Use of VHF Airband Transciever

[BOZR_DOUGIE]

Hey,


After having a couple of flights where VHF radios on light aircraft have packed in mid flight, I decided in investing in an Icom IC-A6 hand held transciever as a last resort if the radio fails and to avoid the full blown radio out procedure and in case of a forced landing I can remain in contact with D&D . However when I got the thing I heard that they are technically illegal to own in the UK (Despite me holding a JAA PPL with the VFR R/T certificate.) After a google around ofcom I am non the wiser , I can't see transair etc selling them if they are illegal . Does anyone have any idea on what exactly the law is on such things?

Thanks

Ewan

[patowalker]

Notice for use
The IC-A24E/A6E complies with requirements of the European Radio and Telecommunication Terminal Directive 1999/5/EC and is RTTE and CE approved. At present full approval for air use is not attainable for this product or any other product at this level in the market place. Therefore, IC-A24E & A6E are both intended for use in Europe for ground use only*.

Under the Wireless and Telegraphy Act of 2006 this radio can be used for emergency communication and navigation (VOR) should your life be at risk.

*Unless an Aviation body in an EU member state gives dispensation for it to be used in the air.

"Honest m'lud, I only used it when my life depended on it." :)

[this is my username]

They are not illegal to own. Using them is a bit more of a grey area.

The CAA stopped "approving" handheld radios back in the days of the Icom A3, so any handheld radios purchased since then have been unapproved. The only way to get an approved radio is to buy a (by now) very old Icom A3 or something of a similar vintage.

Back in the real world there are hundreds of unapproved radios in use every day in microlights, balloons and permit aircraft. I've never heard of anyone being prosecuted or even reprimanded for such use - it seems that as long as the radio doesn't cause any interference and is used in a sensible manner nobody seems to mind too much.

I know of one person who tried to get a radio licence for their aircraft to use an "unapproved" radio - the slightly surreal conclusion from the application was that as long as the radio was "CE" marked then it could be licenced as long as it was only used while on the ground ......

As patowalker says, if you are only using it for emergencies (and a radio failure would almost certainly count) then there's no problem. And, of course, there would only be a problem if someone cared enough to take any notice of you using it ....

This is yet another example of our illustrious regulatory bodies making rules which are impossible to obey!

[BOZR_DOUGIE]

Thanks for the replies. :8

That seems to make sense, I am only going to use it for emergencies or getting engine start clearance at a few aerodromes that require it.

Thanks

Ewan

[pasir]

... I am not up todate on the latest advancements in airband transceivers etc but on a related subject some years ago when Police transmissions could be received on ordinary domestic radios having vhf the same vague rumours abounded as to whether or not it was illegal listening in to police radio tx. In an effort to have the situation clarified guidance was sought
from the local police station. On leaving the premises some fifteen minutes later I had also left the desk sergeant -an inspector and several PCs each with their own versions of the legal position !

...

[peterh337]

I heard that they are technically illegal to own in the UKThat is nonsense.

Just buy what looks best for the job.

This is hardly relevant but if you really wanted a CAA approved radio, there are (were) several models. I have the Icom A22 (http://www.acespilotshop.com/images/products/avionics/A22lg.jpg) which was CAA approved. At least I think it is the A22 - it does COM+VOR. These very occassionally come up on Ebay.

There is a nice American radio (http://www.sportys.com/PilotShop/product/14807) which also does ILS, which might be a real lifesaver one day.

[fwjc]

Frankly if I was in need of "radio" assistance I'd use my mobile phone. I know it's not legal, but if it was a case of a flight safety issue I'd still do it. That said, I've enough experience with non-radio aircraft to have realised that lift is independent of radio capability. As the saying goes, aviate, navigate, communicate. The reason communicate is last, is that it's not as critical as the first two.

[GeeWhizz]

Hmmm... Do I fly a left or right hand triangle...?

[patowalker]

The problem with handhelds seems to be FM immunity, which ICOM France has solved by getting approval for an A6 with a different antenna, which cannot be bought separately from the radio.

