I doubt few would condone the rebroadcast (Youtube or whatever) of ATC recordings or even posting of transcripts. Similarly the mischevious use of transcievers.

On those points only, I'll agree with the finger-waggers. As for simply listening - NBD.

This video has had well over 2 million views and it shows just what you're getting at. It's fascinating and I personally find it extremely informative as to the communication between pilots and ATC in an emergency.

AndoniP, that is precisely the sort of thing i`m on about. I`ll agree that in this case it it informative and the crew and ATC did a very professional job. But why should there bad day at work be posted? What if they were suspended for a time while an investigation was performed, Standard procedure in my company for a serious incident, To then have it be posted and have there every word commented on by people with no knowledge as to what happened. Did ATC want everything they did or say open to comment?. That is why i think it should remain private as the law states. The problem is that while listening to a scanner for your own interest is one thing it now grows into listening and filming, then filming and posting whats next? you tube vids of mode S positions over london with ATC added, film of the entire flight with t/o landing and enroute compiled from various sources?.

Yup - I though HD was a bit stuffy about all this but as usual things like this prove his point perfectly.

None of us in our day jobs would relish the thought of being listened in on. I expect most pilots don't mind and would be quite proud of their profession and the fact they are so revered as for people to want to listen in, but start putting it on you-tube is just bang wrong.

You need rules because unfortunately the world is full of morons. People who go too far ruin it for the harmless people who are just listening in.

My property's boundaries, as far as I am concerned, extend infinitely upwards. If anything 'violates' that space I have THE RIGHT to know who, what, where, and when it's up to....Why should there be a 'snob' value to ATC?

What an idiot!

You mean you think you own the square footage of airspace above your property ad infinitum?

Interesting concept, particularly for land/property owners with thousands of square acres in the larger continents... :rolleyes:

Bit of an overreaction there mate. It was just a birdstrike. Take the video for what it is, good flying and good communication between ATC and pilot/s. OK so matey has a camcorder and has a radio. He's obviously a spotter but if anything serious was to be caught on camera I would be prepared to bet an awful lot that it wouldn't appear on youtube first, it would go to the AAIB, and they would very much appreciate the video as well. Spotters are a bit more responsible than you'd think. I can't find any RT on youtube or anywhere else which contains anything that should be kept from the public... A lot of people make much more out of this than really need be.

And a lot of people will come up with any old argument to try and justify carrying out an illegal act!

Yet if you go into the ATC section of this website there's 15 pages of transcribed ATC/aircraft messages. (the idenitifers are crossed out) but someone is still posting someone elses messages (Pilots and controllers)

Is this do as I say, not do as I do !!!

Matt


It's called ATC Humour

Navigating carefully back into the controlled airspace of the thread topic, I think the GRE PSR 295 scanner deserves an honourable mention.

Just considering Groundloop's post of 27th May re having his airband radio certified at Glasgow airport, I well remember back in the 1960's having to take my massive Shorrocks portable radio ( half the size of a picnic hamper ) into the tower at Manchester Ringway to have it tested for non-interference on airband, and duly being given a certificate to that effect. The reason at that time for insisting on testing airband Rx's that were being used on the piers at the airport was that some cheapo kits came on the market for what I think were called "super-regenerative" type sets, and they just put out "birdies" everywhere on the VHF airband. That apart though, once you had your certificate, there was no problem with using your receiver openly within the confines of Ringway. Sadly I no longer have the Shorrocks, made in Blackburn if I recall correctly.

Incidentally in days of yore many domestic portable radios did have airband as a frequency band on the analogue dial, indeed I still have for daily use a 1970's/80's "Deccasound" domestic portable which has a dedicated airband, and is true AM, not FM. it stays tuned to my local repater for "London Information", and never needs retuning. Brilliant but arguably obsolete piece of kit!

Overall I dont think we are as well-off for airband Rx's now as we were say 25 years ago.

EGCA

Quote:
My property's boundaries, as far as I am concerned, extend infinitely upwards
You mean you think you own the square footage of airspace above your property ad infinitum?

Interesting concept, particularly for land/property owners with thousands of square acres in the larger continents... :rolleyes:

This is true. however air traffic is exempt. I work as a tree surgeon and have known people to be threatened with court action for working on tree overhanging peoples property because they are trespassing in their 'airspace'. I thought yeah right sounds like bull/s ..........but it is true.

Or are you saying there is a limit to the height that you own above your property say 30ft, 300ft or maybe 3000ft what would it be?

I'm sure you'll all be thrilled to hear that I bought a bearcat 3500 in end :8

Looking forward to using it. Hopefully my rt will improve as a result :ok: