Petition to Allow Listening to ATC in the UK

[2dPilot]

As the title. There is a petition at the Government web-site to amend the Wireless Telegraphy Act to permit listening to Air Traffic Contol transmissions in the UK.

The UK is perhaps the only 'free' country in the world that does not permit this.

Sign the petition if you like.

Refine the ATC radio traffic act to allow UK listening - e-petitions (http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/33967)

[Torque Tonight]

When I go to work I am a pilot, not a performer or an entertainer. I would not feel particularly comfortable to think that my professional communications had an audience, whose highlight would probably be to listen in on us experiencing an emergency.

Would you be happy for me to set up a webcam in your office or place of work so I could monitor you at will? Perhaps you could also copy me in to your work emails as I curious about your communications. If the above sounds a bit weird to you can you explain why you should be able to do the equivalent to me.

[DaveReidUK]

From the petition:

"Changing the law to designate Commercial ATC (not Military) to general reception will allow enthusiasts and training [sic] the chance to listen in."

That appears to be the extent of the supporting argument ...

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Absolute bilge. The idea is presumably that of misguided persons who are just interested in their own warped interests. What is really needed is for those committing such breaches to be prosecuted.

[2dPilot]

The issue to me is why is the UK at odds with the rest of the world? Almost anywhere else in the world, ATC listening is not only permitted, but in some cases 'broadcast' (internet feed) but the relevent authorities.
It's not as if personally indentifying information is broadcast.
We can look at photographs identifying an aircraft and watch flight tracks identfying an aircraft world-wide, listen to radio traffic (almost) world-wide except the UK. It's an anachronism in this day and age.
I can legally buy a reciever and listen to (and record) transmissions - The current law just prevents me repeating what I recieve. As for privacy, I conduct my job in the public-eye - but not for the public - and I will be judged not just by my words but by my general behavior.

[Torque Tonight]

Can you post you work email username and password please. Just curious to know what you've been saying recently.

[apara]

I agree with torque. Live atc should be available only to concerned people. I wonder what difference would it make to a normal person if he stays listening to the atc. If you want to know where an aircraft is or what it is doing, there are a lot of flight radars available online today.

[Torque Tonight]

No? Thought not. I guess it's somehow different when it's your own professional communications.

Legality in other countries is not in itself a good reason to legalise something here. Frenchmen urinate in the street with impunity but I would hardly advocate that sort of behaviour here.

I also find some of the amateur monitoring of Mode S somewhat strange. The almost prurient excitement that surrounds real time emergencies, I find rather distasteful. The eagerness of some to be the first to report a 7700 squawk has something of the ambulance chaser about it, and I note that several of your post are on exactly this subject. I have little doubt that you and mny others would be delighted, as soon as you find a 7700 code on your virtual radar, to listen in, record and then forward the associated R/T.

Given that by definition, somebody or many people's lives are in jeopardy, I object to these events becoming a source of idle curiousity for voyeuristic amateurs. This is a professional environment not a soap opera so I echo Heathrow Director's attitude.

[Prazum]

On this matter, I'd rather err on the side of security.

[Skipness One Echo]

Absolute bilge. The idea is presumably that of misguided persons who are just interested in their own warped interests. What is really needed is for those committing such breaches to be prosecuted.
Thousands of people have listened in for decades, we're keen enthusiasts, not warped and misguided. United Airlines broadcast ATC in flight as part of the entertainment system. Perhaps the world has moved on since you retired? Was my father a warped and misguided person because he had an old radio that went beyond 108MHz in the kitchen at home? Was my maths teacher warped and misguided when he used the old Oceanic Tracks broadcast on Shanwick on 133.8MHz to show numbers and maths in action in the real world?

I suspect Torque Tonight and Heathrow Director may have been burned in the past.... Best keep it all a big secret amongst the proper chaps eh? Personal email is also not broadcast on radio channels with random other users (pilots) listening in now is it? The Police would seriosly laugh hard if you suggested prosecution as most airport Police I know see airband scanners on a daily basis and don't bat an eyelid.
On this matter, I'd rather err on the side of security.
Except you literally could not enforce it and it is hardly a priority.
Refine the ATC radio traffic act to allow UK listening - e-petitions (http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/33967)
Signed :)

[Torque Tonight]

If you can actually come up with some valid reasons why other people's professional communications should be available for your entertainment I'm willing to listen. I certainly didn't see any in that post.

