decent radio to listen to atc?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could an enthusiast explain why it is acceptable to listen in on communication which is not public, not addressed to them and by law off limits?
There are always fusspot who like to over react, men (generally men) who need the protection of rules and lots of them. We have just escaped 13 years of more rules introduced into our country than ever before. It is for this common sense reason, that we must allow the authorities to focus on criminals who cause pain, nuisance and suffering. Arresting people who like to listen to ATC, something happily legal in many other enlightened countries isn't a key priority. Why on Earth should it be?
I have had NUMEROUS chats with the armed Police at LCY and LHR with them wanting to know what I am up to, with the camera. Not once in all of those conversations has the readily apparent air band scanner been mentioned even once. Busy men, the Police!
The clinching argument is that it hacks off that poisonous man-child that is Simon Chowder. He who lurks in spotters corner to call other people names. Proud of yourself are we Simon? Run along old thing, mum must have the tea ready by now I think.
SOE.................
Couldn't have put it better myself........!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is too be hoped that one of the spin offs of a change of government will be much less rule making and general prying into our affairs by government....
Planemike
Couldn't have put it better myself........!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is too be hoped that one of the spin offs of a change of government will be much less rule making and general prying into our affairs by government....
Planemike
guys, thanks for all your replies.
i understand the process is technically illegal.
as I am doing my ppl i am desperate to learn more about RT discipline (as that's one thing i'm not very confident on), and also use it for airshows. i wouldn't think of regurgitating stuff i hear on the internet, i wouldn't see the point.
hah, Malaysian28:
Thanks for participating in the very thread you're criticising. Well done 
i understand the process is technically illegal.
as I am doing my ppl i am desperate to learn more about RT discipline (as that's one thing i'm not very confident on), and also use it for airshows. i wouldn't think of regurgitating stuff i hear on the internet, i wouldn't see the point.
hah, Malaysian28:
I hate to be rude, but this something like the 6 forum about recommending an airband radio / Scanner and its quite boring having to recommend and dicuss this topic so many times 
I use a PSR282 200 Channel Scanner.
I use a PSR282 200 Channel Scanner.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: london
Age: 59
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Planemike , thats rather rich , spotters who by their own admissions enjoy eavesdropping illegally on closed private radio broadcasts (and then often as not discussing those private broadcasts here) then have the gall to whine about other people prying into their "hobby" 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cheshire, UK
Age: 60
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
simonchowder;
"often as not" ? I think you exaggerate somewhat. Thousands "eavesdrop" as you call it every day; there is currently ONE thread discussing an R/T conversation.
If listening to ATC really was a problem and "private" then they should encrypt their radio transmissions.
Why do you care so much anyway what others do as a hobby?
"often as not" ? I think you exaggerate somewhat. Thousands "eavesdrop" as you call it every day; there is currently ONE thread discussing an R/T conversation.
If listening to ATC really was a problem and "private" then they should encrypt their radio transmissions.
Why do you care so much anyway what others do as a hobby?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder how many of those on here who encourage flouting the law would like to have members of the public spying on them while they are working? Like someone listening in to your phone calls, or listening and watching over your shoulders would you? That's what you are doing when you listen to the air, police or other utilities. These people are doing their jobs and need to speak to others just as if they were in the same office. Radio gives them the facility to carry out that work over long distance.
What they don't understand is that it's not just the airband which is confidential, but ALL radio comms for which they do not have proper authority. They just need to understand that that is the LAW, whether they like it or not. It has nothing to do with recent governments; it has been law for decades. When I did my Flight R/T Operator Licence in about 1962 the examiner pointed out that the licence only entitled me to use the airband whilst I was flying as part of a crew.
I don't particularly care what the anoraks get up to, just as long as they know where they stand in law. I have had PMs thanking me for that advice from the more sensible individuals on PpruNe over the years.
What they don't understand is that it's not just the airband which is confidential, but ALL radio comms for which they do not have proper authority. They just need to understand that that is the LAW, whether they like it or not. It has nothing to do with recent governments; it has been law for decades. When I did my Flight R/T Operator Licence in about 1962 the examiner pointed out that the licence only entitled me to use the airband whilst I was flying as part of a crew.
I don't particularly care what the anoraks get up to, just as long as they know where they stand in law. I have had PMs thanking me for that advice from the more sensible individuals on PpruNe over the years.
Acting on what you hear!!
