Not responding on 121.5

[kontrolor]

Hi,

we are not the busiest of sectors in the Europe, but do have plenty of complex situations (crosing traffic, climbing/descending etc...) on a relatively small portion of the sky. Our growing frustration is with the crews, not reacting to our calls, even on 121.5, which is becoming more and more dangerous. I mean, isn't it strange to them that there is complete radio silence?

[goatface]

Where are you based? (the country will do), it could be your transmitters and recievers at fault, particularly if the relay stations are below specification (or non existant).

[bobwi]

I don't understand it either. The other day they were calling for an a/c on the 121.5 for many minutes. So not only was this crew not listening out on the 121.5, they were probably also not paying attention where they were flying. If it gets quiet or if you pass a FIR boundry without being called by the controlers, you'd start questioning right??

Seems to me a very unnecesary problem...

I red some time ago an interview with an Air Force pilot who had intercepted an airplane they had lost contact with. Even flying in front of them he couldn't get their attention. They were too busy reading there newspapers. Eventualy passengers asked the cabin crew about the military jets flying next to them... :ugh:

[kontrolor]

goatface > slovenia. We have excelent coverage, thanks to "large" coutry of ours :D

[Nightstop]

FIR boundary waypoints on ND's should be coloured coded differently than white (the TO wpt) or green (the Next wpt). This would make it obvious that a frequency change should be expected here and help reduce loss comms situations such as this.

[Airbus Girl]

Part of the problem is that some pilots decide to use 121.5 for chat etc. When this happens, we tend to turn the volume down, so that we don't miss calls on the main frequency. However, fatigue can cause missed calls, and other reasons too. And often the 2nd box isn't turned back up in volume, so the pilots don't hear the call on it.

[zedoscarro]

AirbusGirl got it right

Every now and then there are some clowns who decide to litter the frequency. So what we pilots do is deselect VHF2 for a couple of minutes...

[DX Wombat]

we tend to turn the volume down, so that we don't miss calls on the main frequency. ......... often the 2nd box isn't turned back up in volume, so the pilots don't hear the call on it. :* How irresponsible. :* Thank goodness you weren't the only aircraft which might have been able to contact me when I really needed help. Many thanks yet again to the Emirates Airbus Flight Crew who DIDN'T turn the volume down / switch off etc. It may be four years ago now but I will always be grateful to you. :ok:

[redsnail]

Sorry DX, but when you're above FL200 over France and COM2 is set to 121.5 then you are often hearing "practice pan etc". In the UK, that's legal, over France, we are not obliged to listen to "practice Pan" calls in the UK.

However, we are obliged to listen to the primary VHF frequency for our own calls.

Sadly, 121.5 is miss used by so called professional crews as well.

Yes, we do try and remember to turn COM2 back up but we are also human.

[DX Wombat]

Maybe not Reddo, but it was an Emirates Airbus crew at FL370 way out over continental Europe which was able to make contact with me.
I agree it must be irritating to be able to hear the UK practice Pan calls and yes, I do know you are human and things can be missed for a little while. As you know I have also been subjected to the gross misuse of 121.5 by so-called professional crews who really ARE a disgrace to the profession. I just felt that the tone of the post was rather flippant and made me wonder if my predicament might have been curtailed sooner if someone else (apart from the person at Humberside whom I couldn't hear) had also been listening. You also know I appreciate the professionalism of most crews. :ok:

[kontrolor]

I always thought that 123.45 was the freq for chats... :sad:

[bArt2]

How irresponsible.

I invite you to come with me in the cockpit of a 737 once. Some of our planes do not have intercom and the cockpit is very noisy. It is not so easy to find a ballance between the ATC volume on one ear and being able to listen over the other ear to the other pilot. If then people start chatting on 121.5 I have to turn it down or I will not be able to understand anything.

If I am flying in a Cessna 152 with a nice intercom and a noise canceling headset it is no problem to listen to 2 frequencies at one time but in a Boeing this is virtually impossible. :sad:

So the irresponsible ones are the ones abusing 121.5

[WhatMeanPullUp]

Can I ask the pilots what your SOP's say regarding 121.5. I understand your frustrations with chat on what is an emergency frequency which as we all know, should be used for just that but it is clear that some pilots do not use it for the purpose it was intended. Having experienced the frustration many times of calling on 121.5 with no response,I would assume that all airlines would follow the same, (what should be), strict code for this frequency. Perhaps a different frequency should be used for practice pans and airlines abusing the frequency be penalised in some form. Just a thought..............:)

[redsnail]

Our SOP is that 121.5 is to be monitored on COM 2 when not using it for speaking to the handling agent, obtaining the ATIS or listening to a VOLMET. I do turn the volume slightly down compared to the primary frequency on COM 1.

