Important Announcement regarding the use of SafetyCom in Scotland
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hotter and Higher than I used to be!
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
xrayalpha, and other fellow aviators,
To answer your questions and concerns, the reason LLCF exists is because there are big swathes of remote Scotland airspace that, at low level, have absolutely no VHF radio reception with Scottish Info or any other ATC/ATS facility. Within that airspace, it seemed absolutely ridiculous that the only option for avoiding other traffic available to pilots flying within it was "See and Avoid" when (virtually) every aircraft has a fully serviceable VHF radio in it that remains silent.
"Hear and Avoid" is being used successfully in many other countries in the world, and has been proven to compliment "See and Avoid" where it is being used. Without doubt “Hear and Avoid” LLCF is a total no-brainer for remote Scotland - however, the primary issues which arise from its use are, as always, the edges of its boundary use, and who is it affecting negatively.
I fully agree with those who say that a blind, self-position and intention report should start and finish with one's present area location, e.g. "Loch Ness traffic, Helicopter CD, 5 SW of Drumnadrochit at 1,500 tracking SW to Fort William and Oban, Loch Ness traffic" as opposed to not starting and finishing with one's present area location, as this gives:
* Initial awareness to traffic at or near that location, i.e. if you are flying around Loch Ness and heard "Loch Ness traffic", you'd most likely pay more attention to looking for other traffic rather than trying to spot Nessie
* Aircraft Type and abbreviated ID, i.e. not too much info that you don’t listen to the rest of the broadcast as you try to remember what the traffic is
* Present position (distance, direction and height) with regard to a relatively identifiable landmark
* Intentions
* A repeat of awareness to traffic at or near your location
That would be my choice, but in the consultation phase of LLCF, that was thought to be too much air time by the Military a) for them to say it all, and b) it would cause too much frequency congestion, so the current guidelines have been suggested.
However, as with all guidelines, that doesn't literally prevent anybody from using what they believe to be better procedure; I personally use the above because there's hardly anyone out there, therefore there is no congestion, therefore if I believe safety prevails because of it, I will use it. Now, if the frequency was very busy, I'd most likely revert to the guidelines. It has been suggested that the guidelines change to the above after the trial - we civilians might say the above, the Military might abbreviate it due to workload constraints. It's all about Professionalism, what is appropriate, and how we can collectively make aviation safer.
As a thought, in these transmissions, one could dig a little deeper and promote a response perhaps if it was really quiet out there. "Loch Ness traffic, Helicopter CD, 5 SW of Drumnadrochit at 1,500 tracking SW to Fort William and Oban. Any other traffic Loch Ness..?"
I have to admit I am surprised that nobody has mentioned the fact that military fast jets traveling at 420 kts as they like to do, if they make a position report every 5 minutes, one report could be at one side of the country, the next report at the other side! And this is the nature of the beast. One makes calls appropriate to one's situation, and hopes that others do the same. This is not a Traffic Service, "Hear and Avoid" compliments "See and Avoid", not replaces it remember.
If you hear something on frequency and it's a clear transmission, you'll most likely be close to the other aircraft, or high in the air. If it's readability 2, then the other aircraft is probably far away, or perhaps terrain masked. You have to use common sense and fit your conclusions to the area in which you are flying. You could, of course, always ask for clarification.
xrayalpha, 135.475 was chosen as the trial frequency primarily because the frequency is already in service, and because it is under-utilised in Scotland - particularly north of 56°N. To try and get a separate frequency out of the CAA would have taken forever for use over such a large area, so the trial would have been delayed until who knows when.
Will a dedicated frequency different from 135.475 be used post trial? I can't answer that at this stage. It depends upon the trial and if anybody has been negatively impacted by the use of 135.475 in their area of operations. LLCF might disappear completely, or it might be altered somewhat to conform to best practice for those concerned.
I also appreciate your concern regarding Strathaven xrayalpha. It was carefully thought about before the Low Level Common Frequency proposal to the CAA, and during it, so please don't feel that your thoughts are being ignored. They were actually thought about before the trial went live!
Strathaven is outside the LLCF area by some 20Nm due south of the 56°N southern boundary, and is unlikely to be affected by frequency confusion or congestion from LLCF because due north of 56°N at longitude 004° 06.5'W, a pilot flying at 1,000’ AGL can talk to and receive a Basic Service from both Scottish Info and/or Glasgow, therefore would not be using LLCF. If that pilot was flying at 500' AGL in that same area, yes, he may be using LLCF, but at that level you would hear not his calls at Strathaven. Not only has this has been thought through, it's also been tested!
Remember, LLCF is only a trial for now, and is most certainly open to tweaking to best advantage for those concerned as it is a work in progress at this stage. It's surprising that of the over 2,500 people LLCF has been disseminated to nobody has given any feedback at all about it to the supplied email address (135.475LowLevelCommonFrequency @ gmail . com). Granted it is early days, particularly in terms of decent weather for GA flying around remote Scotland, however, if no feedback is forthcoming, then those that have the ear of the CAA at present will probably be those that take it to the next stage after the trial is over, and whatever works best for them may well be the deciding factor as to where LLCF goes...!
We need honest feedback please, both positive and negative, as LLCF has the potential to save lives. If it negatively impacts your area for the same reasons, then we need to know about it so we can change it.
Fly Safe!
To answer your questions and concerns, the reason LLCF exists is because there are big swathes of remote Scotland airspace that, at low level, have absolutely no VHF radio reception with Scottish Info or any other ATC/ATS facility. Within that airspace, it seemed absolutely ridiculous that the only option for avoiding other traffic available to pilots flying within it was "See and Avoid" when (virtually) every aircraft has a fully serviceable VHF radio in it that remains silent.
"Hear and Avoid" is being used successfully in many other countries in the world, and has been proven to compliment "See and Avoid" where it is being used. Without doubt “Hear and Avoid” LLCF is a total no-brainer for remote Scotland - however, the primary issues which arise from its use are, as always, the edges of its boundary use, and who is it affecting negatively.
I fully agree with those who say that a blind, self-position and intention report should start and finish with one's present area location, e.g. "Loch Ness traffic, Helicopter CD, 5 SW of Drumnadrochit at 1,500 tracking SW to Fort William and Oban, Loch Ness traffic" as opposed to not starting and finishing with one's present area location, as this gives:
* Initial awareness to traffic at or near that location, i.e. if you are flying around Loch Ness and heard "Loch Ness traffic", you'd most likely pay more attention to looking for other traffic rather than trying to spot Nessie
* Aircraft Type and abbreviated ID, i.e. not too much info that you don’t listen to the rest of the broadcast as you try to remember what the traffic is
* Present position (distance, direction and height) with regard to a relatively identifiable landmark
* Intentions
* A repeat of awareness to traffic at or near your location
That would be my choice, but in the consultation phase of LLCF, that was thought to be too much air time by the Military a) for them to say it all, and b) it would cause too much frequency congestion, so the current guidelines have been suggested.
However, as with all guidelines, that doesn't literally prevent anybody from using what they believe to be better procedure; I personally use the above because there's hardly anyone out there, therefore there is no congestion, therefore if I believe safety prevails because of it, I will use it. Now, if the frequency was very busy, I'd most likely revert to the guidelines. It has been suggested that the guidelines change to the above after the trial - we civilians might say the above, the Military might abbreviate it due to workload constraints. It's all about Professionalism, what is appropriate, and how we can collectively make aviation safer.
As a thought, in these transmissions, one could dig a little deeper and promote a response perhaps if it was really quiet out there. "Loch Ness traffic, Helicopter CD, 5 SW of Drumnadrochit at 1,500 tracking SW to Fort William and Oban. Any other traffic Loch Ness..?"
I have to admit I am surprised that nobody has mentioned the fact that military fast jets traveling at 420 kts as they like to do, if they make a position report every 5 minutes, one report could be at one side of the country, the next report at the other side! And this is the nature of the beast. One makes calls appropriate to one's situation, and hopes that others do the same. This is not a Traffic Service, "Hear and Avoid" compliments "See and Avoid", not replaces it remember.
If you hear something on frequency and it's a clear transmission, you'll most likely be close to the other aircraft, or high in the air. If it's readability 2, then the other aircraft is probably far away, or perhaps terrain masked. You have to use common sense and fit your conclusions to the area in which you are flying. You could, of course, always ask for clarification.
xrayalpha, 135.475 was chosen as the trial frequency primarily because the frequency is already in service, and because it is under-utilised in Scotland - particularly north of 56°N. To try and get a separate frequency out of the CAA would have taken forever for use over such a large area, so the trial would have been delayed until who knows when.
Will a dedicated frequency different from 135.475 be used post trial? I can't answer that at this stage. It depends upon the trial and if anybody has been negatively impacted by the use of 135.475 in their area of operations. LLCF might disappear completely, or it might be altered somewhat to conform to best practice for those concerned.
I also appreciate your concern regarding Strathaven xrayalpha. It was carefully thought about before the Low Level Common Frequency proposal to the CAA, and during it, so please don't feel that your thoughts are being ignored. They were actually thought about before the trial went live!
