Campaign to Stop Stupid Calls on 121.5
 

As a professional pilot, I'd like to sponsor a campaign to stop these stupid and childish calls on 121.5 whenever someone makes an accidental broadcast. I'd like every pilot on these boards to spread the word when they are flying to their other crew members.

Example: If someone makes an accidental broadcast, and no-one responds, they usually work it out themselves pretty quickly. If they make a second call, by all means let them know - once! Only one person needs to say something, not, twenty.

Example: The other day in Brisbane, a US callsign made the following broadcast on 121.5: "This is xxxx on guard, radio check for Amberley Ground". It was obvious that this was a deliberate call on 121.5, and it did not require anybody to pipe up. What eventuated was embarrassing: about twenty people all chimed in on 121.5 telling him he was broadcasting on guard. Of course he was, he even said it was a radio check. Due to the congestion on 121.5, he had to make a second radio check, as no doubt Amberley Ground could not get through on 121.5 the first time.

The use of 121.5 is for emergency calls only. These stupid calls are often heard well beyond the area where the first call is made. It is so bad that some operators make it a requirement to stop listening out on 121.5 during approach and landing, precisely the time when monitoring 121.5 could be most important to them.

So let us leave the mistakes on 121.5 alone, and stay quiet; they'll work it out themselves. In the rare case that a second mistaken transmission is made, then let only one person respond. Let us leave this frequency free for emergency calls.

You're on the wrong frequency Baron. Try 121.5!

ABC (on 121.5): Skywest Ops, ABC!

DEF (on 121.5): You're on guard!

GHI (on 121.5): So are you. :}

Leave them alone for the first call; we all make mistakes. But when they do it again...hammer 'em!!:}

You're on Guard!

Totally agree Baron:ok:

Heard that same check call on guard the other day and felt very frustrated for the poor bloke making the call.

I think the guard police were getting a bit carried away that day!

Why has this been moved? It's not general aviation, and it's not a question.

It's an attempt to improve the professionalism of our pilots - the culprits in particular being those flying for the airlines.

It's also an attempt to see if this forum is capable of changing for the better the practice of professional pilots - rather than just a whinge fest.

It's up to all of us as professionals to give a damn.

I'm curious to know why a bit of radio chatter during approach and landing is an issue, and even more curious as to why a distress call on 121.5 could possibly be important to an approaching or landing aircraft...

Remoak,
I don't know where you operate, but here 121.5 is treated like a phone, especially by one operator who will remain nameless. There would be nothing worse than hearing these Gen Yers rabbiting on about their ride and wind when you were in the middle of a complex arrival.

Emergencies fair enough, but it shouldn't be used as your own squadron common.

London, Paris, Amsterdam and Dublin mostly. Radio traffic is non-stop. I imagine it's no different around the major Aussie airports.

I agree that using 121.5 for mindless chatter is undesirable (we use 123.45 for that in Europe, technically illegal but harmless), but saying that it is somehow dangerous, or that an aircraft on approach has a vital interest in distress traffic that is not within miles of them, is stretching the point a little.

You should hear the crap that fills the airwaves on oceanic routes... worse than 121.5.

Remoak, listening on 121.5 on approach is very important - it might be the only way that ATC can call you if you screw up a frequency change, or suffer an undetected radio failure. My favourite radio call on 121.5 while on approach/departure was the warnings by the USS Vincennes before they shot down the Iranian Airbus. Now that is one call you wouldn't want to miss!

Also, I've seen as a result of this policy crew forgetting to listen out on 121.5 at all during a flight, as they don't select it on departure and forget to set it up at top of climb.

forgive my ignorance (if any) ... but why do you use the term "ON GUARD" ??
I've never heard that term for the frequency :ooh:

Does anyone know why the US acft was calling AMB ground on 121.5 ?

I only ask this as Military ATC don't monitor 121.5, only 243.0 is monitored.

It can be dialled up on VHF emergency radio if required or pre-arranged. Maybe that is what happened.

If there's one thing that drives me nuts it's people talking crap on the airwaves.

Not so bad where I fly now but the area where I used to fly it was non-stop. On CTAF, "numbers", 121.5 and any other freq people dreamed up that they thought would be "discrete" but usually wasn't. Not only would there be protracted, rediculous radio calls but we'd hear all about the pub last night, the pub tonight, the pretty boats on the water below, the hot passengers in the back etc etc.

FFS:mad::mad::mad: if people have time to talk rubbish on the radio they have time to fly the aircraft properly.:ugh::ugh:

I know, there will be people who disagree with this.

I have no problem with people discussing operational/ important stuff but when it becomes a social network it's time to shut up. Use the phone or e-mail after your flight. I have lost count of the number of times I haven't been able to make calls because some goose with nothing better to do is chatting on freq.

End of rant :)

Not really. There are well-established procedures in place for comms failures, and if you suffer one, ATC will automatically keep other traffic clear of you and give you priority. Same applies if you screw up a frequency change, although I can't imagine very many IFR aircraft these days don't have instant reversion to the previous frequency.

More to the point, if you can't manage to fly an approach safely with a bit of chatter on the radio, you shouldn't be flying IFR at all.

I have worked for 7 European airlines over a 20 year period, and not one of them included monitoring 121.5 as an SOP. There might be some point to it when traversing large areas of wilderness in Oz, but not in terminal areas.

I suppose if you happen to be flying an aircraft in a tense and dangerous part of the world, with warships on full battle alert nearby, there might be some point... but then, how many airliners have been destroyed in this way around Australia?

Why don't you just go around to the premises of the worst offender and settle it like men? :}

If you have trouble doing both at the same time, possibly you should research another line of work.
Why should one not be able to discuss hotties in the back with other folk on the radio?. that what a Discrete frequency is for. The radio is for communication between two or more parties, and I am pretty sure it is not for piloting duties only. Dude, get a grip (or loosen it a little).

On Guard
 

Kulwin Park asked,
Kulwin, it's a monitored (or guarded ) frequency. If you need help the idea is that someone is always listening and will provide assistance. The older style ELT's, epirb, ELT's etc that worked on 121.5 (no longer monitored by Aussar) would also be picked up by passing aircraft and satelites as well as civil ATC. Aircraft will still recieve a 121.5 beacon if its set off. Thats why boaties have to be careful when getting rid of older ELT's. Military acft still montior 243.0 (some new acft don't have UHF) as does Mil ATC.

The point of transmitting "on guard" is to make others aware that you are deliberately using the guarded frequency. Its mean't to stop others jumping in and saying "hey your on the wrong freq" that beer baron mentioned in the first post.

121.5 and AsA...
 

Re;
"it might be the only way that ATC can call you if you screw up a frequency change, or suffer an undetected radio failure."

Unless things have changed,
AsA do not have the 121.5 facility avbl for Controllers / Flight Watch staff to use...

The ONLY time I ever had the facility available was for a 'combined forces' military exercise in Derby - 'Pitch Black' or 'Kangaroo', or one of 'those' when the FSU had a portable 'Bayside' VHF loaned to us for use 'if required' to monitor the 'red' or 'blue' forces doing 'funny' night ops.....

And, it actually got used.....once.....to check that, following a 'spurious' call, that the acft in question was 'safe'.

Cheers:ok:

A few days ago, was monitoring 121.5 and some goody two shoes, accidentally made a PA on 121.5. :ok:

They normaly call a nearby aricraft to try and raise you on 121.5 and tell you your new frequency. :ok:

This subject has been brought up before & by myself as well.

You would never be able to stop accidental comms on 121.5 we are all human & finger trouble has been known to take a plane directly to the crash site as well as incorrect R/T's.

What really shows a total lack of discipline at airline level ( I say Airline level or similar as most bug smashers wouldn't monitor 121.5) is the response one often hears from somebody accidentally using 121.5. Like for Eg ...................LT base this is XXX ..........a quick response.....'go ahead', then the poor chap or chapette proceeds to spill their guts on 121.5 much to the amuzment of others. These are the bozos/morons that need kick up the rear end!!!

Perhaps a different dedicated way of transmitting on 121.5 is the answer, much like a deliberate action event where as in it can't be done unless it's a totally different from day to day TX's procedures. Like a TX button not associated with ATC TX's

I know I often turn off the 2nd comm whilst in the terminal area as I might miss an important TX from ATC which does happen.

As for general chit chat Eg ride reports etc, (one guy asked anothet Co A/C to keep an eye out for a lost torch from a few days ago with numerous responses back & forth,all done on 121.5 !!!!) well you can imagine the slack environment in the cockpit when this sort of poor airmanship is wantingly displayed.

Bring back the strap at school, the school system has gone to pot!!!:}


Wmk2