Check out the prices of the A6 and A6FR here to see the cost of legality: http://www.icom-france.com/liste-pro...s-aviation.php (http://www.icom-france.com/liste-produits-portatifs-aviation.php)

490.00 € TTC vs 629.00 € TTC

[peterh337]

The problem with handhelds seems to be FM immunityThat may be true but it is the first time I have heard that in connection with a handheld. FM Immunity refers to receiving equipment (VOR or LOC), not transmitting equipment.

Frankly if I was in need of "radio" assistance I'd use my mobile phoneThere are 2 issues with this.

1) The reason for carrying a VHF handheld is that it gives you a seamless comms capability in the event of a total electrical failure. Obviously you need a headset adaptor for it, but I know that mine is good for at least 10-20 miles and if connected to a normal roof mounted VHF aerial (using a piece of BNC coax) it is almost as good as the built in radio.

2) GSM does not usually work above about 2000ft, and who will you be phoning anyway? Do you know the mobile # of the person on the current D&D or your local airport shift? Even the rescue centre in Falmouth do not publish a mobile number to which one could text a GPS position derived from a satellite phone, which I think is really dim (told them so ages ago) since every satphone can do this.

[patowalker]

That may be true but it is the first time I have heard that in connection with a handheld. FM Immunity refers to receiving equipment (VOR or LOC), not transmitting equipment.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was just another French 'scheme'. Years ago I was denied approval for the installation of an ICOM in a French microlight, because the radio was purchased in the UK and ostensibly did not meet French standards. This was in spite of producing a letter from ICOM Japan certifying that the UK and French models were identical.

ICOM FRANCE : Produits Radiocommunication : Accessoires Platines et filtres : FL-IFFM1 (http://www.icom-france.com/produit-fl-iffm1.php)

[Big Pistons Forever]

My 02 cents

If you do opt for a handheld as a emgergency replacement there are a few other considerations. The first is to get a headset adaptor as they work much better when connected to a headset. The other desirable options is a to replace the rechargeable battery with one that takes dry cells. The rechargeables will slowly loose their charge unless you remember to top it up. With the dry cells you can leave it for years and it will still be ready when you need it. Finally I would get an older radio off e bay rather than pay the big bucks for a new one. My 20 year old King Kx99 has been sitting in my flight bag for almost 20 years and is still going strong. It may be a bit clunky but it works just as well as the new ones.

Don't know about Europe but in North America a cell phone is the go to device for IFR lost comms in Canada/North America. Nav Canada publishes the direct dial numbers for the each Centre facility which will get you right to the guy running the floor. The owner of the Twin Cessna I sometimes fly has upgraded to the new blue tooth Bose headset and the cell reception is as good as the radio. Even without blue tooth a cell phone will work if you yell, but the easy way is just ask the IFR controller to text you any further clearance(s) in the event of a comm failure.

2 min triangles :hmm: Good luck with that :rolleyes:

[BOZR_DOUGIE]

The problem with handhelds seems to be FM immunity, which ICOM France has solved by getting approval for an A6 with a different antenna, which cannot be bought separately from the radio.

Don't you mean the A24? The A6 is COM TX/RX only , it lacks the VOR capability of the A24 , so how would FM immunity be a problem?

The other desirable options is a to replace the rechargeable battery with one that takes dry cells.

Yes I have, the UK version comes with the AA battery back , the NiCd pack was a £140 option! I plan to use it to get the ATIS / VOLMET before I go flying . I spent £250 on it , I may as well use it as much as I can within reason.

[Rod1]

“The reason for carrying a VHF handheld is that it gives you a seamless comms capability”

If anyone is thinking of relying on this then I suggest you run a drill in the air. Without a headset adapter you are wasting your time and with the internal areal I would not rely on more than 10nm range. Getting it all out, connected up and working if you are on your own without an AP is challenging to the point that continuing non radio is worth serious consideration (assuming VFR).