Strathaven is outside the LLCF area by some 20Nm due south of the 56°N southern boundary, and is unlikely to be affected by frequency confusion or congestion from LLCF because due north of 56°N at longitude 004° 06.5'W, a pilot flying at 1,000’ AGL can talk to and receive a Basic Service from both Scottish Info and/or Glasgow, therefore would not be using LLCF. If that pilot was flying at 500' AGL in that same area, yes, he may be using LLCF, but at that level you would hear not his calls at Strathaven. Not only has this has been thought through, it's also been tested!
Remember, LLCF is only a trial for now, and is most certainly open to tweaking to best advantage for those concerned as it is a work in progress at this stage. It's surprising that of the over 2,500 people LLCF has been disseminated to nobody has given any feedback at all about it to the supplied email address (135.475LowLevelCommonFrequency @ gmail . com). Granted it is early days, particularly in terms of decent weather for GA flying around remote Scotland, however, if no feedback is forthcoming, then those that have the ear of the CAA at present will probably be those that take it to the next stage after the trial is over, and whatever works best for them may well be the deciding factor as to where LLCF goes...!
We need honest feedback please, both positive and negative, as LLCF has the potential to save lives. If it negatively impacts your area for the same reasons, then we need to know about it so we can change it.
Fly Safe!
My problem with this is that if one follows this logic then there is a much more pressing requirement for "hear and avoid" in other places where there is much more traffic but it's not practical because the frequency would be choked. In fact it is only practical where there is nearly zero traffic and (IMHO) not really required at all.
Last edited by Romeo Tango; 10th May 2015 at 11:50.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: An ATC centre this side of the moon.
Posts: 1,160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's surprising that of the over 2,500 people LLCF has been disseminated to nobody has given any feedback at all about it to the supplied email address (135.475LowLevelCommonFrequency @ gmail . com)
I've tried to use it but haven't been successful. The plan was to have Scottish on the box, 135.475 on standby, handheld plugged into lighter socket and an earphone under one side of headset. It's a tangle of wire, and if there's a problem after taxiI give up.
PS I've just filed an airprox after getting too close to a paraglider about 4,000'+ over Loch Leven. Looking out is important too. Scottish is the primary source of info about other aircraft.
PS I've just filed an airprox after getting too close to a paraglider about 4,000'+ over Loch Leven. Looking out is important too. Scottish is the primary source of info about other aircraft.
Last edited by Maoraigh1; 10th May 2015 at 06:21. Reason: Add
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hotter and Higher than I used to be!
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no set time to make a blind, self-position and intention report, it's entirely up to the pilot at the time. However, some examples might be:
When it's safe to do so
In areas where you cannot reach Scottish Info
plus
Descending below 2000' AGL
Entering or exiting a valley
Passing over a ridgeline, i.e. different terrain masking areas
Approaching well-known and easily recognisable physical features
Any time it is considered beneficial to the safety of the aircraft, e.g. choke points, known areas of high traffic density
Personally I find on average I make calls perhaps every 3 - 5 minutes when transiting areas where I cannot talk to Scottish Info in the Highlands. That gives me pretty good coverage for anyone to hear me, apart from fast jets potentially. In areas where they are known to frequent, my calls might be every 2 minutes just in case.
Consider this:
A9 from Inverness to Pitlochry
A82 from Inverness to Oban (Great Glen, Loch Ness)
A835/A832/A890 from Inverness to the Isle of Skye
A835 from Inverness to Ullapool
A837/A894 from Bonar Bridge to Kinlochbervie
A82/A87 from Fort William to the Isle of Skye
A86 from Fort William to Newtonmore
A827/A85/A82 from Pitlochry to Loch Lomond
A85/A82 from Oban to Loch Lomond
A93 from Braemar to Blairgowrie
These are the well known corridors where you either cannot talk to, or have extremely poor comms with Scottish Info below 2000' AGL. And this is exactly where the fast jets love to fly, as does GA traffic, and so do I. If I have to make a precautionary landing and the choice is a flat field next to a main road where I can make a phone call and get a cup of tea and a slice of shortbread, or the top of a moor with 2' of snow on the ground in winter which turns into a peat bog with a million midges in summer...
Corridors are where you will most likely come across other traffic. Fast jets do not comply with the right hand rule, as we cannot do sometimes with areas of low cloud on "our" side of the valley.
Those old, bold pilots will tell you to keep your eyes open and your head on a swivel. Why not use your mouth and keep your ears open too now that option is available to you when you can't talk to Scottish...?
When it's safe to do so
In areas where you cannot reach Scottish Info
plus
Descending below 2000' AGL
Entering or exiting a valley
Passing over a ridgeline, i.e. different terrain masking areas
Approaching well-known and easily recognisable physical features
Any time it is considered beneficial to the safety of the aircraft, e.g. choke points, known areas of high traffic density
Personally I find on average I make calls perhaps every 3 - 5 minutes when transiting areas where I cannot talk to Scottish Info in the Highlands. That gives me pretty good coverage for anyone to hear me, apart from fast jets potentially. In areas where they are known to frequent, my calls might be every 2 minutes just in case.
Consider this:
A9 from Inverness to Pitlochry
A82 from Inverness to Oban (Great Glen, Loch Ness)
A835/A832/A890 from Inverness to the Isle of Skye
A835 from Inverness to Ullapool
A837/A894 from Bonar Bridge to Kinlochbervie
A82/A87 from Fort William to the Isle of Skye
A86 from Fort William to Newtonmore
A827/A85/A82 from Pitlochry to Loch Lomond
A85/A82 from Oban to Loch Lomond
A93 from Braemar to Blairgowrie
These are the well known corridors where you either cannot talk to, or have extremely poor comms with Scottish Info below 2000' AGL. And this is exactly where the fast jets love to fly, as does GA traffic, and so do I. If I have to make a precautionary landing and the choice is a flat field next to a main road where I can make a phone call and get a cup of tea and a slice of shortbread, or the top of a moor with 2' of snow on the ground in winter which turns into a peat bog with a million midges in summer...
Corridors are where you will most likely come across other traffic. Fast jets do not comply with the right hand rule, as we cannot do sometimes with areas of low cloud on "our" side of the valley.
Those old, bold pilots will tell you to keep your eyes open and your head on a swivel. Why not use your mouth and keep your ears open too now that option is available to you when you can't talk to Scottish...?
Haven't come across this before away from uncontrolled airfields and high level in-flight broadcast areas / war zones etc - where else is this done and found to be useful ?
That's a lot of radio time
5 minutes @ 520 kts ..... you and mil jet could be over 50 miles apart when you or it makes a call (3 mins = 30 miles apart)
Personally I find on average I make calls perhaps every 3 - 5 minute .... my calls might be every 2 minutes just in case.
5 minutes @ 520 kts ..... you and mil jet could be over 50 miles apart when you or it makes a call (3 mins = 30 miles apart)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: An ATC centre this side of the moon.
Posts: 1,160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AKK355....
I have to disagree with you there. As you know I am one of the voices of Scottish Information ( although the first time we met you admitted not to using the service both myself and colleagues provide)
Traffic routing low level via the A9 if south bound will generally call me once released by Inverness at Tomatin. I will provide the traffic with a Basic Service and advise it that if they stay below 1500ft I will lose comms after Aviemore till they pass Blair Atholl where good 2 way comms will be regained.
Like wise for traffic routing north via the A9 e.g, from Perth, I will also advise that comms will be lost passing Blair Athol but comms will be re established passing Aviemore.
So in this example although I may lose comms for a short period of time if the southbound traffic has called me I can advise the north bound traffic to keep a very good lookout and visa versa.
I can only provide the best possible service though if traffic decides to call me and advise me of their intentions. If traffic decides to make blind calls on Safety Comms as you suggest then I will be non the wiser and be unable to update any traffic that choses to speak to me.
I still think the best way of keeping the military guys out of your worspace AKA355 is to NOTAM any unusual activity that your Company are doing.....that way at least the fast jet boys will de conflict with your operation prior to departure.
Dont get me wrong I am not knocking your idea, I know the hard work you have put in to reach this stage and hopefully you will get some posative feed back from folk that chose to use it.
A9 from Inverness to Pitlochry
Traffic routing low level via the A9 if south bound will generally call me once released by Inverness at Tomatin. I will provide the traffic with a Basic Service and advise it that if they stay below 1500ft I will lose comms after Aviemore till they pass Blair Atholl where good 2 way comms will be regained.
Like wise for traffic routing north via the A9 e.g, from Perth, I will also advise that comms will be lost passing Blair Athol but comms will be re established passing Aviemore.
So in this example although I may lose comms for a short period of time if the southbound traffic has called me I can advise the north bound traffic to keep a very good lookout and visa versa.
I can only provide the best possible service though if traffic decides to call me and advise me of their intentions. If traffic decides to make blind calls on Safety Comms as you suggest then I will be non the wiser and be unable to update any traffic that choses to speak to me.
I still think the best way of keeping the military guys out of your worspace AKA355 is to NOTAM any unusual activity that your Company are doing.....that way at least the fast jet boys will de conflict with your operation prior to departure.
Dont get me wrong I am not knocking your idea, I know the hard work you have put in to reach this stage and hopefully you will get some posative feed back from folk that chose to use it.