I don't have the Jeps handy at home, however, over Europe (France etc) we need to monitor 121.5, over the UK, ironically, we don't because of Mil DDD. (Please excuse me if I have the name wrong, I have met the folks a few times, great blokes with fantastic kit)

[DFC]

Policy is that 121.5 is monitored on the other radio unless using it to obtain the ATIS for destination, talk to handling / ops or getting the volmet.

However, I can guarantee that when "The other day they were calling for an a/c on the 121.5 for many minutes" is encountered we deselect that radio on the intercom until we find that peace reigns.

I am sure that everyone else within 250nm (except the one you are calling) is doing the same.

Problem is that you do that for 10 minutes and for 5 of those minutes you are crossing with some airfirce base in Germany calling something else and then we have to get the ATIS and then we are 50nm south east of Paris and in range of the "Practice Pan brigade" and guess what, we end up flying from Nice to London trying to listen on 121.5 but finding that it is impossible due to the constant chatter from ground stations

I use "chatter" to include ACC's trying to contact silent aircraft, airfirce bases doing radio checks etc because it is a reason for deselecting 121.5 since when PNF (PM) the primary outside communication task is to monitor and respond to calls on the ACC/APP/TWR frequency. Monitoring 121.5 is secondary and can't be allowed to hamper the first.

Have you ever considered the posibility that they can't hear you on the ACC frequency because they are hearing transmissions from a ground station other than you on 121.5 and when you call on 121.5 this other ground station is blocking you?

What is the DOC of your 121.5 at say 40,000ft and how many other ground stations overlap that DOC - lots and lots if you are in central Europe - and most of them can not hear the other's transmissions and so don't know (or in the UK case 'care') if thay are blocking your transmissions.

So before you go blaming the aircrew, remember that we hear every idiotic waaaaaaaassssssssuuuuuuupppppppppp on 121.5 with hundreds of miles, we hear every ground station within a similar distance - but you don't and therefore are not best placed to decide if you transmission has nay chance of success.

There are also plenty of places in Europe where VHF coverage is poor - parts of Italy fro example - hard to believe that between Corsica and Rome the coverage at 300+ can often be quite poor.

No point in giving me the xxx123 we have called you several times. If I had heard you I would have responded!! We don't intentionally ignore direct clearances / short cuts!! :)

-----

On a side note - I never adjust the volume of the radio other than to make it comfortable i.e. I never turn it down fully. If I don't want to hear what is going on I will de-select it on the intercom. I have seen so many pilots turn down the volume and then forget that while the light on the intercom says you are listening to the freq, you are not going to hear anything.

[Reimers]

Perhaps ATC in Europe should get a SELCAL system so they can ring on 121,5 even if the volume is turned down/off? Can't be that expensive now, can it?

[kontrolor]

I was always wondering whay we don't have selcal installed in the ops rooms...

[bobwi]

It is not just about listening out on the 121,5 but also about checking your position. If you cross a Fir boundry and you don't get handed over, doesn't it make sence to check?? (good sugestion by Nightstop!:ok:)

I know there is a lot of noise on the 121,5 and I also turn it down ocasionaly. But if things get quiet on the radio or I notice the reception of the controler is getting weaker, I check... I don't claim that it is not possible for me to find myself out of contact but I try to prevent it as much as I can...

[DFC]

I think that we don't need selcal it is very simple-

If I have a known radio failure I will squawk 7600. If you get no response from me and you can still see my assigned code then I have not heard you calling (for whatever reason) or you can not hear my response.

Strange thing is that while I frequently hear an ACC trying to call an aircraft over and over and over, I never hear them say "if you read this transmission squawk ident"........which can save a lot of time wasting.

On the other hand as I said on a different topic I have experieced calling an ACC in Spain and receiving no response so one of us called on 121.5 while the other called on the acc frequency. Imgine my surprise when I was answered on 121.5 by a different controller at the ACC and could hear my colleague calling and calling in the background!!!!

