Security of radio comms
Thread Starter
Security of radio comms
Pardon my observation but it was interesting to hear the radio comms from the PolAir Helo made during the Queensland Murder Massacre being broadcast on National Nine TV News.
Maybe the regulations have been changed yet again but my understanding is that radio comms are only for the party transmitting to the party meant to receive them.
So can one explain how come Nine broadcast those comms of the shooting? Will CASA follow up a breach of the regulations?
We wait to see the outcome!
Maybe the regulations have been changed yet again but my understanding is that radio comms are only for the party transmitting to the party meant to receive them.
So can one explain how come Nine broadcast those comms of the shooting? Will CASA follow up a breach of the regulations?
We wait to see the outcome!
Released by the Qld Police media dept as far as I know
Can you quote the regulation breached if someone publishes radicomms? I’m aware of some obscure piece of folklore embedded in some pilot competency documentation, but so far as I can tell it’s a remnant of some defunct rule.
From memory of my 1968 radio licence course, a radio operator will hear all sorts of confidential private communications, she may even be required to intercept and relay them to other parties in her role is an active node in what we then called a radio net. The law at least at that time stated that it was not a crime to listen to other peoples transmissions in the course of your duties. It was however a crime to make use of what you heard for your own private purposes or to divulge such intercepted communications to third parties.
This legal doctrine is the foundation, I think, for the use of amateur radio in support of communities and all sorts of activities.
Nevertheless, it was a stupid person who divulged their intimate Saturday night plans to a mate over the airwaves.
To put it another way, It ain't folklore LB:
This legal doctrine is the foundation, I think, for the use of amateur radio in support of communities and all sorts of activities.
Nevertheless, it was a stupid person who divulged their intimate Saturday night plans to a mate over the airwaves.
To put it another way, It ain't folklore LB:
Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 - section 2 refers.
Last edited by Sunfish; 15th Dec 2022 at 10:29.
And have you read the provision you cited? These things are published.
It would have had to be released by the QPS as I believe the QPS comms are secure.
There was a ruckus when the QPS went digital and the TV stations could no longer listen to the QPS chatter.
It may have changed.
Also the transmissions broadcast on TV were not aviation related, but QPS operations.
There was a ruckus when the QPS went digital and the TV stations could no longer listen to the QPS chatter.
It may have changed.
Also the transmissions broadcast on TV were not aviation related, but QPS operations.
And this is 2022 - do you really think any media outlet would sit back and NOT publish a good story because of some obscure r/t rule by a civil aviation authority?
And were they to be prosecuted you'd get the "freedom of the press" Free speech" stories running for ever - worth paying the fine just to get the news flow
And were they to be prosecuted you'd get the "freedom of the press" Free speech" stories running for ever - worth paying the fine just to get the news flow
As 601 has pointed out, the audio was not VHF air-band.
Back to the original question and LB’s comments, I think the “rule” or whatever we want to call it, stems from ASA not wanting their calls broadcast rather than the actual VHF air-band as such. So no rules would appear with CASA for that one.
Back to the original question and LB’s comments, I think the “rule” or whatever we want to call it, stems from ASA not wanting their calls broadcast rather than the actual VHF air-band as such. So no rules would appear with CASA for that one.
It seems these days all our VHF transmissions are out there for anyone anywhere in the world to monitor.
So, how does that work with LiveATC? https://www.liveatc.net/hlisten.php?...mml3&icao=ymml
It seems these days all our VHF transmissions are out there for anyone anywhere in the world to monitor.
It seems these days all our VHF transmissions are out there for anyone anywhere in the world to monitor.
Just because it’s on live ATC doesn’t make it legal.
In Victoria, you can record a conversation that you are part of, but not someone else’s conversation unless you have all parties consent.
The question would be does some federal law override the state law in this instance?
Live ATC are effectively recording and re-broadcasting ASA employee conversations of them performing their role. I’m trying to think of a similar example that doesn’t involve first-responders or similar. A member of the public can record an interaction with a police officer or another member of the public, but as to whether it’s 100% legal to put it on YouTube, I am unsure…
In Victoria, you can record a conversation that you are part of, but not someone else’s conversation unless you have all parties consent.
The question would be does some federal law override the state law in this instance?
Live ATC are effectively recording and re-broadcasting ASA employee conversations of them performing their role. I’m trying to think of a similar example that doesn’t involve first-responders or similar. A member of the public can record an interaction with a police officer or another member of the public, but as to whether it’s 100% legal to put it on YouTube, I am unsure…
Communications on published ‘airband’ VHF AM frequencies are ‘private’? Doesn’t make sense to me. When I broadcast on Area or CTAF, I’m kinda hoping people - number and identity unknown - will be listening and I don’t particularly care if that includes Cyril the plane spotter who’s recording what’s going on.
I recall there is something somewhere, in some training syllabus, about the security of aviation comms. I’m yet to see the current rule that deals with the issue and, if it exists, we can be certain it’s not enforced.
I recall there is something somewhere, in some training syllabus, about the security of aviation comms. I’m yet to see the current rule that deals with the issue and, if it exists, we can be certain it’s not enforced.
I guess they don’t really want everyone knowing the terminology etc, despite being able to listen with a scanner. As for recording and re-playing on the internet, that’s a whole different thing.
