Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Radiotelephony in shambles in Europe?

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Radiotelephony in shambles in Europe?

Old 29th May 2008, 05:52
  #1 (permalink)  
ZbV
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Samsonite
Age: 51
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Radiotelephony in shambles in Europe?

Since the introduction of the 8.33 radios and the widthspread use of the said "Channels" I have noticed more and more flights are lost. The general level of RT work and situational awareness seems to have diminished with the introduction of advanced glass cockpit aircraft. Who is reading an enroute chart these days? FIR boundaries?

Wrong frequencies assigned or handovers forgotten by controllers working several busy sectors at the same time or more often pilots just not listening or getting the frequency wrong, easy to do really. Know your FIR boundaries. If I approach a boundary clearly marked on a chart and have not heard from ATC I will prompt them. Should FIR boundaries be included in EFIS symbology and databases? I use the FIX function to mark them.

Do we have too many sectors in Europe? Is the airspace too complicated? Should it be simplified? I have calculated 30 odd frequency changes in less than an hours flight.

The increase is considerably in the last 10 years and readily noticeable on 121.5 or Guard. The emergency frequency is being congested by ATC trying to reach flights for the correct frequency. The practice pans, why must these be done on 121.5. Pilots in error trying to reach various handling agents or OPS with their ETA's and then there is the Guard Police discussed elsewhere. This has become a clear safety issue.

I remember years ago hearing someone on guard. I would immediately pay attention and listen what was being said. Today I hear the constant talk and I turn the volume down until the yapping seizes. A good practice? There is so much talk on 121.5 that it has started to make listening ATC difficult.

The introduction of JAR has reduced the training requirements to be able to operate aircraft radios. Is this something we want when skies over Europe are busier than ever?
JJflyer is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 07:22
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,982
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Speech is a poor way of conveying safety critical information - we should be using a datalink system.

Aviation uses Amplitude modulation - an inferior system.

Too late now but when 8.33 khz was introduced a channel number system should have been utilised - eg call XXX on channel "Eight Alpha" rather than all these numbers.

If aircraft were fitted with "Contran" this would prevent simultaneous transmissions and repeat calls etc.

Good idea about FIRs on the EFIS and yes using FIX is a good plan and we should be aware of where the FIR boundaries are and prompt if no handover.

Totally agree about the sectorisation but with the traffic densities around now is there any other way of doing it?

Surely modern technology could address some of these challenges? 121.5 monitoring could perhaps be done on a SELCAL type system?
fireflybob is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 07:31
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
totally agree about 121.5, used to sit up and listen if heard anything on that freq, now just turn down to a background chatter as so much going on (especially in certain airspace) that it interferes with listening to ATC.

I was always trained to have a chart out, just in case. That seems to have died off.

Also with ATC band boxing, especially with Brest, Bordeaux and Madrid, the initial check-in often takes several calls, a reversion to previous and a recall to get a response taking up 20 miles or so.
BusBoy is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 07:36
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Don't worry not everyones standards are dropping. Enroute charts (both hi and low level) are out on our flight decks and the PNF will make a mention to the other guy about FIR boundaries and when we can expect a handover. If not handed over when expected we make a nice position report which is usually enough to prompt the controller to pass us on. If nothing heard on a quiet frequency for some time we will ask for a radio check as well.

Also 121.5 is up and monitored usually when we climb through 10,000ft although it can be tedious some days with the amount of double clicking, singing and practice pans going on. Don't get me wrong about the latter, I am all for practice but just wondering whether the powers that be would be better setting up a practice "guard" frequency instead.
potkettleblack is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 07:54
  #5 (permalink)  
F4F
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: on the Blue Planet
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
shambles...
A bit exaggerated, isn't?
Been sailing for a while and look ma, no hands: just by listening out and being aware of my position, never "got lost". This without pulling the cumbersome RFC out of the bag on the other side of the FDK or waking the F/O up, please call me minimalist if you want
The other extreme is chap we had in a previous company, who before each flight pulled a copy CFP where he had joggled down all frequencies pertinent to the route on a previous flight. Clipping this list on his side he made it a point, disregarding PF or PNF duties, of selecting the next frequency from his list as soon as feasible...

