121.5 monitoring by ATC
Mostly Harmless
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Oz (cold & wet bit)
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
121.5 monitoring by ATC
That's what they do overseas. If you can talk to ATC on a location-specific frequency you can also talk to ATC on 121.5 from the same location at the same altitude.
In Australia a sector can have up to 8 VHF sites, before you start combining sectors, and this guy thinks all these sites should have a reciever set to 121.5 also. How generally do you monitor guard elsewhere in the world?
Here we leave it to the sattelites & aeroplanes.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think I'm correct in saying that in the UK the only Centre-based agency which is allowed to monitor 121.5 is the Distress and Diversion (D&D) cell at London and Scottish. They have the autotriangulation facilities and necessary links to ground transmitters and receivers to ensure coverage down to quite low level in most areas. (They also monitor UHF 243).
As civil controllers, we are not even able to select 121.5 on our frequency panels without being given a code by D&D. I suppose it is logical that such a function should be concentrated in one unit only, since controllers have enough to do controlling on their own frequency and any of their traffic having an emergency will report it on the sector frequency first. We do get a lot of reports of ELTs which the aircraft who monitor 121.5 hear, and we pass them on to D&D as appropriate.
If EVERY aircraft were mandated to monitor 121.5 (providing they have a second radio) then it would make getting in contact with yet another american pilot who has gone AWOL from the sector frequency for the last 100 miles a lot easier than it is at present..!
In summary: Agree that it is best left to the agencies designed for the purpose and aircraft who have the will and equipment.
As civil controllers, we are not even able to select 121.5 on our frequency panels without being given a code by D&D. I suppose it is logical that such a function should be concentrated in one unit only, since controllers have enough to do controlling on their own frequency and any of their traffic having an emergency will report it on the sector frequency first. We do get a lot of reports of ELTs which the aircraft who monitor 121.5 hear, and we pass them on to D&D as appropriate.
If EVERY aircraft were mandated to monitor 121.5 (providing they have a second radio) then it would make getting in contact with yet another american pilot who has gone AWOL from the sector frequency for the last 100 miles a lot easier than it is at present..!
In summary: Agree that it is best left to the agencies designed for the purpose and aircraft who have the will and equipment.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: 59°45'36N 10°27'59E
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here in Norway, and I know it's the same in Sweden ALL ACC sectors, approach/radar, twr and AFIS units need to monitor 121.5. CRCs, military and joint civ/mil TWR/APP units and all ACC sectors monitor 243.0 as well. 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SE UK
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If memory serves, and I know someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but the UK AIP says that...
121.5 will be monitored by D&D, aircraft in oceanic airspace, and aircraft in an area where S&R ops are being carried out.
There are no requirements for individual units to have that facility, and within NATS, the ability to monitor 121.5 has already been removed from some.
I agree with eyeinethesky.....leave it to the designated agencies
121.5 will be monitored by D&D, aircraft in oceanic airspace, and aircraft in an area where S&R ops are being carried out.
There are no requirements for individual units to have that facility, and within NATS, the ability to monitor 121.5 has already been removed from some.
I agree with eyeinethesky.....leave it to the designated agencies
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<As civil controllers, we are not even able to select 121.5 on our frequency panels without being given a code by D&D. >>
That's quite extraordinary, IMHO. Is that a recent ruling?
I recall a session in Heathrow Approach (when it was in the tower building) where two of us took over a situation on 121.5 from D&D because we were a) better equipped (radar-wise) and b) had better local knowledge (of local aerodromes) to assist the pilot.
That's quite extraordinary, IMHO. Is that a recent ruling?
I recall a session in Heathrow Approach (when it was in the tower building) where two of us took over a situation on 121.5 from D&D because we were a) better equipped (radar-wise) and b) had better local knowledge (of local aerodromes) to assist the pilot.
Beady Eye
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no restriction on monitoring 121.5, a LOT of people do! The more ears the better. D&D are the ones who will generally respond though.
As to the 'restriction' on selecting 121.5 I assume eyeinthesky is based at LACC. The restriction is engineering not operational. You can have 121.5 whenever you need it, on request.
