That's how I always understood it. I also agree (and get niggled) with the incessant posting for information on 7700 squawks or posting mundane poor quality videos/photos which are of no particular significance or interest.

PF, you are of course entitled to your opinion, but keep it clean eh ;)

May I thank those who commented on my previous post; what I was trying to say was that regardless of the rights and wrongs of unauthorised listening to ATC communications, the fact is that no law is going to prevent it so long as the equipment to do it is available to all and sundry.

I did not intend to favour either side of the argument.

What can be discouraged, probably by a successful high profile prosecution and swingeing sentence, is rebroadcasting communications that have been obtained illegally, either using a recorded audio file or the written word. But only if the miscreant can be traced.

Now, where do you stand on the proposed Data Communications Bill, aka "Snoopers' Charter"? Because that would be used in such a case to identify and prosecute a boy who, say, uploads a Mayday exchange to YouTube, regardless of protestations that the Bill is "only to monitor terrorist activities".

Sorry about the thread creep! But it is connected.

It also depends on the prosecuting authorities. For many years, I always assumed Policemen sold stories to newspapers and suddenly after a major case, it gets taken seriously and people go to jail. People are fickle....

It may well have been badly written HD but I think the pathetically low number of people who responded to it reflects the abject apathy people have towards the subject matter.

There are devices that are actively sold with the pure intention of listening to "live ATC". Don't see any of the suppliers of this type of equipment being dragged away in the dead of the night and flown to Guantanamo Bay.

Spotters have a bad rep with people and it doesn't take much to bring people out of their caves to give them a good kicking. IMHO, I think there are a number of posters on this thread who need to wind their necks in and park their egos in the drawer but hey, that's just what I think.

Let the debate continue.

Bloody Hell Mig

Does an A380 fit into Guantanamo Bay? Wer'll start by rounding up everyone in Mrytle Avenue (that should please the locals), then we'll hit the AVP at Manchester. We'll send separate hit squads to LGW, BHX and STN and we'll finish up with the dribblers at LTN.

Problem solved.........NOT!

For the past three or so years I have regularly been listening to some liveatc.net stream instead of a radio program at the office just because it's a soundscape directly linked to something I like. And as these transmissions are (luckily) anonymous, I fail to see the privacy issue here (but ready to stand corrected). Completely agree that the "hunt" for emergencies and/or emergency transmissions is rather disgusting, though.

So while I cannot forward any compelling argument why "public access" to ATC communications is a necessity, I fail to see any potential harm, certainly as long as it is about pure listening (by whoever).

Hmm, interesting. Remember way back in the 50s through to the late 60s a great deal of ATC was mainly procedural and involved regular position reports. In my early ATC days I worked at an procedural air traffic control centre. Would that not translate as a navigation broadcast - hence why spotters with scanners were left alone? Although position reports are now in the main history, one can still argue that ATC/pilot transmissions are generally just navigation related broadcasts.

General reception?

You mean that some miserable sod, underfed, underpaid, overworked, been up since stupid o'clock, calling "roger, turning 270 degrees" is more interesting than some blonde bimbo dressed in a skimpy outfit calling "baby hit me one more time"?

Move over pilots, life doesn't end at 60, there's a career for you yet ... in broadcasting. :)

Can you imagine, so called, reporters from the Sun, Daily Mail and Mirror being given a free rein to publish what they thought they heard?

Has anyone ever been prosecuted under this archaic ("UK") law?

(BTW, the Live ATC app works just fine on an iPhone before and shortly after take-off. Prey tell me I'm not breaking the law with an app?!)

Seems to me there are some in these forums who need to get over themselves.

Sky gods, dont you just love them........

You may very well be by having a telephone switched on during flight.


Either something is illegal or it is not. This activity is illegal. I would have thought that any sensible person who knowingly engages in illegal activities would keep a low profile and not announce it to the world.

Its not illegal (or I hope that as a law abiding citizen that its not illegal) to listen to liveatc.net on the net. There is a note explaining why there are no UK airports on the site. It does make you wonder why so few countries make it illegal. That said most countries have a few laws which are unique to themselves. I suppose that one of these days ATC transmissions will go digital and the discussion will become academic.

As a matter of interest is United Channel 9 available on international flights to/from the UK?

Channel 9 is at the discretion of the Captain. Whether United Captains are aware of UK law is another matter :)

You mean like ripping my old CDs to iTunes? Surely you could see the difference and why it was widely derided as a daft law?
Um, well for some of us yes :) When I was studying I knew the sun was about to rise by the large influx of Lufthansa heavies working Scottish high level. I never claimed to be mainstream (thank God)!

I have 20+ years behind me as a (now former) Air Traffic Controller. I always assumed that everything I said on an unsecured radio would be heard by aircrew and spotters/enthusiasts alike. It never bothered me as I tried to make every transmission as professional as possible (I didn't always manage it!).

I have had good and interesting interaction with enthusiasts and on many occasions, joined them outside the airfields I have worked at - I am also an aviation enthusiast.

Now working in an open plan public office environment, everything I do and say can, and is, overheard by the public. This doesn't bother me either.

To echo and paraphrase comments from earlier, maybe some sensitive souls could do with getting over themselves a little. Good luck with it!

I'm sure one reason listening in to ATC transmissions in the UK is so popular is because our ATC professionals are amoung the most professional in the world. Something to be proud of I'd say.

So it's not legal to listen to ATC transmissions in the UK.:=

By the same logic, is it also illegal to tune into the aircraft transponders and use the data for things like Kinetic's SBS / virtual radar?

Are the likes of Flight Radar 24 also breaking UK law?

The enthusiasts supplying Flight Radar with SBS feeds from the UK are!