As a mini way of reducing chatter and enhance simplicity why not drop the 1 in front of each freq, e.g. call it 21 decimal 9 iso 121 decimal 9

As for the use of 21 decimal 5, the guard frequency, I have to agree with you. Most eastern countries use it as a chat frequency, the French call or try to call their ops, Italians use it to create jungle or other irksome noises, the brits for nav exercising, all which means that it finally either gets turned off or at least set to its lower volume setting, hardly a good practice...


live 2 fly 2 live
F4F is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 09:50
  #6 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
quick replies to some statements :

Too many sectors : because too many aircraft wanting to use same airspace = only way today to increase airspace capacity is multiplying number of sectors. each needs a dedicated frequency here you go.

Use data link instead of R/T : equip first and with ATN , today only (far) less than 10% a/c are ATN D/L capable
Retrofit is very expensive. ACARS ( FANS-1A) is not suitable for ATC dense airspace operations ( too long responses times and no acknowledgment messages back )

Drop first 1 : excellent idea., but against ICAO / ITU regulations which stipulates that frequencies on R/T have to be read in full (to separate HF from VHF etc..) Attempts to change this failed. Nevertheless some Aeronautical charts have already done this.

Prepare a list of frequencies to be crossed en route :totally useless in most dense airspace as sectorisation is variable according to traffic load and staff availability. You never know in advance which sector is bandboxed or separated, and consequently which frequencies are in use.

121,5 : fully agree ; but as long as States or ANSPs will not monitor it , identify the culprits and fine the perpetrators nothing will change.

Golden rules of today dense European airspace : :1) make a position report at least every 30 minutes if you have not been called. I) if you hear nothing, you are probably on the wrong frequency.
.
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 10:04
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If i dont hear ATC calling us after more than 10 minutes i tend to get nervous (and usually ask for a radio check if the frequency is quiet). Probably just a result of too long flying shorthaul around europe where you usually have a frequency change every 1 to 2 minutes.
Denti is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 11:21
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Fearness of FIR encroachment is cured by noting them on the PLOG, then creating a 20 mile circle around the FIR.
captjns is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 13:36
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hmmm, no high/low charts on the FD, missed radio calls, unsure about FIR boundaries...doesn't sound good to me.
Perhaps these 'new' flight decks are far too automated.
And, new guys into the system don't know any better.

Situation far from satisfactory.
411A is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 13:41
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: land
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In my day we used to note the new freq on the plog at the relavent position. I still do it but a lot I notice are not and maybe a contibuting factor. If you are given a wrong or useless forward freq change, one is able to go back to the noted freq. Yes I am aware the modern avionics remembers the previous freq but is not full proof. the freqs are written on the chart to but not always correct for the day and your position.

Rec freq, readback, write it down on plog, then change freq then call.

Just my 2 pence worth.

As for 121.5 abuse, it discusts me. One day someone will need to get a word in on that freq, real quick. At the moment they would be lucky to get a word in edge ways.
joehunt is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 14:50
  #11 (permalink)  
short flights long nights
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 3,872
Received 147 Likes on 46 Posts
Why cant they make a couple of huge upper level centres. Start by expanding MST?? Or is that too simple?
SOPS is online now  
Old 29th May 2008, 15:13
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: ireland
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You would still need the same amount of sectors as were only allowed work a maximum number of planes at any one time so reducing centres won't reduced sectors.
jumparound is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 15:15
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: EHBK
Age: 58
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Back in '65 that was the whole idea behind Eurocontrol. A logical progression into the jet age (as it was back then), scuppered by lack of political will / agreement. An idea that's a lot lesslikely to fly (no pun intended) today given ANSPs as private entities with shareholders and ATC being 'run' as a business. All the market forces are working in the opposite direction with everyone wanting their slice of the pie. Most probably, MST in its' current form, is time limited.
Radar is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 15:30
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
who before each flight pulled a copy CFP where he had joggled down all frequencies pertinent to the route on a previous flight. Clipping this list on his side he made it a point, disregarding PF or PNF duties, of selecting the next frequency from his list as soon as feasible...
THats a bad habit which can get you into trouble.Fast fingered Freddie tries getting landing clearance from....ground crontrol.Always keep the last frq on standby.Setting dep freq on stby for takeoff is the exception.
Rananim is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 16:33
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,982
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Surely the relevant charts should always be to hand. Ok it depends on the context a little bit - if I am operating from my base aerodrome then I am not obsessed about checking the SSAs on the low level but the principle still applies.

