Southend Approach Frequency Change
Official PPRuNe Chaplain
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Witnesham, Suffolk
Age: 80
Posts: 3,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Southend Approach Frequency Change
Those of you who browse regularly the 285 pages of the AIRAC will know this.
Otherwise, it might not have reached folks' attention:
WEF 10 July 2003, the frequency for Southend Approach will change from 128.95 (where it has been for all my aviating life) to 130.775.
It's interesting that Bottlang has not picked it up in this month's Special Notes, has not produced a revised plate, or communicated it - except that they've updated the LARS page to show it.
Otherwise, it might not have reached folks' attention:
WEF 10 July 2003, the frequency for Southend Approach will change from 128.95 (where it has been for all my aviating life) to 130.775.
It's interesting that Bottlang has not picked it up in this month's Special Notes, has not produced a revised plate, or communicated it - except that they've updated the LARS page to show it.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Apa, apo ndi kulikonse!
Posts: 1,757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I reckon they aren't really changing at all - just saving on the number of calls they get on LARS!
TO that end I wish to announce the secret change of Thames Radar freq to
with immediate effect.
Please avoid using 132.7
tee hee
Then I can
at work
thank you
TO that end I wish to announce the secret change of Thames Radar freq to
with immediate effect.Please avoid using 132.7
tee hee
Then I can
at workthank you
Official PPRuNe Chaplain
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Witnesham, Suffolk
Age: 80
Posts: 3,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tell ya wot - I'll call Sahfen' on 128.95 when I set out for the PFA Rally on Friday and see what response I get. It's still one of their frequencies, so maybe they monitor it.
Unlisted frequency - like 123.45, you mean?
Unlisted frequency - like 123.45, you mean?
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think 128.95 becomes S'a'fe' Ra'ar, so it may well be that an initial call on that frequency remains appropriate (ie if you typically get a radar service from 30nm and an approach service from 15nm)
W
W
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WC don't do it. The frequency change documentation makes it quite clear that 128.95 is not continuously guarded and is only to be used as directed. (It has the same status as 125.05 which is being reallocated). If you want radar service call on 130.77
RF
RF
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The change is not subject to NOTAM because sufficient notice has been given for it to be incorporated into the AIRAC 28 day amendment system. This requires amendments to the AIP to be promulgated 42 days in advance so that they are in the hands of the recipients at least 28 days in advance of the effective date.
CAA VFR Charts have published a chart amendment here.
The amendment itself is currently on the AIS site as a pending amendment here and the updated page in the AIP will appear here on the amendment date, 10 July.
It would be interesting to get some feedback from subscribers to flight guides on when (or if) they actually get the amendment.
The actual amendment is:-
APP changed to 130.775
Radar changed to 130.775 and 128.950
I suspect that I can say with some confidence that subscribers to Pooleys amendment service will not get it in time because AFIK they don't follow the AIRAC cycle.
Mike
CAA VFR Charts have published a chart amendment here.
The amendment itself is currently on the AIS site as a pending amendment here and the updated page in the AIP will appear here on the amendment date, 10 July.
It would be interesting to get some feedback from subscribers to flight guides on when (or if) they actually get the amendment.
The actual amendment is:-
APP changed to 130.775
Radar changed to 130.775 and 128.950
I suspect that I can say with some confidence that subscribers to Pooleys amendment service will not get it in time because AFIK they don't follow the AIRAC cycle.
Mike
Official PPRuNe Chaplain
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Witnesham, Suffolk
Age: 80
Posts: 3,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've already asked Jeppesen why it isn't in the latest Bottlang Special Notes. No reply yet.
It wasn't in the last "Changes - Frequency and Airspace" (Issue 2 of 2003) that comes with the GASIL etc.
It wasn't in the last "Changes - Frequency and Airspace" (Issue 2 of 2003) that comes with the GASIL etc.
Official PPRuNe Chaplain
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Witnesham, Suffolk
Age: 80
Posts: 3,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F3G - Good question. Not a clue. I've never had co-channel interference on 128.95, and I don't know of anywhere else using it anywhere near here. (I'm sure it's used somewhere, but don't have one of those giant frequency lists to check.)
I would guess/surmise that somewhere there's a master plan to redistribute frequencies so that the risks of co-channel interference are minimised.
I remember when Lille moved to 120.275 and a certain Southern England airfield had to change its A/G frequency rapidly.
The bit that worried me more about this one was that it didn't get communicated via any of the channels I watch (OK, it was in AIRAC 7/2003, but I'm not in the habit of downloading 24MB of those every month). Hence the posting here, which seems to have been the first a few Essex lads heard of it.
I would guess/surmise that somewhere there's a master plan to redistribute frequencies so that the risks of co-channel interference are minimised.
I remember when Lille moved to 120.275 and a certain Southern England airfield had to change its A/G frequency rapidly.
The bit that worried me more about this one was that it didn't get communicated via any of the channels I watch (OK, it was in AIRAC 7/2003, but I'm not in the habit of downloading 24MB of those every month). Hence the posting here, which seems to have been the first a few Essex lads heard of it.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am indebted to Barry Davidson of UK AIS who has corrected me.
NATS staff are not allowed to post on the forums but they do monitor them and it was good of Barry to contact me and pass on the info.
This thread also shows that Pilots are alert to what is going on, also good.
Mike
P.S. Any flight guide subscribers received it as an amendment yet?
In accordance with ICAO & Eurocontrol requirements, Trigger NOTAM E1296/03, effective 0307100001, notifying the changes was issued 05 July 2003. The NOTAM also appears on the PIB.