Rod1

[Whopity]

Does anyone have any idea on what exactly the law is on such things? In order to use a VHF handheld on Transmit you need a licence issued by the CAA (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=8) in the case of Aeronautical radios or Offcom in the case of non aviation devcices.

One problem with some handhelds is that they are not type approved; the reason is simple, the approval process costs money and the manufacturers can't be bothered to obtain approval in a wide range of States. Many will have a FAA approval but not a European approval. Without approved equipment, you can't obtain a licence to use it. There is no UK law to prevent you owning it, or using it on receive. In an emergency you could use it on transmit and nobody would be concerned, transmissions in an aircraft would be covered by the aircraft radio licence. You could not install it if its not type approved.

A flight telephony radio operator's licence contains no privileges to operate a handheld; that licence covers the use of a licenced radio station installed in an aircraft.

FM immunity is totally irrelevant and refers to the bandwidth specification of navigation receiving equipment. Older wideband equipment was susceptible to broadcast transmitters in the top end of the 88-108 MHz FM broadcast band immediately adjacent to the aeronautical navigation band which starts at 108MHz.

[patowalker]

Don't you mean the A24? The A6 is COM TX/RX only , it lacks the VOR capability of the A24 , so how would FM immunity be a problem?
I mean the French say FM immunity is a problem on the A6. They added the FM filter, called it A6FR and got DGAC approval. Make of that what you will.

Filtre antenne réjecteur bande FM des portatifs IC-A6FR et IC-A24FR pour l'installation à bord d'aéronefs (ne peut être vendu séparement)

[Whopity]

All quite possible if the Receiver spec did not meet the FM Immunity spec, but are you likely to fly an IFR approach using a handheld for navigation?

[Maoraigh1]

Getting it all out, connected up and working if you are on your own without an AP is challenging to the point that continuing non radio is worth serious consideration (assuming VFR).


I bought an Icom in 1990. It got damages in 2011. It's had no replacement batteries. I agree a headset adaptor is essential. However getting it out of the bag and setting it up has never been a problem, and Jodel 1050s are not the most stable aircraft when left to themselves. If you're based at an airfield with full ATC, it's worth having, especially if you have only one radio. My most frequent use has been due to low voltage, but the last time I used it was due to the stick PTT buttons being mis-connected after the final Star Annual before going on a permit.

[fwjc]

I've once texted ahead to a destination strip whilst flying a non-radio aircraft to confirm weather conditions. "wx?" doesn't take long to type. That gave me the information to decide between a diversion to an airfield nearby or to continue. Who says you have to fly over 2000'?

If you're flying aircraft that have enough gizmos and electricity to run them, then you should be worried about maintenance standards if you're planning on carrying a handheld as backup. If you are flying home build or vintage machines with limited or non-existent electrickery, then make the choice to fly non-radio if necessary.

One of the aeroplanes I fly is a Permit type with no electrics. We use a single handheld with a battery and a standby back up battery. If the radio fails the aeroplane keeps flying without any degradation of performance. Others that I fly either have a twin radio stack giving redundancy of operation built in, or no radio at all, in which case the issue of radio failure is rather moot.

Just IMO. I'm sure there are other people here who have different opinions and perspectives. As they say, YMMV.

[peterh337]

then you should be worried about maintenance standards if you're planning on carrying a handheld as backup

There is a truth in that, but most SEPs have just one alternator and just one battery. And alternators do pack up... you might want to save the battery for operating flaps etc or for flying an ILS at the very end of the flight.

[fwjc]

True, and I have had an alternator failure. Continued with local aeros sortie, left radio on rx only since tx is the bit that bleeds most power. This allowed us to keep situational awareness. Chose flapless approach, no problem. Btw had an instructor on board at the time, he was happy with the decisions. Complete non-event, to be honest.