[Skipness One Echo]

There isn't a compelling reason other than it's been a harmless pastime for decades, does no one any harm and has never been used maliciously (transcievers are a different matter and a known nuisance). Many people are keen, engaged and interested, personally I was fascinated and used to listen in bed as I read. Routings, SIDS, STARS, exotic airlines flying to foreign locations mixed in with mail flights and domestic.

It's been available to the public to listen to for generations, scanners were and remain freely available. I respect that you may not wish everyone to be listening into your comms with ATC, but I think the stable door has been well and truly left open and that horse has bolted. Some former NATS ATCOs have even written books on the subject aimed at those very enthusiasts.

Nowadays I can see on my iPhone where an aircraft is, height, heading and location. That strikes me as more of a risk at first sight than ATC comms, however we live in an ever more open society. There are usually stands at most airshows that openly sell recievers to the public, under a loudspeaker transmitting the ATCO, at a military installation as a smiling Policeman patrols. If you think there's any actual harm involved, I wonder what it might be?

[laz219]

I can't comment on entertainment purposes, but when I first started my training- I purchased a basic receiver so I could listen to ATC at my local airfield and learn calls and expected responses.

[Gonzo]

2dpilot,

Incorrect. It is technically illegal to listen to anything but general broadcasts, such as weather information, or when it is assumed that the operating authority has given permission, in the case of a published airshow frequency.

Read the sticky at the top of the ATC forum.

[Phileas Fogg]

The issue to me is why is the UK at odds with the rest of the world?

Perhaps the issue is why you are at odds with the UK over something so trivial?

Don't you have a wife or girlfriend to occupy your free time with?

[+TSRA]

When obtaining my PPL, CPL and ME-IR, I found it a great training tool to listen in on ATC conversations. It provided real-world insight into my chosen profession. I stopped listening once I got a flying job, and haven't listened to a scanner for pleasure in over seven years.

However, having had to use the word "emergency" twice in my short professional career already, I can certainly see why there are many pilots who would prefer their communications not be broadcast for all to hear. Pardon the saying, but I really don't want or need some armchair amateur (of which I once was) second guessing every decision and call my crew makes, and spitting it off on the internet for all to see.

I agree with Torque Tonight. When I come on to PPRuNe to find a bunch of guys getting their rocks off from an aircraft in distress, it makes me sick. I was never that involved in "scanning" that I cared about hearing emergency communications. It's akin to listening to a Police Scanner, hearing about a multiple homicide, then calling all your friends in excitement.

Now...working here in Canada, the knowledge that my communications can be monitored around the world ensures a certain level of professionalism. I would relish the opportunity, though, to limit the ability to listen on these conversations to people who are going to be reasonable and responsible with the information.

I have no problem if a student pilot wants to listen in on my conversation and learn from my example of what to (and what not to) do. I do not want the ambulance chasing public - of which there are many here on PPRuNe - to listen in and get their Sunday night kicks.

Unless, of course, I can listen in on your stock and bond information between you and your client in a manner which will make me a lot of money - then we can talk.

[AdamFrisch]

Laws that are impossible to enforce should be abolished. They're a waste of taxpayers time and money. Petition signed.

[airsmiles]

Those current and retired professionals who belittle those who like to listen into ATC broadcasts might like to dwell on the fact that quite a few current controllers actively embrace the personal monitoring of the ATC broadcasts. I could personally name a large handful of these professional chaps who embrace the enthusiast community and actually do a great job in PR terms of explaining the high standards employed by pilots and controllers. You guys should be proud of what you do and not defensive.

I'm a professional in the aerospace & defence industry but certainly wouldn't describe myself as a crank. I'm in business and have to defend my decisions and actions everyday to anyone in my business who cares to comment. That's face to face comment as well.

