Air To Air Chat
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hotel this week, hotel next week, home whenever...
Posts: 1,492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air To Air Chat
I have had a rummage around the forum and can see some chatter (no pun intended!) on the air to air frequencies for chatting amongst touring groups but it all dates from some time ago - nothing recent.
Can somebody advise what (if any) air to air chat frequencies are still usable in the UK, France, Germany, Spain and The Netherlands.
I know its a touchy subject....
Can somebody advise what (if any) air to air chat frequencies are still usable in the UK, France, Germany, Spain and The Netherlands.
I know its a touchy subject....
AIC on use of 123.45 in the UK.
An interesting point here - I was delivering some refresher training on RT for my microlight club the other night (they are not regular users, so benefit from an occasional refresher!), and covering emergencies gave the standard "call the frequency currently in use", when I was asked about Unicom.
Presumably, Unicom 135.475, the microlight A/G frequency 129.825, or the "chat" frequency 123.45 are all about as useful as a chocolate teapot in an emergency - in most cases anyhow. These are presumably the exceptions where you should immediately switch to guard in an emergency?
Anybody got any thoughts on that?
G
An interesting point here - I was delivering some refresher training on RT for my microlight club the other night (they are not regular users, so benefit from an occasional refresher!), and covering emergencies gave the standard "call the frequency currently in use", when I was asked about Unicom.
Presumably, Unicom 135.475, the microlight A/G frequency 129.825, or the "chat" frequency 123.45 are all about as useful as a chocolate teapot in an emergency - in most cases anyhow. These are presumably the exceptions where you should immediately switch to guard in an emergency?
Anybody got any thoughts on that?
G
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
Because it's allocated elsewhere.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
Back in the 1980's, I flew from a field in Germany which had the allocated frequency 123.45.
Life could be very difficult at times - usually when we had to listen to the American baseball scores etc.
Life could be very difficult at times - usually when we had to listen to the American baseball scores etc.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ShyTourque an interesting read like Duchess Driver I also believed 123.45 had been specifically closed to use for air to air communication. Looking at some old band allocation web sites it is actually shown as an “illegal air to air” frequency. This has been a significant communications gap for some time now. Good to see it is now open for use.
There is also a need for legal integration with ground based communications for air to ground chat and co-ordination. In the voluntary SAR world in the UK there is no air ground communications for aircraft supporting a ground based search. As far as I can see at the moment it is either this or the illegal use of a mobile phone or handheld intended for ground use.
There is also a need for legal integration with ground based communications for air to ground chat and co-ordination. In the voluntary SAR world in the UK there is no air ground communications for aircraft supporting a ground based search. As far as I can see at the moment it is either this or the illegal use of a mobile phone or handheld intended for ground use.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plumpton Green
Age: 79
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This has been a significant communications gap for some time now. Good to see it is now open for use.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is not how I read it. The remote oceanic area bit seems to just relate to the spec for the equipment used. It does not say that 123.45 is only to be used in those areas. As usual the drafting is crap, and one wonders whether sometimes it is deliberately done that way just so that various possible interpretations may be put on it, to suit any particular circumstance or argument.
Well it means what it says. 123.450 MHz is not for the Le Touquet lunch club to prattle away to eachother, it is for 'operational information' purposes in remote / oceanic areas....
....apart from Spams yakking about their damned rounders scores and 'ride reports', of course...
Why would touring gaggles need to jibber-jabber to each other anyway? If you want to fly in formation, learn to do so properly.
....apart from Spams yakking about their damned rounders scores and 'ride reports', of course...
Why would touring gaggles need to jibber-jabber to each other anyway? If you want to fly in formation, learn to do so properly.
Last edited by BEagle; 5th Jun 2011 at 19:25.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pannie - my formation aerobatic team just uses std handsignals and knows the routine. I do expect them to "check in" on any frequency change - these are published RT freq's.
Hope this helps,
Stik
Hope this helps,
Stik
Isn't the best thing is to simply find a frequency that isn't going to interfere with any other within range 
I've used 122.95 (is that an obselete Unicom frequency?) for discrete air2air r/t for over 10 years without a problem. Yet
I've used 122.95 (is that an obselete Unicom frequency?) for discrete air2air r/t for over 10 years without a problem. Yet
So, your chat may just tramp across Bristows trying to co-ordinate a search and rescue operation. Unlikely, but I doubt you'd enjoy explaining your rationale in court.
G
Isn't the best thing is to simply find a frequency that isn't going to interfere with any other within range