BD
As to the 'restriction' on selecting 121.5 I assume eyeinthesky is based at LACC. The restriction is engineering not operational. You can have 121.5 whenever you need it, on request.
BD
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: No longer where I was before...
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not a case of D&D giving a code to access 121x5 but allocating a channel number. Depending on which area of the UK coverage is required the D&D staff will select an appropriate group of forward relays and then advise the controller which channel to input into his comms.
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maastricht UAC sectors all have 121.5 and 243 available,
a/c in possible R/F are often called on it.
Although no requirement to do so a large % of flights monitor 121.5 judging by the number of ELTs reported
a/c in possible R/F are often called on it.
Although no requirement to do so a large % of flights monitor 121.5 judging by the number of ELTs reported
The UK's D&D Auto-Triangulation service hasn't always been available on 121.5 - only perhaps in the last decade?
Prior to then, D&D was reliant on bearings from a number of ATC units that were equipped, not only with 121.5 R/T,
but also the facility to select this frequency on D/F, when required.
Prior to then, D&D was reliant on bearings from a number of ATC units that were equipped, not only with 121.5 R/T,
but also the facility to select this frequency on D/F, when required.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UAE
Age: 63
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here in Muscat (Middle East) we have 121.5 on all ATC consoles.
Problem is, the transmitter/receiver is at Muscat airfield so we are limited in range.
agree with the above statements...very handy to wake up some of our pilot friends.
Problem is, the transmitter/receiver is at Muscat airfield so we are limited in range.
agree with the above statements...very handy to wake up some of our pilot friends.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Silicon Hills
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the U.S., we have both freqs available at nearly all positions, and monitor them via speaker in both Tower and TRACON. Scott would have better info on how many receiver sites the Centers have. Also, FSS also monitors the Guard freqs, and used to drive us nuts with the Monday morning checks of primary and secondary Xmittrs and Rcvrs with airborne aircraft.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fort Worth ARTCC ZFW
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some Centers in the US, mine included do not monitor 121.5 and do not even have it available. The reason being cost. It has been established that there are enough tower, approach control and Flight Service Stations in the operating area that can cover it. We do however monitor and use 243.0 or as some of us call it, military common <G>...
regards
Scott
regards
Scott
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite recently I called Luton for zone transit and they replied: "Do you have any problems, D & D have been trying to call you on 121.5."
This says to me that they were monitoring 121.5. It actually made me feel quite nurtured to know that there were people keeping an eye out for me.
I never did find out why they wanted me, mind you!
Timothy
This says to me that they were monitoring 121.5. It actually made me feel quite nurtured to know that there were people keeping an eye out for me.
I never did find out why they wanted me, mind you!
Timothy
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Road to Nowhere
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that US regard 243.00 as 'Mil Common'.
In the UK it is UHF Guard, and monitored by a number of organisations including the 2 D&D Cells. They 'own' the frequency from a ground perspective, and I would not transmit on it (under normal circumstances) without calling them first. The most usual reason for us transmitting on 243.00 is to correct a mis-dialled frequency change. Since all mil ac monitor UHF Guard this is extremely useful to sort out a lost comms situation.
What I don't understand is why Civvy aircraft are not required to monitor VHF Guard. In the current climate, I would think it at least a wise precaution, especially given certain 'airlines' seem rather lax in checking-in when changing from sector to sector during transits.
If you are trying to check-in with the next sector, what is the procedure if they don't respond? Go back to previous? VHF Guard? Some people just seem to plough-on regardless!
I thought it was mandatory to be in receipt of a radar service in Class A/B airspace? How can you if you haven't established 2-way with ATC for the sector?
In the UK it is UHF Guard, and monitored by a number of organisations including the 2 D&D Cells. They 'own' the frequency from a ground perspective, and I would not transmit on it (under normal circumstances) without calling them first. The most usual reason for us transmitting on 243.00 is to correct a mis-dialled frequency change. Since all mil ac monitor UHF Guard this is extremely useful to sort out a lost comms situation.
What I don't understand is why Civvy aircraft are not required to monitor VHF Guard. In the current climate, I would think it at least a wise precaution, especially given certain 'airlines' seem rather lax in checking-in when changing from sector to sector during transits.