Had the decision been made to police the law re; listening to ATC transmissions, the hobby would never have taken hold. However, it's far too late to ban airband radios and also radar tracking software now.

[Tarq57]

I'm about as far from England as it's possible to get and still work in ATC.
I became aware well over 15 years ago that anything said over the radio might as well be considered to be public knowledge.

It doesn't bother me in the slightest. In fact, on the odd occasion it's been good for a laugh.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

I'm in business and have to defend my decisions and actions everyday to anyone in my business who cares to comment.

So what part of my business are Spotters in?

[Lord Spandex Masher]

It's not as if personally indentifying information is broadcast.

The next time I transmit the full name and DOB of one of my passengers and details about their physical condition (the last one would have been rather embarrassing) you promise to put your fingers in your ears?

[10W]

The next time I transmit the full name and DOB of one of my passengers and details about their physical condition (the last one would have been rather embarrassing) you promise to put your fingers in your ears?

Not quite sure why you would need to transmit such information ? I've never heard it done in 30+ years of ATC.

Personally, I'd not be too upset if the law was amended to reflect what happens most of the time, namely to allow people to legally listen in to transmissions.

That said, I would beef up the law to give absolutely clarity on the illegailty of rebroadcasting transmissions (e.g. on the Internet), recording and/or distributing transmissions, publishing transcripts, and publishing information which has been gained from transmissions. In other words, you would be free to listen, but not push out the data elsewhere.

Harsh penalties and an immediate high profile prosecution of law breakers when the law was amended would be my favoured policy 'pour encourager les autres'.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

10W, medical emergency. Information, which include stuff like bodily fluids and the failure to retain(!), requested by ATC to forward to paramedics and our company.

A couple of minutes on the web with a full name and DOB and a weirdo wouldn't have a hard time finding out more about a person.

Not saying all (;)) spotters are weirdos but you never know who's listening!

[10W]

I've asked for, and received, information regularly for medical emergencies. I would never ask for the D.O.B or name, nor have any of the emergency services ever asked me for it.

All the medics need to start is the sex and age, plus condition. Full passenger details can be gained on landing or from the company. :ok:

[Hotel Tango]

Legal or not, thousands of spotters and just simply those interested in aviation, listen in to ATC transmissions. They have been doing so for more than 60 years. As mentioned, which seems to be conveniently ignored by HD and TT, is that in countries like the USA they have spectator areas with loud speaker broadcast of ATC transmissions. No one is watching you reading the Beano on the FD or listening to your personal conversations TT, so your argument aimed at 2dPilot is flawed. As an aviation professional myself, I say yes it is most definitely about time the law in the UK is reviewed.

[airsmiles]

So what part of my business are Spotters in?

Lord Spandex Masher - your profile doesn't say what business you're in, so I can't answer that and neither should I.

My point was plenty of people have to answer questions about their daily work life but some previous pilot/ATC posters seem nervous of enthusiasts just listening in, let alone questioning them. I don't really understand why that should be but I'm prepared to be educated on that perspective.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Airsmiles, we're talking about spotters listening to live air traffic broadcasts, so that's the business I'm in.

You said that you have to defend your decisions and actions everyday to anyone in your business who cares to comment, fair enough. Spotters however, are not in my business so, therefore, why should they be privy to my conversations/transmissions, good, bad and ugly? Notwithstanding the fact it is illegal. Would you be happy about someone listening to your business meetings illegally? Maybe misconstruing what they heard because they don't have a full understanding of what they're hearing and possibly misrepresenting you in public?

I'm not nervous about it, it's a fact it happens and probably was before I started flying.

[Hotel Tango]

Spotters however, are not in my business

Careful with that statement. Certainly not the majority, but you would be surprised how many are. I personally know quite a number of ATCOs, ATCAs and two commercial airline pilots who are spotters.

[Groundloop]

This country is in such a bad state at the moment that the Government has enough serious things to worry about. They are not going to waste any parliamentary time on something as unimportant as this.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

HT, I know, they're not the spotters I'm referring to.