I do always have the appropriate enroute high available which has frequencies whereby we could establish comms with someone at the acc but not necessarily the correct sector (Jeppesen). However, long gone are the days when the FIR boundary was the division between ACC's area of responsibility. these days in Europe it is simply a very rough guide.

I like the selcal idea (because we have it) however, can't see those that never fgly oceanic / remote being very enthusiastic about having it in Europe as a "back-up" when we have satphone, AFIS, CPDLC etc etc etc in most cockpits.

[BOAC]

However, long gone are the days when the FIR boundary was the division between ACC's area of responsibility. these days in Europe it is simply a very rough guide. - I don't think you have done Nightstop's idea full justice there, DFC - I think it is an excellent idea and should be very simple software-wise. Even where the FIR boundary is not the comms boundary it would at least (hopefully) get some attention and at least an "are we in r/t contact" thought.

As for having charts out in the cruise - it always produced a wry smile for me when I saw the unspoken "what's the old git doing now" thought bubble. Old habits, eh?

[BrATCO]

Mode S should solve frequency change problems when available all over Europe.
Waiting for that, we've got in the ops room a list of companies we can reach via ACARS. But I think those companies must have ops in france (not sure) so a message can be send with the right frequency.

It doesn't solve the problem for pilots who listen to 121.5 when it's crowded. It shoudn't be !
Usually, pilots say "12345" when they want to chat. I've never heard "1215".

What is this "practice Pan" procedure ? Do people use the emergency frequency for training, or ...??? :confused:

[WhatMeanPullUp]

Thanks for the interesting comments, it basically comes down to why bother monitoring 121.5? I would prefer if you monitored the frequency that you were on and as has been said in other comments, monitor your position and if you have crossed an FIR then change frequency to that sector you are in. Nothing more frustrating than when an aircraft is in your sector and will not respond to calls and the previous sector tells you they have lost contact. Perhaps the sight of a pair of Tornado's or F16's off your wing will spur you into checking where you are and who you should be speaking to. As for practice pans.......a waste of time, we can handle your real emergency and we do not need the practice unless you guys do. That said, there are so many different circumstances surrounding aircraft emergencies which I will not go into, that is like the Chronicles of Narnia, but we only learn from the real situations. www.airdisaster.com (http://www.airdisaster.com) has plenty of these that you can say, "How would I respond?"

Safe flying always guys, we are there to help if and when you need us. :ok:

[Jagohu]

I invite you to come with me in the cockpit of a 737 once. Some of our planes do not have intercom and the cockpit is very noisy. It is not so easy to find a ballance between the ATC volume on one ear and being able to listen over the other ear to the other pilot. If then people start chatting on 121.5 I have to turn it down or I will not be able to understand anything.

Well, I don't know about the rest but at us in Maastricht I hear the frequency either both ears of the headphone or in the right ear - left ear is for phone conversations with other sectors. In the meanwhile I'm listening to my coordinator controller sitting next to me about requested speeds/mil crossers/etc. Also 1-2 positions next to me sits my upper/lower sector I make direct coordination with, so I'm supposed to pay attention to them too. On top of all that my supervisor comes around or just shouts about military areas going active/deactivated, busy periods predicted, etc.
So I think we do know more or less how difficult it is to listen to many sources of information... but at least we're not bothered by the cabin crew ;)))

[Denti]

Maastricht makes it easy for us pilots, they offer CPDLC and that is really great especially for frequency changes or other stuff. Not all ATCOs there like to use it apparently, some do a mix, but it is still great as backup if nothing else. But could you do away with the annoying voice read back please?

[DFC]

Last year we answered 1300+ practices and there is clear evidence that these procedures assist pilots when it does go wrong. Controllers also need to practice!


How many of those civil practice pans were IFR flights within controlled airspace?

How many of those civil practice pans simulated spomething other than "unsure of position" i.e. lost?

How many hours do your controllers spend in the simulator training where emergency scenarios can be run from start to end rather than the usual "I'm pretending to be lost" - "You are there" - "Thanks, bye" which we hear over and over on 121.5.

Aircraft over Dijon can hear both Milano and London on 121.5 - often at the same time not to mention USAF Europe. Does anyone expect that to be listened to?