If you are trying to check-in with the next sector, what is the procedure if they don't respond? Go back to previous? VHF Guard? Some people just seem to plough-on regardless!
I thought it was mandatory to be in receipt of a radar service in Class A/B airspace? How can you if you haven't established 2-way with ATC for the sector?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BDiONU & Wombat66:
Thanks for the further info. (HD: From what I remember it was also the case when I was in TC 8 years ago...)
The fact remains (at Swanwick at least) that we are unable to select 121.5 on any sector as a matter of course and monitor it just in case, even should we have the will to (which we don't for the reasons already specified).
We can of course deal with an aircraft on 121.5 if that is necessary, subject to the interventions regarding transmitter relays and so on already mentioned. But that was not the question. It was whether we routinely monitor 121.5: No we do not at LACC.
As Sir Toppham says: If we could be sure everyone was monitoring 121.5 it would be a lot easier to get hold of the ones not talking to us without all the hassle of phoning companies for ACARs links, or even sending up a couple of fighters to get their attention!..
Thanks for the further info. (HD: From what I remember it was also the case when I was in TC 8 years ago...)
The fact remains (at Swanwick at least) that we are unable to select 121.5 on any sector as a matter of course and monitor it just in case, even should we have the will to (which we don't for the reasons already specified).
We can of course deal with an aircraft on 121.5 if that is necessary, subject to the interventions regarding transmitter relays and so on already mentioned. But that was not the question. It was whether we routinely monitor 121.5: No we do not at LACC.
As Sir Toppham says: If we could be sure everyone was monitoring 121.5 it would be a lot easier to get hold of the ones not talking to us without all the hassle of phoning companies for ACARs links, or even sending up a couple of fighters to get their attention!..
Sir Toppam,
I think Scott's comment about 243.0 sometimes being called 'military common' in the US, might have been written in jest - possibly a humorous dig at its misuse by some?
I think Scott's comment about 243.0 sometimes being called 'military common' in the US, might have been written in jest - possibly a humorous dig at its misuse by some?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fort Worth ARTCC ZFW
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually we call it military common due to some of the rubbish radios that some of the military aircraft had in the past and the only one that seemed to work was Guard...
regards
Scott
regards
Scott
Here in SA most of the consoles in the major centers have 121.5 on and we select it to monitor on our headsets, but the moment there's interference or some idiot with the wrong freq we deselect as it becomes annoying. At the out stations (smaller Airfields) there's usually a handheld or Dittel radio permanantly on and monitoring 121.5. It isn't monitored by all and is usually a personal preference to select it or not although management does try insist that all keep it monitored.
The RX/TX site is at the major centre base so again limited range on no more than 60nm but most often the elt's are reported by acft in flight and we don't usually hear them on our RX. Any ELT report gets logged and a check done that no one has any acft missing in their sectors but thats where it ends from ATC point but we do have a satelite (SARSAT) that monitors as well and gives us a co-ord of the ELT. it monitors 121.5, 243 and the encoded freq (i think its 406MHZ or something) That gives the acft reg as well with the ELT
The RX/TX site is at the major centre base so again limited range on no more than 60nm but most often the elt's are reported by acft in flight and we don't usually hear them on our RX. Any ELT report gets logged and a check done that no one has any acft missing in their sectors but thats where it ends from ATC point but we do have a satelite (SARSAT) that monitors as well and gives us a co-ord of the ELT. it monitors 121.5, 243 and the encoded freq (i think its 406MHZ or something) That gives the acft reg as well with the ELT
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Kandahar Afghanistan
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like others have stated, in the U.S. most of the towers and tracons (approach controls) have the capability to monitor and transmit on 121.5 and 243.0 .
Since 9/11 the majority of calls on 121.5 are from aircraft that are on the wrong frequency because they missed a frequency change and are trying to figure out who they should be talking to.
Mike
NATCA FWA
Since 9/11 the majority of calls on 121.5 are from aircraft that are on the wrong frequency because they missed a frequency change and are trying to figure out who they should be talking to.
Mike
NATCA FWA