[Pistonprop]

HT, I know, they're not the spotters I'm referring to

Fell off my stool laughing. Only in Britain can you seemingly have a class distinction between spotters :)

[Phileas Fogg]

Do some actually wear anoraks? :)

[flydive1]

The next time I transmit the full name and DOB of one of my passengers and details about their physical condition (the last one would have been rather embarrassing) you promise to put your fingers in your ears?

10W, medical emergency. Information, which include stuff like bodily fluids and the failure to retain(!), requested by ATC to forward to paramedics and our company.

A couple of minutes on the web with a full name and DOB and a weirdo wouldn't have a hard time finding out more about a person.

Not saying all (;)) spotters are weirdos but you never know who's listening!

Would you ask all other pilots on frequency to put their fingers in their ears too? Not saying all pilots are weirdos, but you never know.;)

Personally I would use the sat phone to reports such sensitive informations if I have to.

[AGPwallah]

Well guys you've missed your chance now to sign the petition. It closed at 09:14 today with a whole 93 signatures.

AGP

[Torque Tonight]

Only 99,907 short of the required amount. Never mind. Still waiting for any of the supporters to offer me access to their work comms.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Would you ask all other pilots on frequency to put their fingers in their ears too? Not saying all pilots are weirdos, but you never know.;)

Personally I would use the sat phone to reports such sensitive informations if I have to.

Most pilots I know are weird. I take your point but I'd rather trust sensitive information to the pros who are background checked, psycho analysed and are actually there for the benefit of the punters than a bunch of couldbeanythingoranybodies who have no responsibility for the information which they might make public and may or may not understand the implications of doing so.

Don't have a sat phone, didn't even have HF on that airframe so the only way to pass on the info that was asked for was on VHF.

[A30yoyo]

Just out of interest does anyone know if the UK Authorities ever tried to stop the importation of Airband VHF sets (and later on, Scanners) when they first became available?... don't think they were available when I stopped spotting in 1961 but I was able to buy one from a shop on the A4 opposite Heathrow Northside in 1969 when I was convalescing from a road crash.
I think the UK position is reasonable and there's no chance the law will be loosened

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

I see that the petition is closed already! The application was badly written IMHO. What exactly is "ATC radio traffic act"?

[gorter]

Would you ask all other pilots on frequency to put their fingers in their ears too? Not saying all pilots are weirdos, but you never know.;)

Personally I would use the sat phone to reports such sensitive informations if I have to.

Pilots don't have a choice but to listen to these transmissions and like ATCOs are licensed and required to do so as part of our profession. Also you'll find very few a/c non legacy airliners have satcom so no choice.

I don't have a problem with genuine spotters listening to my comms. What does make my blood boil is when you get the ghoulish delight of some on here posting 7700 squawks immediately as it is happening and inviting you to maybe "fingers crossed" listen in to a real crash as it happens!!

Sorry but that is no better than rubberneckers at car crash sites and needs stamping out.

[Capot]

Well, now that's over, why is everyone so bothered about whether or not it's illegal to listen to ATC comms? To the best of my knowledge** no-one has ever been prosecuted for doing that, and I'll bet good money that no-one will be in the future. Thousands (tens of thousands?) do it daily, many in situations where it seems very legal but isn't, technically. EG line maintenance offices, club operations offices etc.

**I know, some-one will know of a case, somewhere, that proves me wrong!

[chevvron]

The problem as I perceive it is that someone may hear a transmission which is perfectly innocent, misinterpret it, and report the details to the 'press', subsequently causing a minor problem to be reported as a life threatening event. This has happened many times in the past, and will continue to happen.
It's the media who need to be restrained from reporting things until they have received confirmation that something has happened.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Capot. Simple - it's the law here. You could argue that thousands of motorists break the speed limit every day but few get penalised.

[Gonzo]

Capot,

To continue on from Chevvron, one might envision an emergency situation or incident where the ATCO (or pilot) was indentifiable from their voice.

Perhaps in this hypothetical incident sadly some lives were lost.

Grief stricken and angry, some of the relatives may well consider acting outside of the law to get revenge.

Purely hypothetical, but an incident with a similar sad ending has occurred.

Obviously that's at the extreme end, but still...........

[DX Wombat]

It happened to that Swiss ATCO. :(
Having been told over the last couple of days some incredible rubbish which I was assured was the truth I can only concur with those who feel that the very least which should happen is that the law regarding the passing of information overheard should be applied stringently and huge fines and or imprisonment doled out to the guilty parties. If what I was told had been passed on to the media it could have caused utter mayhem. I have no intention of repeating what I was told so please do not email or send me a pm.

[22 Degree Halo]

Damn! I was willing to sign this purely because it would annoy Heathrow Director, who in-turn annoys me with his constant belittling replies, almost anywhere on this forum.

Back to my scanner ^:rolleyes:

[flydive1]

It happened to that Swiss ATCO. :(.

Are you really saying that that happened because someone was listening on the scanner and recognised his voice?
Nothing to do with the fact that he was on trial, that his name was made at the trial and was on all newspapers?

[Hotel Tango]

flydive1: Precisely, he was most certainly NOT identified by the perpetrator from his r/t transmissions.

22 Degree Halo: It is indeed sad that HD, a retired ATCO and once (or maybe still) a spotter has become increasingly hostile towards spotters on this forum. Of course he's factually correct about the law, but his response:

The idea is presumably that of misguided persons who are just interested in their own warped interests. What is really needed is for those committing such breaches to be prosecuted.

is condescending and a waste of tax payers money.

[Gonzo]

Flydive1, No, nobody is saying that. However, my fear is that if the law ceases to exist, the mainstream media will be free to replay RT just as they seem to do with 911 calls in the USA. Maybe something might happen one day where the newspapers or TV news crews might want to try and talk to the ATCO/pilots involved. Perhaps even offer money to anyone who knows the identity of those involved? I would suggest that that is not a good situation, and does not lend itself to maintaining safety.

In the current situation, enthusiasts listen in and not very much gets out to the wider world. Why change it?

[Skipness One Echo]

I think all of the examples given are at the extreme end and quite exceptional. If it was all so hush hush then certain people ought not to be reminiscing quite so much on the ATC thread having signed the Official Secrets Act. The intention was plainly to stop you blabbing about what you got up to back in less open days but yet the stories continue to be told on a public forum?

Why? Because there's no harm in it and people enjoy hearing them. Now, perhaps there's an analogy.

I agree that there is however a rather odd subset, more so on airliners.net, who seem to get off on 7700 sqawks and compete to be the first to post as if there was a competition. Of course that may come from software monitering as well. Nought so queer as folk.

[Gonzo]

This isn't about Official Secrets, indeed nobody signs the Act anymore, I didn't when I joined (news just in; everyone in the UK is liable for prosecution under the Official Secrets Act, not just those who have 'signed it'. I haven't signed the Road Traffic Act yet can still be caught for speeding).

There are certain ATC procedures that have a security aspect. We are not taking about those here. Nobody involved 'blabs' about them.

[DaveReidUK]

In the current situation, enthusiasts listen in and not very much gets out to the wider world. Why change it?Exactly - if it ain't broke, ...

The petition is a misguided attempt to change the law to make something legal that nobody ever gets prosecuted for doing anyway. I'd say that the status quo represents a wonderful example of the UK's admirably pragmatic approach to law enforcement.

[Gulf4uk]

HI
Ive been Spotting since i was able to see vertually and some
of the recieving Equipment very Odd often Homebuilt but worked
.Ive never Had any trouble because watch what I say to who I say it.
I Dont like or approve of people Asking or posting Emergency Situations
as something big and we need to read about them we dont thankfully
most are something and nothing am sure this goes for most Spotters.
Talking to the press is another no no for most Spotters or anyone who
Asks to many Questions and many would report anyone asking to much.
Dont think anything needs changing other than being more careful
of what we say we need to be aware of what could happen in the
wrong hands like Social media watch your Mouth.
Spotters the Majority are decent people helpful and really are grateful
what we see from the Aviation World if we can help we will .

Tony
a farnborough spotter

[PIK3141]

In my place of work everybody signs the Official Secrets Act - whether that's necessary or not is another matter.
Anyone else find it annoying that presumably grown adults have nothing better to do than whine about plane spotters, and fellow professionals, listening to airband radios ? Some would be better off learning how to spell the word professional !

[NacelleStrake]

Anal retentive-ism is alive and kicking. Bet the majority of the dissenters are 'Nigel's.'...............

[clicker]

If it was just a case of "What's heard in this room, stays in this room" then I would ask what's all this fuss about.

I note one poster refers to a shop on the A4 selling radios, well if you are referring to the one East of Heathrow near the Master Robert Motel as it so happens I worked there for 7 years behind the counter and sold hundreds of radios. Never in that time, to my knowledge, did anyone say to the owner that what we were promoting was illegal. Nor was there any concern when radios build for the military UHF transmissions came out.

The reasons for this radio listening hobby are likely to be many and various. I myself used to use a radio to figure out what was arriving at an airfield to figure out if it was worth staying there with the camera or moving on to somewhere busier, call that ambulance chasing if you want.

No I can't understand the "emergency chasers" either but in this day and age of the modern media its going to get into the system somehow. I do note that with the BA incident last week that no-one seems to have made any reference to any comms heard, a remark also made in the thread about it.

[chevvron]

Following on from what Gonzo says about mainstream media replaying RT; what's to stop them editing the soundtrack so the listeners hear what the media wants them to hear and not a true sequence/version of events.

[Tarq57]

We have a law that (as I understand it) doesn't prevent one listening to radio transmissions; it does prevent one sharing them/publishing/using the content within them without the appropriate authority.

Seems to work.
Doesn't stop the media listening in; does prevent them actually using it. If anyone becomes aware something out of the ordinary is happening via a radio scanner, they still have to get the info from whomever is able/entitled to release such info before going "to air" with it. And they still can't use the radio clip in a broadcast, nor refer to it in the item.

Not the same in the UK?

[Gentle Climb]

I don't have too much of an issue with people listening to my ATC comms, if it is of interest to them either as a hobby or even professionally. A few years ago I occasionally used to park up for half an hour or so and watch a few movements where a few spotters with receivers were hanging around and it was interesting...to a point.
In reality, I suspect that flying around Europe, people are listening a fair amount of the time anyhow and thats fine when all is going well.

On the other hand...what I do object to are those who listen, record and potentially broadcast emergency situations. In the event of a major incident, I really wouldnt want my final transmissions being recorded and replayed on youtube by some geek looking to make money out of it ( with links from the UK gutter press). I dont want my family having to suffer that. It would be unacceptable and I wouldnt want that for any professional in any similar situation. On the basis of generally slipping standards of behaviour, I believe that the law in the Uk probably serves a good purpose as it stands and offers some protection.

[Phileas Fogg]

This has to be one of the funniest yet, at the same time, most serious threads of a long while.

The spotters are so funny, indeed ridiculous, that they just don't get that, just sometimes, a level of confidentiality is required whilst the spotters become even funnier, indeed ridiculous, because they're just not getting "it" that the aviation professionals are trying to get across to them.

Perhaps the professionals should get back to flying aeroplanes and the spotters get back to jerking off (without audio) watching them flying their aeroplanes!

[Planemike]

PF............

I have not found anything particularly amusing in this thread but certainly have found offence in your crude utterances. As others have suggested, if you have problems being civil to fellow forumites, spotters in particular, perhaps best not to visit this thread.

Planemike

[Hotel Tango]

We have a law that (as I understand it) doesn't prevent one listening to radio transmissions; it does prevent one sharing them/publishing/using the content within them without the appropriate authority.

That's how I always understood it. I also agree (and get niggled) with the incessant posting for information on 7700 squawks or posting mundane poor quality videos/photos which are of no particular significance or interest.

PF, you are of course entitled to your opinion, but keep it clean eh ;)

[Capot]

May I thank those who commented on my previous post; what I was trying to say was that regardless of the rights and wrongs of unauthorised listening to ATC communications, the fact is that no law is going to prevent it so long as the equipment to do it is available to all and sundry.

I did not intend to favour either side of the argument.

What can be discouraged, probably by a successful high profile prosecution and swingeing sentence, is rebroadcasting communications that have been obtained illegally, either using a recorded audio file or the written word. But only if the miscreant can be traced.

Now, where do you stand on the proposed Data Communications Bill, aka "Snoopers' Charter"? Because that would be used in such a case to identify and prosecute a boy who, say, uploads a Mayday exchange to YouTube, regardless of protestations that the Bill is "only to monitor terrorist activities".

Sorry about the thread creep! But it is connected.

[Skipness One Echo]

It also depends on the prosecuting authorities. For many years, I always assumed Policemen sold stories to newspapers and suddenly after a major case, it gets taken seriously and people go to jail. People are fickle....

[Evanelpus]

I see that the petition is closed already! The application was badly written IMHO. What exactly is "ATC radio traffic act"?

It may well have been badly written HD but I think the pathetically low number of people who responded to it reflects the abject apathy people have towards the subject matter.

There are devices that are actively sold with the pure intention of listening to "live ATC". Don't see any of the suppliers of this type of equipment being dragged away in the dead of the night and flown to Guantanamo Bay.

Spotters have a bad rep with people and it doesn't take much to bring people out of their caves to give them a good kicking. IMHO, I think there are a number of posters on this thread who need to wind their necks in and park their egos in the drawer but hey, that's just what I think.

Let the debate continue.

[Evanelpus]

Bloody Hell Mig

Does an A380 fit into Guantanamo Bay? Wer'll start by rounding up everyone in Mrytle Avenue (that should please the locals), then we'll hit the AVP at Manchester. We'll send separate hit squads to LGW, BHX and STN and we'll finish up with the dribblers at LTN.

Problem solved.........NOT!

[Armchairflyer]

For the past three or so years I have regularly been listening to some liveatc.net stream instead of a radio program at the office just because it's a soundscape directly linked to something I like. And as these transmissions are (luckily) anonymous, I fail to see the privacy issue here (but ready to stand corrected). Completely agree that the "hunt" for emergencies and/or emergency transmissions is rather disgusting, though.

So while I cannot forward any compelling argument why "public access" to ATC communications is a necessity, I fail to see any potential harm, certainly as long as it is about pure listening (by whoever).

[Hotel Tango]

Although it is not illegal to sell, buy or own a scanning or other receiver in the UK, it must only be used to listen to transmissions meant for GENERAL RECEPTION. The services that you can listen to include Amateur and Citizens' Band transmissions, licensed broadcast radio and weather and navigation broadcasts.

Hmm, interesting. Remember way back in the 50s through to the late 60s a great deal of ATC was mainly procedural and involved regular position reports. In my early ATC days I worked at an procedural air traffic control centre. Would that not translate as a navigation broadcast - hence why spotters with scanners were left alone? Although position reports are now in the main history, one can still argue that ATC/pilot transmissions are generally just navigation related broadcasts.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

General reception?

[Phileas Fogg]

You mean that some miserable sod, underfed, underpaid, overworked, been up since stupid o'clock, calling "roger, turning 270 degrees" is more interesting than some blonde bimbo dressed in a skimpy outfit calling "baby hit me one more time"?

Move over pilots, life doesn't end at 60, there's a career for you yet ... in broadcasting. :)

[Shytehawk]

Can you imagine, so called, reporters from the Sun, Daily Mail and Mirror being given a free rein to publish what they thought they heard?

[22 Degree Halo]

Has anyone ever been prosecuted under this archaic ("UK") law?

(BTW, the Live ATC app works just fine on an iPhone before and shortly after take-off. Prey tell me I'm not breaking the law with an app?!)

[GGR]

Seems to me there are some in these forums who need to get over themselves.

Sky gods, dont you just love them........

[KBPsen]

Prey tell me I'm not breaking the law with an app?You may very well be by having a telephone switched on during flight.


it's technically illegal. Either something is illegal or it is not. This activity is illegal. I would have thought that any sensible person who knowingly engages in illegal activities would keep a low profile and not announce it to the world.

[Peter47]

Its not illegal (or I hope that as a law abiding citizen that its not illegal) to listen to liveatc.net on the net. There is a note explaining why there are no UK airports on the site. It does make you wonder why so few countries make it illegal. That said most countries have a few laws which are unique to themselves. I suppose that one of these days ATC transmissions will go digital and the discussion will become academic.

As a matter of interest is United Channel 9 available on international flights to/from the UK?

[Hotel Tango]

Channel 9 is at the discretion of the Captain. Whether United Captains are aware of UK law is another matter :)

[Skipness One Echo]

I would have thought that any sensible person who knowingly engages in illegal activities would keep a low profile and not announce it to the world.
You mean like ripping my old CDs to iTunes? Surely you could see the difference and why it was widely derided as a daft law?
You mean that some miserable sod, underfed, underpaid, overworked, been up since stupid o'clock, calling "roger, turning 270 degrees" is more interesting than some blonde bimbo dressed in a skimpy outfit calling "baby hit me one more time"?
Um, well for some of us yes :) When I was studying I knew the sun was about to rise by the large influx of Lufthansa heavies working Scottish high level. I never claimed to be mainstream (thank God)!

[P6 Driver]

I have 20+ years behind me as a (now former) Air Traffic Controller. I always assumed that everything I said on an unsecured radio would be heard by aircrew and spotters/enthusiasts alike. It never bothered me as I tried to make every transmission as professional as possible (I didn't always manage it!).

I have had good and interesting interaction with enthusiasts and on many occasions, joined them outside the airfields I have worked at - I am also an aviation enthusiast.

Now working in an open plan public office environment, everything I do and say can, and is, overheard by the public. This doesn't bother me either.

To echo and paraphrase comments from earlier, maybe some sensitive souls could do with getting over themselves a little. Good luck with it!

[airsmiles]

It never bothered me as I tried to make every transmission as professional as possible

I'm sure one reason listening in to ATC transmissions in the UK is so popular is because our ATC professionals are amoung the most professional in the world. Something to be proud of I'd say.

[Rev1.5]

So it's not legal to listen to ATC transmissions in the UK.:=

By the same logic, is it also illegal to tune into the aircraft transponders and use the data for things like Kinetic's SBS / virtual radar?

Are the likes of Flight Radar 24 also breaking UK law?

[Groundloop]

Are the likes of Flight Radar 24 also breaking UK law?

The enthusiasts supplying Flight Radar with SBS feeds from the UK are!

[Skipness One Echo]

The enthusiasts supplying Flight Radar with SBS feeds from the UK are!
What's the specific law? That sounds about right. I guess planefinder may be technically illegal too?

[GeorgEGNT]

I've always found ATC communications wonderfully exciting. It's one of the reasons I decided to pursue a career flying so I can definitely relate to the attraction. Its very interesting to watch aircraft move around on the ground and take off/land whilst listening to ATC/FC communications.

During my PPL it was useful at first to hear comms on a scanner but I only really use a scanner to listen to ATIS before climbing into the aircraft now. I get my RT 'kicks' whilst flying now.

Can't say I'd be overly keen on my RT being broadcast on the internet if I was a professional though.
I have been annoyed at viewing galleries and the likes on several occasions where spotters have laughed along with various conversations on the radio as if they were in the flight decks themselves when in fact they're simply eavesdropping on a conversation. Something they wouldn't do in the supermarket or in the pub.

Already mentioned on the thread but the 7700 excitement culture is quite worrying too. One of the major 'flight tracking' apps even sends a push notification to your phone when an aircraft squawks 7700. :ugh:

[Ifield Lad]

Although some may say there is no harm in it, I fully understand the professionals not wanting anybody listening in. Especially so if the information is passed on which, as we all know, is illegal. I used to own a scanner. I cannot explain why I enjoyed listening. It's quite boring really, but I did. I cannot explain why I look up to the sky when I hear an aircraft, but I do. I cannot explain why I enjoy flying. Again it's quite boring really but I do. I would not have signed the petition.

[Rev1.5]

What's the specific law?

This might explain:

Ofcom | Guidance on Receive-Only Radio Scanners (http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/enforcement/spectrum-enforcement/guidance)