
FFW

[Snigs]

There's one thing bothering me here.....

and I guessed he was a student as he came back a minute or so later with a standard CAP413 position call, with all the err's and umm's in it.

I hope that this student wasn't left with the impression that he was under a FIS, because he wasn't. Hence no action by D & D should anything go wrong.

It's the same for anyone blind calling a closed station, no distress cover. Personally, if I contact a closed station (whether or not I'm told it's closed by someone else on frequency) I'll report my position, and intentions, which include that I'm changing to a nearby working frequency (or even London Info) so I'm covered by an FIS. Maybe I'm a scaredy cat, but I'd like to be able to talk to someone immediately if something is going wrong!

[jezbowman]

Snigs - I never informed the 'suspected student' that he had a FIS, therefore he had no reason to assume he had one. I understand the point you're making though, but cannot be fully responsible for someone elses lack of experience or stupidity (not saying he had either, for all I know he may have had an instructor sitting next to him).

I'll quote myself saying:

I guess the biggest risk would have been 'what if the donkey stops' then I'd have to messed around re-tuning another frequency for the mayday. I did have 121.5 on the standby of the second radio, so this would have taken only a few seconds. In hindsight, had I have also been at 3000ft, my course may have converged with G-ABCD, increasing chances of a mid-air.

London Info could not have helped me with traffic info for G-ABCD. I still feel that under the circumstances my decision to stay on Cot's freq was the correct one.

Edited to Add: My opening statement to 'the suspect student' was "G-DCBA, this is G-XXXX. I believe Cottesmore is closed." At which point it should be clear that no ground based services (such as D&D) would be available. I would have more than happily have relayed a Mayday from him if I was still on frequency, but appreciate not every aircraft has two radios for doing this (not that you need two, but it wouldnt be nice to leave the frequency the other chap was on to broadcast on another would it?).

FFW - no argument read. Debate is what we're here for isn't it?

:ok:

[Snigs]

I wasn't inferring that you had given him the impression that he was under a FIS, it's just that because the student came back with a "TRPACER" call of some sorts it suggests to me that he perhaps thought he was talking to an ATCO (it may have been the first time he'd encountered this situation) and didn't know any different! Just remember students are capable of doing some rather strange things because they know no better!

And to clarify a small point, my assertion that I'd change to another en route frequency pretty sharpish should be accompanied by the point that I am in fact flying across the country. If, and I suspect that this applies to your situation, I was bimbling around in the local patch, then I'd certainly carry out at least a listening watch on the MATZ/LARS frequency.

[jezbowman]

You're quite correct, I was just bimbling. But even if I was heading somewhere in particular, I would probably have still done the same since, in my mind, that is still the most sensible frequency to keep a listening watch on and talk to other aircraft in the area.

[Capt. Manuvar]

I trained in the UK an flew thru Cottesmore quite a few times and I've experienced the scenario described above. Now I fly in Canada and am now used to Remote radio communications. In the UK, unmanned frequencies are rare and VFR air-air RT doesn't exist so when pilots find themselves in a situation where there's no one on the other side of the radio, they don't know what to do.
In Canada, they've got 126.7. You'll hear everything from Jetsto turboprops and spamcans. I've now learnt a new method of collision avoidance.
Capt. M