A few years back I lived near Cambridge Airfield, and used to scan the Airwaves.
One Sat afternooon.
On selecting 121.5 I heard a Distress beacon , quite feint but audible.
I am ex RAF Radio Technician so felt I had to do something.
I ran the local plod and explained the situation, qualified my call by saying that I was maybe out of order but I felt it was important.
They agreed and said they would look into it.
A few minuites later I had a call from the main rescue centre in Scotland asking if they could listen to my Scanner over the phone to verify the situation.
They agreed it was genuine and said they would update me on the outcome.
Awhile later they called and said they had monitored the area and had located the Beacon as coming from Marshalls Airport. On further local investigation found it to be from a C-130 in a hangar,
someone had left the emergency transmitter switched to activate.
They thanked me very much and on my remarks about responding to something I had picked up while scanning said "no worries you carry on scanning with our blessing"!!!!!!!!
The reason I do have a scanner is to help me when at an Airport/Airfield
to identify in advance Aircraft which may be of interest to Photograph, giving me time to set myself up in the best position.
(I am of an age where I prefer to sit in the comfort of my car and move only when I feel it is worth it)
OPF
One Sat afternooon.
On selecting 121.5 I heard a Distress beacon , quite feint but audible.
I am ex RAF Radio Technician so felt I had to do something.
I ran the local plod and explained the situation, qualified my call by saying that I was maybe out of order but I felt it was important.
They agreed and said they would look into it.
A few minuites later I had a call from the main rescue centre in Scotland asking if they could listen to my Scanner over the phone to verify the situation.
They agreed it was genuine and said they would update me on the outcome.
Awhile later they called and said they had monitored the area and had located the Beacon as coming from Marshalls Airport. On further local investigation found it to be from a C-130 in a hangar,
someone had left the emergency transmitter switched to activate.
They thanked me very much and on my remarks about responding to something I had picked up while scanning said "no worries you carry on scanning with our blessing"!!!!!!!!
The reason I do have a scanner is to help me when at an Airport/Airfield
to identify in advance Aircraft which may be of interest to Photograph, giving me time to set myself up in the best position.
(I am of an age where I prefer to sit in the comfort of my car and move only when I feel it is worth it)
OPF
H D................
Have seen what you have said but do you not think it might be more sensible to repeal the law which is widely flouted and appears to serve little if any useful purpose? Were it vital the communications remained confidential I am sure some form of encrypted form of communication could be used.
I think the fact no individual has ever been prosecuted for listening to airband and the receiving equipment is widely on sale tends to indicate that "the authorities" have other rather important matters to attend to and are not in the least concerned about the practise.
Planemike
Have seen what you have said but do you not think it might be more sensible to repeal the law which is widely flouted and appears to serve little if any useful purpose? Were it vital the communications remained confidential I am sure some form of encrypted form of communication could be used.
I think the fact no individual has ever been prosecuted for listening to airband and the receiving equipment is widely on sale tends to indicate that "the authorities" have other rather important matters to attend to and are not in the least concerned about the practise.
Planemike
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Inside
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by by various
they should encrypt their radio transmissions
Originally Posted by by various
receiving equipment is widely on sale
use?
It seems that the attitude is; Because I find it interesting and because I can and because I can get away with it then it is ok.
And interesting pick and choose approach to the law.
Firstly....... I am not a user of airband equipment.
My point is, if it were important the contents of the transmissions remained confidential something would be done about it. Nothing is done about it, no prosecutions, equipment still legally on sale, why not bring the law into harmony with what is actually happening??
Both HD and OO explain that listening to airband is illegal, which indeed it is, but neither say what HARM is being done by the practice. As no harm is being done I guess the "authorities" are willing to leave things as there are.
Planemike
My point is, if it were important the contents of the transmissions remained confidential something would be done about it. Nothing is done about it, no prosecutions, equipment still legally on sale, why not bring the law into harmony with what is actually happening??
Both HD and OO explain that listening to airband is illegal, which indeed it is, but neither say what HARM is being done by the practice. As no harm is being done I guess the "authorities" are willing to leave things as there are.
Planemike
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In transit
Age: 70
Posts: 3,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Laws such as this have to remain in place to provide the authorities for a framework in order to be able to prosecute when someone has clearly misused information obtained. That is why there is a tolerance. Removing the law would be 'carte blanche'.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Oxfordshire
Age: 70
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Laws such as this have to remain in place to provide the authorities for a framework in order to be able to prosecute when someone has clearly misused information obtained. That is why there is a tolerance. Removing the law would be 'carte blanche'.