[englishal]

I'd use my mobile phone. I know it's not legal,
I challenge you to show me the actual law that says it is not legal to use a mobile in an aeroplane......;)

[Whopity]

I challenge you to show me the actual law that says it is not legal to use a mobile in an aeroplane......Mobile phones are licensed to the telephone service provider. The prohibition if anywhere, is in the Terms of the Licence held by the phone company. Having never read it I can't be sure what it says but as an example, a UK amateur radio licence prohibits the use of such equipment in an aeroplane, no other law prevents it.

[UL730]

Just checked my Aircraft Radio License (Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006) and Certificate of Approval of Aircraft Radio Installation issued by UK CAA and aside from standard stuff ATC Transponder, DME and VHF COMM/NAV it states:

“ The licensee also authorises the use of Aeronautical VHF Hand portable radio equipment operating in the frequency band 118-137 MHz …. for use on the above named aircraft”

I have found an ICOM linked to a headset an absolute necessity when sometimes waiting upwards of 20 minutes on a ground frequency - for start approval.

[patowalker]

“ The licensee also authorises the use of Aeronautical VHF Hand portable radio equipment operating in the frequency band 118-137 MHz …. for use on the above named aircraft”

One which is approved, of course. :)

[patowalker]

The radio is an IC A-21, tough stuff with metal case like they built them 20 years ago.

That's strange. My A20 had a plastic case, which broke when I dropped it. ICOM then fitted it with an A21 case, which is also plastic.

[UL730]

One which is approved, of course.

My ICOM transceiver complies with requirements of the European Radio and Telecommunication Terminal Directive 1999/5/EC and is RTTE and CE approved. At present full approval for air use is not available. Therefore intended for ground use only - hence

waiting upwards of 20 minutes on a ground frequency

:8

Would I use it in an emergency?

The Wireless Telegraphy Act of 2006 states this radio can be used for emergency communication and navigation (VOR) should life be at risk - so in the event of a radio failure whilst airborne - yes I would and have.

[peterh337]

The Wireless Telegraphy Act of 2006 states this radio can be used for emergency communication and navigation (VOR) should life be at risk - so in the event of a radio failure whilst airborne - yes I would and have.

Who cares about the Wireless Telegraphy Act of 2006 if it is an emergency?

:ugh:

[Stephen Furner]

I challenge you to show me the actual law that says it is not legal to use a mobile in an aeroplane......

From what I can see on the internet here in the UK the CAA view the mobile phone as a personal electronic device (PED) that causes interference with aircraft electronics systems. Consequently its use is restricted to aircraft on the ground at the operator’s discretion unless the aircraft has a specific exemption.


AIC 1/2004 (Pink 62) 8 January Use of Portable Electronic Devices in Aircraft

CAA PAPER 2003/3 Effects of Interference from Cellular Telephones on Aircraft Avionic Equipment

[GeeWhizz]

From what I can see on the internet here in the UK the CAA view the mobile phone as a personal electronic device (PED) that causes interference with aircraft electronics systems. Consequently its use is restricted to aircraft on the ground at the operator’s discretion unless the aircraft has a specific exemption.

I dont know the details, but AFAIA, there is a current study into the use of mobile phones being used whilst airborne. When I flew with a guy a few months back in the primitively instrumented C172, his mobile phone signals had nil effect. Also I know of pilots texting family whilst on an ILS with nil effect also.

[patowalker]

CAP 756: "The responsible civil aviation authority or agency should continue to remind the aircraft operators of their responsiblity in ensuring that no person does use, on board an aircraft, a PED that can adversely affect the performance of the aircraft's systems and equipment ..."

[Stephen Furner]

When I flew with a guy a few months back in the primitively instrumented C172, his mobile phone signals had nil effect. Also I know of pilots texting family whilst on an ILS with nil effect also.

In the air is not the best time to find out what impact a mobile has on your avionics. There is some discussion bout this on an earlier thread http://www.pprune.org/private-flying/464636-mobile-phones-2.html

[GeeWhizz]

Stephen Furner: that didn't happen during a flight to find out what happen to anything, the guy I flew with 'knew' what he was doingn;) As I said, I don't know any details but the rules are being looked at.