But in particular for descent I feel the low levels should always be available and indeed consulated. Msa on plogs can be incorrectly annotated. I feel that we are getting a generation of pilots now who are too dependent on what the FMC is telling them.

Perhaps in the days before radar environments went we had to give standard position reports there was more awareness of FIR boundaries - you got the handoff when you called at the FIR. But now we are (usually) in a radar environment you have to be more proactive to spot that you havent been handed off to the next sector. Also I feel that an awareness of FIRs is a part of flight planning since the ATC plan shows where the FIRs are.
fireflybob is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 18:56
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: France
Age: 69
Posts: 1,142
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Here are a few ideas that I use to help:

1. Look at the ATC flight plan and note the EET of the FIR crossing points, then write the name of the FIR next to that place on the Plog. OK, that won't solve the sector issue in Europe, but it works in most of the rest of the world.

2. Try to have an appropriate chart to hand and keep a mental plot of where the likely freq changes will be.

3. Write down the frequencies as they come up, then you will have a reference if you have to 'backtrack' to the previous one.

4. On some bizjet installations, you can display airspace sectors, FIRs and geo-political boundaries; great for SA. Can't wait to see this feature on the airliners.

Just my two cents-worth!
eckhard is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 19:51
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I fully agree regarding the congestion on 121.5 with chat, burps and calls to ops - the miscreants who continue to do this should be fined. Regarding "practice pans" my view is that it should be encouraged - and in any event those practising are likely to be with instructors who would intervene should a "real" pan or mayday suddenly appear.

Regarding the other matter of radio congestion, I think it is a problem that has been unnecessarily exaggerated - sure it gets a "bit busy" sometimes, but ATC generally prioritise and recognise when someone needs to be called if it looks like their turn may be overdue.

As for sailing through FIR's without noticing that nobody appears to be talking to you (because you screwed up or misheard a frequency change), then my suggestion is that you go and get re-trained. You can't have it both ways - you complain that the radios are too busy, but don't recognise your likely screw up when it's all gone quiet!!

Sooty
sooty615 is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 20:49
  #18 (permalink)  
ZbV
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Samsonite
Age: 51
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quote

As for sailing through FIR's without noticing that nobody appears to be talking to you (because you screwed up or misheard a frequency change), then my suggestion is that you go and get re-trained. You can't have it both ways - you complain that the radios are too busy, but don't recognise your likely screw up when it's all gone quiet!!

Unquote

Mhh. Have not gone sailing past FIR's and has not gotten quiet with me. Just an observation I have made in the last few years.
JJflyer is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 22:18
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm sorry JJFlyer, but I was not suggesting that you may have done it, but so many do. Once or twice is bound to happen to all of us at sometimes in our career, but my observations are that it has got busier on the radio, but not to an extent that should concern us - not just yet anyway.

As those who fly outside of Europe will know, there are many TMA's with frequencies far more congested than the likes of London/Frankfurt/Paris. Many such American controllers for example are dealing with traffic of all kinds destined for airports in close vicinity to a major hub - the difference is that they seem to manage it with more "break breaks" than European fliers are familiar with. In a way it stops the often unnecessary chit chat and lengthy calls/readbacks that some of our breed seem to like to make. Part of the problem also seems to be that low houred F/O's have still not yet got over the love of hearing their own voice - and insist on talking for too long. (I was guilty myself when I was first given the opportunity to advertise my presence and RT skills).

I was merely pointing out to those posters who made reference to flying past or through FIR's that the clue of a missed frequency is obviously a lack of radio chatter. As others wisely pointed out - if it goes all quiet for a while, first check your volumes, and or make a radio check. Not really rocket science is it?

The other solution of course would be to let the FO's fly all the legs - now that would give us all a lot of peace and quiet!!

Sooty
sooty615 is offline  
Old 29th May 2008, 22:23
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks, potkettleblack, just what this slf likes to hear!
chippy63 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.