However it seems to be the norm that the authorities mostly turn a blind eye to this practice, as long as common sense is applied. My 'overhearing' a transmission between ATC and aircraft giving, for example, a clearance to a new height or heading, is pretty innocent and harms no-one. And of course I keep this to myself. I note that these types of routine transmissions are reproduced without hindrance, in such publications as "Flying the big jets" and several ATC guides.
However, hearing sensitive/confidential information and relaying this to all and sundry, well then I would expect to be hit with a big hammer and could have no defence. I think for these reasons (and to frustrate the criminal classes) the emergency services moved away from open FM transmissions to secure TETRA.
Regarding the comparison to the speed limit, it's the same. On a motorway 77mph is illegal, but you would not expect to be pulled over. However, 95mph is different, you are pushing it too far beyond the spirit of the law!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Heathrow Director is from the old school which is not a criticism pre se, but the world has really moved on. Taking photos of the lines of aircraft on delivery during the Second World War at Prestwick may have been seen as an act of spying, nowadays we view it as a priceless historical archive.
Context is everything. There is little harm that can be done by telling the press what you hear on ATC. If it's important enough to upset people and end up in the press, they'd get it from another chatty pilot IMHO. Such is life. To be honest, I'd be more concerned if they really did try and stop us listening because we'd then be convinced they had something to hide! We now know we have good reason to suspect "the authorities" as they've been caught BS'ing once too often. I mean for the love of God the Head of the CAA has no Aviation Experience and came from Worst Great Western Railways, something which I have painful experience of. Somehow leave it to the professionals isn't the defenece it once was....if ever!
Transparency is often a good thing gentlemen, calm yourselves to a frenzy please. If an ATCO vectors two aircraft into each other, the spotter informing the press is really the least of his worries.
Think of context. Next to no-one ever gets proesecuted for "tweaking" their CV a little. However in the wrong circumstances, the CPS shouts public interest and you'll get prosecuted. Think of Maxine Carr who lied on her CV in a way that many do. I ask again, how many spotters / enthusiasts have been prosecuted for listening to the airband since 1945?
Can someone outline the real world harm that this does and outline a top level case for sending someone to court? The courts are busy places I believe (!)
Context is everything. There is little harm that can be done by telling the press what you hear on ATC. If it's important enough to upset people and end up in the press, they'd get it from another chatty pilot IMHO. Such is life. To be honest, I'd be more concerned if they really did try and stop us listening because we'd then be convinced they had something to hide! We now know we have good reason to suspect "the authorities" as they've been caught BS'ing once too often. I mean for the love of God the Head of the CAA has no Aviation Experience and came from Worst Great Western Railways, something which I have painful experience of. Somehow leave it to the professionals isn't the defenece it once was....if ever!
Transparency is often a good thing gentlemen, calm yourselves to a frenzy please. If an ATCO vectors two aircraft into each other, the spotter informing the press is really the least of his worries.
Think of context. Next to no-one ever gets proesecuted for "tweaking" their CV a little. However in the wrong circumstances, the CPS shouts public interest and you'll get prosecuted. Think of Maxine Carr who lied on her CV in a way that many do. I ask again, how many spotters / enthusiasts have been prosecuted for listening to the airband since 1945?
Can someone outline the real world harm that this does and outline a top level case for sending someone to court? The courts are busy places I believe (!)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: london
Age: 59
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All seems a bit creepy to me, its bad enough adults spending all day scribbling aircraft reg numbers in a little book but wishing to listen in on private conversations is pushing it a bit , i wonder if they also tune their little boxes to the police /ambulance /fire frequencies as well, that must be very tempting for these characaters
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All seems a bit creepy to me, its bad enough adults spending all day scribbling aircraft reg numbers in a little book
What I also find pathetic is your clear intolerance of other people. I struggle to find any recent posts that you have made that adds anything worthwhile to a thread.
You mock, you name call, you belittle and you sneer with your little emoticons. And yet I don't see you as someone who has much to be superior about really. Indeed your ignorance that one cannot listen to Police band shows you know less a about radio comms than most of the other subjects you speak about with the threat of information or relevant facts!
Mods, WHY is he still on allowed on here given he adds NOTHING to any argument and goes out of his way riling good men and women who enjoy pprune?