Benson and Lyneham ATC

[Three Yellows]

Hi there,

I am a regular (and grateful) user of the most excellent services provided by RAF Benson and RAF Lyneham's radar units for LARS and zone transits. However, I have always found the quality of the transmissions from RAF stations to be of poorer quality (i.e. muffled and unintelligable) than civilian units.

This morning Benson was particularly bad, I kept having to ask the nice lady controller to repeat everything..... I'm sure that she thought that I was either (a) a complete muppet or (b) not paying sufficient attention to her radio transmissions.... or probably both. I always try and be as professional as possible on the radio and listen, especially with mil units because I'm sure that the controllers are also busy on UHF freqs too and so haven't got time to repeat everything for me.

I don't think that the problem is with my kit as I don't have problems with civilian units and I'm very lucky to have a brand new Garmin G1000 with Sennheiser headphones.

Do other pilots have these problems? Could we club together and by the RAF some new microphones?

regards

3Y

[Maude Charlee]

All of the RAF R/T infrastructure sounds like a bloke with his head in a bucket talking to you from ther far side of a concrete cell.

It certainly isn't just you. :)

[whowhenwhy]

Personally I've always found many at Benson to be particularly bad, muffled and unintelligable. Of course it could just be that they're sad that they don't work at the better JHC unit. :E

In terms of what we sound like, we are in a concrete cell (from which I'm currently trying to escape using nothing more than raw stupidity and a spoon) with our heads in a huge mug of coffee to provide us some stimulation while all our aircraft are broken or in other places :ugh:

[chevvron]

They're just the same on the telephone when we do handovers, Brize being worst.
It all boils down to the system they use called MASCOT; it was designed for police/ambulance etc control rooms and was adapted for ATC use. As installed at some units (not all), it apparently doesn't emit the full range of audio frequencies, low and high frequencies being the ones not transmitted. This means you only hear mid range audio, hence the muffiled sound. I believe they might have been issued with new headsets recently as it seemed to get worse a few weeks ago.

[BDiONU]

I'm out of the loop now but about a year ago MoD were inviting tenders from industry to replace and subsequently maintain everything engineering in aerodromes. They were putting it on a fast track and thought a contract could be let in 5-6 years :rolleyes:

BD

[pulse1]

I'm glad to hear that it isn't just me. I have found Lyneham so difficult to understand that I usually prefer to avoid them.

A few weeks ago I was flying with my son who is fairly advanced in his military flying training and, expecting to be impressed, I asked him to talk to his friends at Lyneham. Not being familiar with the local VRP's he couldn't understand their zone clearance at all. "Keep to the west of Melksham and Chippenham" can sound very odd when it's garbled and you're not expecting it.

[London Mil]

Not jsut MASCOT, the valve driven transmitters and receivers don't help.:bored:

BD, correct. I think the project is called JMATS and it will incorporate all technical aspects (radar, SSR, RT etc) as well as a few other things.

[BDiONU]

I think the project is called JMATS and it will incorporate all technical aspects (radar, SSR, RT etc) as well as a few other things.
Thats the acronym! Couldn't recall it.
"JMATS: The Joint Military Air Traffic Services (JMATS) project was established following a successful EP05 Option to sustain key elements of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) Air Traffic Control (ATC) infrastructure. Serious obsolescence issues face this entire capability area and JMATS intends to bring a coherent approach to its future provision as well as exploring options for more efficient provision of the service. The project shows early signs of Private Finance Initiative (PFI) potential and a key decision for Initial Gate (IG) will be whether to take forward a PFI procurement strategy."

NATS are (were) very interested, in collaboration with an engineering supplier.

BD

[Dysonsphere]

Ah Ha the dreaded JOINT in a project come back in 10 years and see if its even installed yet:ugh:

[chevvron]

Means you military guys will probably get ASR 10s replacing your far superior Watchmans; don't say I didn't warn you. Still at least you'll get decent comms kit.

[Grabbers]

Three Yellows
Count yourself lucky you could hardly hear what they had to say. If you heard the full transmission it would probably have been unmitigated self-promotion. "We are the best, we rule the sky, etc..."
A close shave if you ask me.
Grabbers

[DX Wombat]

I usually talk to Shawbury which is always excellent but on the one day when I needed to talk to Lyneham all was loud and clear :) - and this in spite of the fact that the radio in the aircraft has, in the past as well as last week, proved unreliable for reception. :* Perhaps the answer is to have a radio which should be consigned to a museum? :hmm: (Just joking)

[radarman]

London Mil,

Don't knock old valve-driven gear. When I first started in ATC all our squadrons (Victor Mk 2) were equipped with ARC 52 tx/rx, and the tower had ancient valve equipment fed by GPO telephone headsets with plastic tubes to talk into. The quality was superb. One of your mates called up a couple of hundred miles out and it was like talking to him in the same room. Squadrons said the same of our transmissions.
Then they installed the original minicomms, and then came Mascot. And the result of forty years progress in radio technology?......... the comments on this thread :ugh:

[Sideslipper]

Three Yellows,
I have had the same problem. Its not your kit. Often go from crystal clear with Bristol to almost unreadable at Lyneham or Brize.
I am also unimpressed that you can't hear the military traffic which apparently operates on UHF, and presumably they can't hear us using VHF. Not the best arrangement for forming a mental awareness picture of what is going on in the zone.
I am also more comfortable with transiting the Bristol rather than Lyneham zone. They appear to have far less of a problem with routing me overhead dodging their commercial traffic than Lyneham has with their militaries.
(See my previous posts)

[London Mil]

SS, the VHF-UHF 'cross coupling' facility exists but, due to incompatabilities between MASCOT and the wonderful pieces of aviation heritage otherwise known as 'valve radios':) it doesn't work. If you select the facility, you get endless 'keying'.

[chevvron]

Lon Mil and other mil types: Your procurement people visited my unit several weeks ago and I had the pleasure of demonstrating how easy it was to cross couple 2 or more VHF/UHF frequencies with our kit, (Schmid ICS 200/60) as supplied as standard by the company which I believe has got the contract.
As you say, when we had MASCOT, you could cross couple but not successfully, although our techies did a special 'hard wiring' job which did work. Course when Sealand came down for annual maintenance and discovered this, the proverbial hit the fan and it had to be disconnected!!

[Sideslipper]

Chevvron,
Are you saying that it is technically possible for the military to couple UHF/VHF at their units, but they either won't or don't know how to do it?

[whowhenwhy]

SS, yes we know how to do it and yes the kit can theoretically do it. Unfortunately, as I understand it, if you actually cross-couple the freqs the kit can't cope and shuts down or some other un-helpful activity. :ugh:

I find it hard to believe however that our kit supremos will purchase anything mildly useful within the next few years. Bless em.

[Chilli Monster]

SS, yes we know how to do it and yes the kit can theoretically do it. Unfortunately, as I understand it, if you actually cross-couple the freqs the kit can't cope and shuts down or some other un-helpful activity.

Never had that problem at West Freugh, and that was 6 years ago (Mascot comms). I can't see the kit there being all that different - could be worth talking to someone in MOD-PE to see why it worked there.

[PPRuNe Radar]

Never had that problem at West Freugh, and that was 6 years ago (Mascot comms). I can't see the kit there being all that different - could be worth talking to someone in MOD-PE to see why it worked there.

No aircraft to talk to ?? :p

[Chilli Monster]

In my case it served its purpose mate :ok:

[chevvron]

Maybe the techies at WF did the same as ours. In any event, the attitude of the Sealand boys was 'it's non standard therefore unless you de-modify we'll cease all support'!(This in spite of the fact it worked better than standard)

[Brilliant Stuff]

I also have the problem of understanding Benson. If we really think about it this is actually dangerous!!:{

[Three Yellows]

Thanks for all the replies. I glad that its not just me. As Brilliant Stuff says, this is a flight safety issue.

Every year I pay the for an engineering inspection to approve MY radio installation... don't ground based units have to do the same?:bored:

[London Mil]

Weekly!!!!!!!

[Three Yellows]

Well maybe next week, the 'inspector' would like to come flying with me and see how it sounds at 2400ft!!!!!

[London Mil]

Just a thought, but has anyone actually mentioned this to Benson?

[Three Yellows]

Just a thought, but has anyone actually mentioned this to Benson?


London Mil, that is of course a great idea. I guess to start with, I wanted to establish that this was a common problem and not just my cloth ears. But it would appear that its not just a Benson problem.. but quite a few RAF Stations.

Should we go straight to the top?

[London Mil]

Well, that is one option. Maybe a call to the units concerned is a good start. I have to admit, I have never had a problem with any military unit on VHF although I don't recollect ever speaking with Benson. Certainly Northolt, Brize, Lyneham and most of the 'A1 airfields' have been fine on my VHF boxes.

I'm just wondering if we have an issue here with standby radios. If anything, the RAF ground radio chaps are forever servicing bits of kit, far more than we find at somewhere like West Drayton. Invariably this means that controllers have to use standby radios which are not tuned to a specific freq (ie they work in a similar way to the radio in your aircraft where you can dial-up any VHF/UHF freq). These sytems work on a far lower power output.

If you want, I will do some sniffing around and speak to various units. I would need a little more detail (ie frequency used, rough time etc and type of problem/interference).

[Brilliant Stuff]

i will check Benson tomorrow or the day after. I will let you know.

[Three Yellows]

Just a thought, but has anyone actually mentioned this to Benson?


I have just spoken to an extremely helpful SATCO at Benson. He is going to look in to it for me.:ok:

[Cpt_Pugwash]

Just to add my two-penn'orth... agree on comments on audibility, and to diverge slightly, there seems to be quite a lot of " ...limited RIS due to poor radar performance ...." from Lyneham recently. Roll on JMATS, although not holding my breath.

[Number2]

'I have just spoken to an extremely helpful SATCO at Benson. He is going to look in to it for me.'

We all know what "looking into it" means.

[Three Yellows]

We all know what "looking into it" means

Number 2, ... please, give the guy a break.:ugh:

Capt. Pugwash - yes I agree, but why don't you start a new thread on that one!

[Cpt_Pugwash]

Three Yellows,
Yes, I did think of starting a new thread, but as I was merely making an observation that was pertinent to the earlier JMATS comments, I took the liberty of muscling in on yours!
All credit to the Lyneham staff for the services provided with the equipment they have.

[fantaman]

At least someone has bothered to do something about it Number 2. I'm sure the SATCO at Benson will be looking into it, however, if you dont like it, dont fly near Benson :=

[Brilliant Stuff]

Well Benson was more or less crystal clear today early afternoon.

I very much hope this will become the norm now.

I will keep an eye on it this week.

[Three Yellows]

Fantaman, I can't always choose where I fly!:bored:

And for the cynics amongst you, having spoken with RAF Benson again this afternoon, I know that they have worked hard all day to explore all possibilities. (I'm sure I'm now very unpopular with 'the troops')

The result is that 'Brilliant Stuff' has experienced first hand what a bit of 'looking in to it can do'. - This is from someone who a few days ago shared my concerns.

Further RT trials will continue, and at a date to be arranged as soon as possible, some 'pilot education' for local pilots about why we hear the phrase 'limited due poor radar performance' more often than we'd like.

[Number2]

Because the Watchman picks up it's fair share of false returns and it's a great 'excuse' if you have a mishap!

[Three Yellows]

Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm sure you will... but even with a RIS, it is still the pilots responsibility to look out the window and not bump into the ground or fellow aviators.

[Number2]

What do you mean by 'even with a RIS'?

[Three Yellows]

Number 2,

Sorry, I thought that with your comment "it's a great 'excuse' if you have a mishap!" you were implying that if a pilot was receiving a 'limited RIS' then if he/she bumped into traffic not called out by the radar controller, then the radar controller would be 'in the clear'.

I said what I said, because I believe that many pilots think that if they are receiving a RIS, then there is no requirement to 'look out the window'.

Sorry for any mis-understanding, I just want to be able to hear what the controllers say and in time learn more about the limitations of the radar equipment. Something which wasn't covered when I did my PPL 10 years ago. Yes, I'm beginning to understand that due to many reasons, there are an awful lot of hardworking people doing their very best in radar units with all types of equipment that is, shall we say, a little past its sell by date.

All I was trying to do was create a useful dialogue between us mere civvy PPLs and the people on the ground to hopefully make everybodies life a bit easier.

[Number2]

You're preaching to the choir old boy! I used to encourage Civvy pilots to fly into the unit on PDs and visit ATC to see what we had to work with. I applaud your efforts - don't get me wrong!

[Three Yellows]

I finally had a chance to tune into Benson today and they sounded crystal clear... so thank you.

The discussion on here has also given me the confidence (rightly or wrongly) to let other mil units know at the time, that they are almost unreadable and not to be so frightened of them. After all, as a mere civvy, calling up the boys and girls in blue, feels like asking a traffic cop how your driving is whilst doing 71mph on the M1.

Bye the way, I had the great pleasure of using Northolt approach last weekend for a RIS and they were astonishingly helpful. I'll always be using them in future as routeing BNN - LAM can sometimes be quite crowded and Luton are far too busy these days to talk to GA.

[SQUAWKIDENT]

Benson sounded "5" to me last week when I asked for a MATZ penetration.
I can't say the same for Luton Approach on 129.55 which sounded distinctly unwell (the audio quality not the controller). They always provide an excellent service though so I ain't complaining:)

[chevvron]

129.550 equipment has been on maintenance a couple of times recently and Luton have been using another frequency.

[themightyimp]

'I have just spoken to an extremely helpful SATCO at Benson. He is going to look in to it for me.'

We all know what "looking into it" means.

If SATCO Benson said he would look into it then, trust me, he would have done so. The problem seems solved according to other posts. There is some humble pie to eat here if you want some, Muppet. :=

[ATCO Fred]

Guy's

Just to clear up some confusion in the posts here. Under RIS "The pilot is wholly responsible for maintaining seperation from other aircraft whether or not the controller has passed traffic information".

By limiting traffic information the controller is just letting you know that the radar is being a bit crap that day and you should continued to maintain a good scan and lookout the window.

Fred

[Number2]

MightyImp

Cheap insults - very impressive. Ever heard of coincidence? Perhaps the techies were looking into the problem already! If there even was a problem.

[chevvron]

Hope you can get the same result with Brize; their landline comms are terrible.