When an AIP amendment is published in accordance with the AIRAC procedures, a Trigger NOTAM is originated by AIS giving a brief description of the contents, as well as the effective date and reference number of the AIP. The NOTAM must come into force on the same date as the amendment. The text of such NOTAM is included in the PIB to ensure that pilots and operators are
reminded, that changes of operational significance take place from a given effective date.
In the UK Trigger NOTAM are usually issued the weekend preceding the AIRAC date.
AIP Supplements and Mauve AICs (UK only) are also subject to Trigger NOTAM action.
When an AIP amendment is published in accordance with the AIRAC procedures, a Trigger NOTAM is originated by AIS giving a brief description of the contents, as well as the effective date and reference number of the AIP. The NOTAM must come into force on the same date as the amendment. The text of such NOTAM is included in the PIB to ensure that pilots and operators are
reminded, that changes of operational significance take place from a given effective date.
In the UK Trigger NOTAM are usually issued the weekend preceding the AIRAC date.
AIP Supplements and Mauve AICs (UK only) are also subject to Trigger NOTAM action.
This thread also shows that Pilots are alert to what is going on, also good.
Mike
P.S. Any flight guide subscribers received it as an amendment yet?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike,
Good example of a closer relationship building between NATS/AIS and NATS/IS and the GA community. Their hands are tied as far as the use of forum boards are concerned but, the internet is a powerful and useful tool when used positively.
Great news!
Andy
Good example of a closer relationship building between NATS/AIS and NATS/IS and the GA community. Their hands are tied as far as the use of forum boards are concerned but, the internet is a powerful and useful tool when used positively.
Great news!
Andy
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Apa, apo ndi kulikonse!
Posts: 1,757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NATS staff are not allowed to post on the forums but they do monitor them
******
What a load of tosh
If they have something constructive to say why not?
"Publish and be damned"
Hey P7 - WORK is having to battle off the likes of you and Spunky when plugged in. Much easier than vacate left.........zzzzz
teee heee
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AlanM
AFIK they can and do post under aliases, as do most of the posters on here. You're an ATC'er. Employed by NATS by any chance?
Most commercial organisations would baulk at the idea of their employees freely entering into debate in the company's name. It's not at all unusual.
The Mad Controller is to be congratulated for holding his own (so to speak)
(see this thread) but he's unusual in telling us who he is, who he works for, and what position he holds.
People tend to be employed to do a job rather than be corporate spokespeople. Not everyone can cope with or would welcome, some of the slagging off that can come their way
Mike
Mike Cross
Just an ordinary PPL and not employed in aviation.
P.S. Like the photos
AFIK they can and do post under aliases, as do most of the posters on here. You're an ATC'er. Employed by NATS by any chance?
Most commercial organisations would baulk at the idea of their employees freely entering into debate in the company's name. It's not at all unusual.
The Mad Controller is to be congratulated for holding his own (so to speak)
(see this thread) but he's unusual in telling us who he is, who he works for, and what position he holds.
People tend to be employed to do a job rather than be corporate spokespeople. Not everyone can cope with or would welcome, some of the slagging off that can come their way
Mike
Mike Cross
Just an ordinary PPL and not employed in aviation.
P.S. Like the photos
Last edited by Mike Cross; 10th Jul 2003 at 00:13.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: SX in SX in UK
Posts: 1,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I might be allowed to return to the subject of this thread...
This new frequency of 130.775 is very close to Andrewsfield's 130.550, which geographically is just up the road from Southend.
This new frequency of 130.775 is very close to Andrewsfield's 130.550, which geographically is just up the road from Southend.
Official PPRuNe Chaplain
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Witnesham, Suffolk
Age: 80
Posts: 3,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's been an interesting and enlightening debate! I've learned a lot more about how this "bit" of the system works.
I don't know the answer, but how would an "ordinary" PPL who goes for a bimble once a month (and may or may not need to give Sahfen' a call) pick up on a change like this?
If folks relied on the flight guides, they could be seriously embarrassed - such changes sometimes don't make it into the books for quite a while. (The new French ZITs aren't in mine yet, but fortunately the communication channel called PPRuNe alerted me months ago.)
I don't think there's much risk of interference between 130.775 and 130.550 - but it might make the frequency change quicker!
I don't know the answer, but how would an "ordinary" PPL who goes for a bimble once a month (and may or may not need to give Sahfen' a call) pick up on a change like this?
If folks relied on the flight guides, they could be seriously embarrassed - such changes sometimes don't make it into the books for quite a while. (The new French ZITs aren't in mine yet, but fortunately the communication channel called PPRuNe alerted me months ago.)
I don't think there's much risk of interference between 130.775 and 130.550 - but it might make the frequency change quicker!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Dorset
Posts: 902
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mrcross - Mike, in response to your 0838 9 Jul 03 post: I spent a happy few hours last night updating both my Aerad and Pooleys (Aerad was shamefully out of date - 4 months, but I don't fly IMC and only occasionally IFR).
No sign of any updates to the Sarfend freqs yet.
No sign of any updates to the Sarfend freqs yet.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Apa, apo ndi kulikonse!
Posts: 1,757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mrcross
yes I am a NATS employee - but I nothing I do on here is to suggest it is the position of NATS, my unit or my colleagues.
It is all my opinion and, as such, I don't feel the need to hide behnd a name.
each to their own
yes I am a NATS employee - but I nothing I do on here is to suggest it is the position of NATS, my unit or my colleagues.
It is all my opinion and, as such, I don't feel the need to hide behnd a name.
each to their own