121.5 is the reason for most "say again" calls while in the cruise i.e. we sit there for 20 minutes in the cruise and London Centre starts transmitting a long paragraph about a temporary sar-ops area and we miss the call to transfer frequency from one mid- French sector to another.

So I believe that the more ACC's call on 121.5 for various non-emergency reasons, the more that other aircraft will miss calls from other ACC's to change frequency.

The wholoe practice pan UK thing has to be taken in the same light as the paragraph from a major UK training organisation's ATPL manual for navigation which says:

Lost procedure

make sure that while lost you do not infringe any controlled airspace. :}


Finally;


(every time you transmit we can see exactly where you are, with associated transponder info.


Not true unfortunately but I suppose the admin fills in the time between feeding the fish and responding to people who can't navigate in class G airspace!! :)

[DFC]

We can! And I do report abusers, particularly those who have used profanities on frequency in the past.



Please review the procedures for establishing identity.

You may have a good idea of who did it and I am in 100% favour of catching those that abuse the frequency but from experience, your information holds insuficient weight unless the abuser uses the aircraft callsign which counts out the real serial abusers (unfortunately).


For D&D, simulators are only of limited use - you have to know how to react to a pilot (who believes he/she is likely to crash) effectively. I have controlled people who were in tears and barely able to fly - you can not simulate that realistically.




and how many of these pilots in tears and barely able to fly were on practice pans? or how many times was that covered by practice pans befrore you had a real example?


Approximately 40% - you are possibly confusing Training Fixes / Lost pilots with Practice PANs.



No I am not confusing it at all. I was asking - of all the "practice calls" made by civil flights on 121.5, how many were simulating an emergency that did not involve being unsure of position and were continued to a realistic ending?

In my experience the vast majority of civil practice pans are simulating unsure of position and once "found" the exercise ends. At D+D the practice pan is allowed to proceed. The controller tells the pilot where the automatic position fix indicates and the exercise ends.

Years back when manual plotting was used I could agree with the requirement for live practice - many links in the chain required the practice. These days it is not so - for the majority of cases which are calls from within the autotriangulation area.


With 2 pilots in most CAT aircraft, I am surprised at the information missed in the cockpit due to 121.5 transmissions.


Yes. Two pilots listening to the same frerquencies - ACC on one and 121.5 on the other.

When you put on your headset, if you have a telephone coordination call in progress you have telephone in one ear and r/t in the other. With no telephone call you have r/t on both sides.

That is not a simple process and it would be far easier to route both pieces of information to both sides of the headset. Ever wonder why they don't do that?

Could it be to prevent the R/T and the telephone blocking eachother out? :)

[soaringhigh650]

Guys, this is an emergency frequency.

I don't call 911 for practice so please leave it alone unless you have an emergency.

Pilots should monitor the freq on COM2 where possible.

[mad_jock]

If you like it or not in the UK 121.5 has the function of also allowing practise calls. I doudt very much if it will ever change because it has proven air safety results. The ATC bods seem to have a pretty sure fire bunch of statistics which proves that CAT pilots that moan about it, are just that a bunch of moaning bastards.

And if GA don't do enough of them CAT does get asked to help out with controller training. I have had a couple overhead Glasgow, a couple further North up the old W3D and a couple on the East coast. Never been a problem with company rules and we were always happy to help out. Its actually pretty good fun. The first one was during my line training and the ex Mil LTC subjected the controller to a carrier wave only with a bit on morse thrown in. Which caused great hilarity with the tay sector controller "good drills lads you have got them sweating"

They don't bother me when I am flying at FL's in fact we must have had dodgy radios because while flying in a regional airline for 4 sectors a day 7 hours flying I heard them maybe once or twice a day if at all, all done and dusted in under 10 mins. As an Instructor linked in with the happy user friendly service from Scottish info they give confidence and knowledge to the aspiring PPL pilot.

Flying outside the UK 121.5 has way more traffic on it, frequency pickups when out of range/wrong one given for the FIR swap, pilots being arses, company traffic, sports scores etc. Very very rarely there is actually a Mayday on it. Heard one in 3 years outside europe, cloud seeder with a dodgy engine. From the conversation it was very evident that both the pilot and the ATCO could have done with a bit of practise pan training.

And to add in the last three years I have transmitted on 121.5 more times than I ever did working in the UK. Mostly its been with getting the sector frequency we are meant to be on when swapping on the IFR boundary, only to find the freq given is duff and we are out of range of the previous station. You don't realise how good things are in Northern Europe

[mad_jock]

Don't worry rogue DFC is a well known prat on the board in both the private flying forum and also especially the instructors forum.

Personally I think he is a Walt.

Stick him on ignore and everything makes sense again.

[fisbangwollop]

Dont forget a lot of these practice pans are actually for training purposes for the D and D controllers.....I ( Scottish info ) am often asked by my military friends at Scottish to put an aircraft over to 121.5 to perform a practice pan for training purposes for the controllers...........quite fun also when the aircraft does comply then forgets to use the word practice when making the initial call :cool::cool::cool:

[Check Mags On]

Yesterday Friday the 27th.

I heard D&D help a light aircraft pilot in the Ockham area.
She was obviously by the tone and fear that came across in her voice, in trouble.
D&D vectored another aircraft (with an instructor on board I think) on to her right wingtip.
Didn't hear what happened after the 2nd aircraft reported being on her wingtip. Had to go and get the volmet, atis, etc.

I hope it was resolved with a successful and happy ending.

But can I just say to all involved, a job well done and keep up the good work.
As both a 737 pilot and light aircraft instructor, I for one am grateful for your silent vigil.

[mad_jock]

Mad Jock - Thanks, I do like to try and gently persuade people

Lost cause I am afraid DFC will just argue the toss even if there is over powering informed opinion that they are talking bollocks.

[smellysnelly2004]

I have a question for DFC - have you ever been wrong about anything?

[topoverhaul]

My view lies with those who believe 121.5 should be reserved for genuine emergencies or loss of communication. If training is required it should be performed by simulation or if transmission is really required, on a quiet frequency.
CAT around the world monitors 121.5 on the 2nd box to aid those in distress and to provide a secondary communication channel if Box 1 is on the wrong frequency. This works well all over the world apart from the area from 15W to 5E and 50N to 55N. Here the NAA has declared to ICAO that 121.5 will be used for practice emergencies because a legacy triangulation system left over from the 1950s is used to provide a rough fix. Technology now offers many more effective solutions to lost aircraft.
The problem is that CAT at FL300+ in the said area is obliged to deselect 121.5 owing to the continuous practice traffic on that frequency which interfers with listening on the primary frequency. This leads to there being no secondary method of communication when primary communication is lost. This has already led to CAT being intercepted and escorted when availablity of 121.5 could have avoided this event.
I understand that with a certain high profile event being expected in 2012, the NAA will look again at maintaining a quiet 121.5, free of training fixes, and fully available as a loss of communication first stop.

[Lon More]

Much simpler than the above; if you've not been called for, say, 20 minutes, try calling the ATS unit for a check. Even if they've forgotten you or thought you'd been QSY'd you should still be in R/T range.

In the Netherlands we had a common approach freq., monitored by all units, which served the purpose of a local guard freq, and as such was used for Practice PANs etc.

[10W]

Topoverhaul

Here the NAA has declared to ICAO that 121.5 will be used for practice emergencies because a legacy triangulation system left over from the 1950s is used to provide a rough fix.

Who are the NAA ?

Roguetrooper

There is (in my opinion), a good case for providing a VHF frequency for Practice PANs / Training fixes etc. This is something I have recommended in the past. The stumbling point appears to be NATS who struggle to convince airlines the justification for the extra costs involved. Maybe this is a tack you could try through your own management.

I agree it is also a desirable thing to have. The stumbling block however is not NATS. NATS are contracted by the CAA through its En-Route licence to provide 121.5 so that the CAA can meet its ICAO obligations, which is then discharged jointly by NATS (who provide the kit) and the MoD (who provide the D&D human resources).

If the CAA want the practice frequency, they could vary NATS 'contract'. There would of course be a cost, which the CAA would have to arrange to be paid somehow. If the MoD want it, they could lobby the CAA, who could vary NATS contract. If the industry want it, they could lobby the CAA. who could vary NATS contract. I don't think NATS will volunteer to provide it on it's own initiative as it is not a NATS core service, and is actually not operated by them nor directly assists its own service provision.

121.5MHz is sadly over-used by CAT pilots/co-pilots who neither listen to and/or readback correct frequencies and therefore waste our time trying to get them onto the correct frequency - that is not what it was designed for.

121.5MHz is NOT a frequency to abuse because you have lost communication - the policy is to return to your previous frequency and confirm the new frequency you should change to; all too often abused by CAT.

There was a period when sleeping radios were a major cause, however, the manufacturers seem to have resolved most of those problems now (except for C17s ;) ). The prime cause these days is usually down to the crews. Finger trouble selecting the correct frequency (and not having the sense to go back to the previous one when no contact can be made), turning down the volume inadvertently, reading back the wrong frequency and not waiting for ATC to reply with the correction, assuming the other guy is listening out when he isn't, etc, etc. A long list of factors which are in the main down to the humans making some sort of error. Increased use of Datalink will help in the future, both in terms of passing hard copy frequency changes to the flight deck and in being able to get hold of them quicker when they disappear from the frequency, but in the meantime, we'll all have to find ways to cope with the weakest links in the system.

[topoverhaul]

NAA is National Aviation Authority, a generic term but in UK it is the CAA.

The point that needs to be made with regard to the use of 121.5 for practice pans is that a survey of usage of the frequency by a ground based antenna will reveal many Txs in error from aircraft and thus the impression that these fill the frequency. However a survey by an airborne antenna will reveal that it is the lengthy Txs which a Practice Pan involves which fills the frequency and means that Tx on the primary frequency is missed or 121.5 must be turned down and thus be unavailable as a comms loss frequency over the UK and surrounding area.

[mad_jock]

However a survey by an airborne antenna will reveal

If an airborne survey reveals that you hear more than the ground based 121.5 recievers there is a major flaw in the 121.5 coverage for the UK.

[DFC]

On Wednesday this week, London Centre transmitted a SAROPs warning which took 45 seconds; the transmission was to warn pilots to avoid a SAR operation in progress - this allowed the Seaking to operate unimpeded.
The SAR Helo recovered 2 young girls who were drowning and very sadly one 17 year old boy who died in hospital. News Link is here: BBC News - Teenage boy dies and two girls injured in sea at Whitby (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-11087377)

If you really take offence to these transmissions then it is a shame. Everyone involved in aviation should evaluate what is important and to try and respect other users. This shared frequency is vital to saving human life and if it means a little bit of frustration or interrupts your cosy conversation whilst in auto-pilot, then I am afraid you will have to put up with it.



The 45 seconds message which in my experience is repeated a number of times will be heard by several aircraft as far south as Paris.

It will not be heard by the several light aircraft operating as they normally do in the area described and either listening to the FIR or a local ATS frequency - or perhaps even none at all. The only time your average PPL in their C172, PA28 or Microlight tunes 121.5 is when they are about to do a practice pan.

Of course when one has the unfortunate experience of ditching and you are floating in your life jacket with the faint sound of a helicopter in the distance you start a transmission on your handheld 121.5 so that the heli can home in.......but they can't get it because several high power land stations are broadcasting a message to the world about SAR-OPS.:rolleyes:

Of course one has to wonder about aircraft at 35,000ft being warned about a maritime accident. Do those ships that are flying those large sails at 1000ft get warned on the maritime distress frequency about low level helicopter air ambulance flights? Seems a far more likely conflict!

----------------

MadJock,

I have reported your defamatory comments. :=

However, you might like to know that Scottish D+D does not have autotriangulation and if you bothered to read my post, I clearly said that in such a case, practice is sometimes necessary.

-------------


2. We know who you are to an accuracy of 200ft to 320miles between 1500ft AMSL and FL660



You know the lateral location of the transmission you have received. That is not suficient to determine if the transmission came from something at 1000 or 35000ft.

In otherwords, you have a fair idea of who did it but you do not know exactly who did it unless you have someother information.

---------


3. Simulation is no replacement for the real thing - for pilots and controllers.



I don't think that several Aviation Authorities, several simulator training providers and several airlines who spend fortunes providing simulator training - not to mention the several pilots who provide their time for free to UK atc and give assistance to make the TRUCE training better! would agree.

Isn't the whole idea of simulation so that we dont have to wait for the real thing to happen?

Perhaps the next time an airline wants to practice it's disaster plan it should call Sky News and 999 and the Home Office and so forth so that they can see if it works!!

--------

The UK is not unique in providing the fixing service on 121.5.

It is unique in allowing live practice.

----------

smellysnelly2004,

Only when it comes to carrot top Canary fans!! :p

[DFC]

God forbid one if your loved ones is ever in need of urgent assistance but a rescue is delayed due to a TDA infringement


Do you think that any of the traffic that would be likely to hinder a rescue operation at 2000ft ASFC or lower monitor 121.5?

Does anyone else believe that PPLs (or any other form of licence holder) on VFR flights in microlights, gliders, Cessna, Piper and all the other types flown in the club / training environment............in otherwords 99% of the traffic in class G who could come into conflict with a SAR operation monitor 121.5?

What is the target audience of these sar-ops transmissions?

If the London / Scottish FIS frequency and the nearby ATS units made the warning calls then there is a far higher probability that it would reach the desired audience.

As best this could be described as helf & safety box ticking.

Therefore if I am awash in my lifejacket, I would prefer if the FIS and local ATC units issued the warnings and 121.5 tramsmissions were limited so that the SAR heli can home onto my 121.5 transmissions.

-----------


I am not going to waste my time teaching you how to corroborate Mode 3/A , Mode-S, 406MHz database data with an exact lateral location fix.



You don't have to.

The 406 database is available for use only when a 406 transmission is received and the information in the database is protected and only available for SAR purposes.

The Mode S hex is different in that it is public information.

You have the exact lateral location of a transmission. Just because an aircraft is directly above that position does not in itself prove that the aircraft made the transmissions or that it is the only one at that location.......unless as I have said several times you have other information such as the pilot uses their callsign;

a joke from before your time to illustrate;

B747 and C152 are taxying out to the active runway. They are clearly in a race to be first away and each reporting "ready on reaching" etc etc etc.

The ATCO sees what is happening and after an aircraft lands says "OK, which one of you guys wants to go first?"

Ther is an immediate response in a deep well cultured airline pilot voice saying "Shucks I think we'll let the little fella go first"

The take-off clearance to the C152 was partially blocked by the B747 pilot saying "we did not say that" but the C152 acknowledged and departed.

--------

Just hope that when my friend with the Big Airline Captain voice makes a practice pan call directly below something at 35,000 you don't assume it is a jet!! :D

Finally, ...........how far again to the edge of the autotriangulation area?

:)

[DFC]

Don't talk about it....do something; because if you don't, everyone on here will know just how very very wrong you are.


Am I wrong to say that the vast majority of the traffic that could conflict with SAR ops at 2000ft ASFC or below in class G airspace do not monitor 121.5?

:)

[Dufo]

ready on reaching

From which part of the phraseology standards is this anyway?
The same as 'fully ready'?

[WhatMeanPullUp]

After spending a pleasant time on leave I have returned. Rogue Trooper, give up the bun fight, it seems you are itching for a punch-up, let it go. Fact is 121.5 SHOULD only be used for emergencies, but, it is not. Practice pans are a waste of time unless you are a D&D controller with nothing else to do and are desperate for a practice pan/pan to break up the monotomy of your day. Been there, seen it, done it. Real Air Traffic Controllers do not need practice pans and if they did, they should be in the simulator with the trainees. As said before, check out the real emergencies on other websites and you will learn way more than you will on 121.5.

[DFC]

Rogue Trooper5,

There is a military saying I am thinking of.

Heels together.

About turn

left right
left right
left right
left right
left right
left right
left right
left right
left right
left right
left right
left right
left right
left right
left right

:D :D :D :D

Some of us don't need to tell the world who we are. This a forum for debate not a celebrity contest.

I have asked a question relevant to the debate. Feel free to answer it at your leisure.

Here it is again;

Am I wrong to say that the vast majority of the traffic that could conflict with SAR ops at 2000ft ASFC or below in class G airspace do not monitor 121.5?

Why not finish your shift and take your time.

[DFC]

Hey, Rogue Trooper,

Tell us all (to improve our knowledge) what typical civil flights below 2000ft ASFC reguluarly monitor 121.5? You can include all airspace classes in your answer.

The problem is that in order to describe a person as a fraud you would have know that to be the case. You don't know me. Therefore since you have no way of knowing it to be the case (and of course it is not) you are making a defamatory statement. Perhaps you are following in the footsteps of Mad Jock a bit too closely. I will ignore it this time but ask mad Jock what happens to defamatory posts :)

I have no problem (in fact I have requested) that PPRUNE be limited to people who can provide an appropriate licence and this should be the basis of their profile (personal data removed). That would remove the unlicensed element from trashing regular debates. I have a professional pilot licence. You don't have an ATC licence do you? Do you have a professional pilot licence? A Private Pilot licence? Any form of civil aviation experience?

Some of use would prefer to debate the topic and not have to filter out all the claims of "I must be correct because after all I have .......(insert some random number) years of experience.

Anyway, enough grunting. back to the topic. :}

[Check Mags On]

In my view and I hold a professional licence.
CRM is what makes our world a safer place.
That means from the smallest job driving the honey wagon through our operational jobs in the flightdeck and in the towers and control rooms of the world.
We all work together.
But DFC in your last post, CRM has gone for burton.

You may, and I do not know the answer, be right in saying that RT5 does not hold a licence to operate as an ATCO.
This thread is in the ATC issues section of Pprune.

So DFC are you saying that the ATC section should not have contributions from the very people in the know about that subject. Or might be able to answer a question from the other side of the screen or radio.

I disagree with you but to be honest can't be bothered arguing against you.

But here is a question for D&D.
When you transmit about SAR ops, would local ground stations be able to pick up those transmissions. To a point DFC is right about light aircraft not monitoring 121.5. They should and as an instructor I always advocated that they did if a spare box was fitted.
But if the local ATC units pick up on the SAR ops call they can then relay it to any known aircraft?

[DFC]

Check Mags On,

CRM went out the window with the invitation to go down the squash courts without the need to any sports equipment!! :hmm:

The "step outside" attitude which was picked up on by at least one other poster was amplified in a personal message. :ouch:

I was simply trying to reflect back some of the attitude I received but without the violent bits.

However, it is nice to hear that the RAF has started issuing licenses to serving controllers. That will save them having to complete the full civil ATC training course from scratch when they leave. :ok:

--------

As for ground units receiving 121.5. One has to remember the unique set-up in the UK.

121.5 is not reguluarly monitored by most civil units (towers and acc sectors). There are a few exceptions - Carlisle I think is one for an obvious reason!!

So even if say Bournemouth, Southampton and Shoreham all have direct line of sight to the transmitter at Ventnor Isle of Wight they will never hear any transmissions on 121.5

Furthermore if you are flying at FL350 over say Birmingham and have an emergency and (for some reason) call on 121.5 then none of the controllers who are working the traffic in any of the london sectors nor any of the aerodromes below you are going to hear that call.

The call is going to be heard by military personnel who also are providing the same service to the military on 243 and the controller working the traffic near you will not know of your call until they receive a phone call from the military people in D+D.

So if you decide to divert to Birmingham with a very expeditions descent then they will not have a clue until they receive a phone call and may not be able to pass you anything on 121.5 eg weather approach etc etc. Which is a bit of a pain to say the least.

Strange thing is that D+D has automatic executive control of every emergency in the UK and if you read the wording of the SOPs at the ACC carefully you will find that;

a) Civil ATCO's are required to inform D+D if you have an emergency in their sector

b) D+D immediately has executive control

c) D+D can (usually do) permit the civil unti to continue handling the emergency.

If we look at one of the legitimate calls on 121.5 as an example:

Milano ABC123 10nm North west of TOP FL330 can you confirm the frequency we should be on.

ABC 123 call me on 134.525 (made up frequency)


or

London Centre ABC123 10nm North West of HON can you confirm the frequency we should be on.

ABC123 standby

telephone conversation later

ABC 123 call 134.525 (made up frequency)

So quite a different situation. Some pro's and some con's to both cases but one should be aware of what is available if one calls.

----

Rogue,

I have been to D+D several times. Very nice people.

[DFC]

I notice that my comments about his claiming to be a test pilot has been removed?

If the mods would like to check DFC's deleted posts you will find his post where he claimed to be one along with a PPL examiner.



Mas Jock's comments were removed by the Mods after I complained about the way that he follows me round the board making defamatory statements.

I don't publicise my qualifications and I don't feel the need to just to add weight to what I say.

If you think that it is rubbish then everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Debate the topic and not the person. This is not a celebrity cat fight!

---------

Rogue,

I have broken a habit of years and sent you a PM which I hope you will learn from :ok: