Use of 121.5mhz (Merged)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kent
Age: 61
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diddley Dee 
I probably should put my hard hat on first but.....
I've followed this thread and finally feel the need to "sound off" myself.
As far as I am concerned I:
And in a pre-emptive response to some of the things that will be thrown:
As said by many others: "If you don't like it then campaign to get the UK difference withdrawn".
I fly in the UK and will obey the laws that govern me flying there. I will also, at appropriate times, use ALL the LEGAL safety aids provided.
Until the "professionals" can manage to select the correct box the bit about "removing the plank from ones own eye before bothering with the speck in your brothers" springs to mind.
OK - now I really have put my hard hat on.
OC619
I probably should put my hard hat on first but.....
I've followed this thread and finally feel the need to "sound off" myself.
As far as I am concerned I:
- Fly 99% with in the area covered by 121.5 tri-angulation
- Believe it is totally legal (even encouraged) to use it for "Practice Pans", "Training Fixes" and when I am "Unsure of my position"
- WILL use it if I am unsure of my position and am close to controlled airspace or (especially) Cumulo Granitus (thoughnever have and hope never to have to)
- Totally agree that a student who has used it during their training is more likely to use it EARLY when they get into doubt - as opposed to getting into real trouble. For me that says: "Continue getting students to practice".
And in a pre-emptive response to some of the things that will be thrown:
- I cannot use a Radar service in many of the aircraft I fly as they don't have a transponder (before anyone starts they don't have a starter motor or generator either).
- I cannot use another frequency as auto-triangulation will not be available.
- I would not be in favour of a "separate" frequency - now the low hours PPL, unsure of their position, scared, .... needs to decide "Is this an emergency". Far better they get straight onto somone who can deal with the full range of eventualities.
As said by many others: "If you don't like it then campaign to get the UK difference withdrawn".
I fly in the UK and will obey the laws that govern me flying there. I will also, at appropriate times, use ALL the LEGAL safety aids provided.
Until the "professionals" can manage to select the correct box the bit about "removing the plank from ones own eye before bothering with the speck in your brothers" springs to mind.
OK - now I really have put my hard hat on.
OC619
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3. A frequency we can get all the practice we want on? Oh that will be the Mil PETF will it? The calls we get from GA are totally different to those from Mil ac. Handling Mil emergencies does not keep you up to speed on dealing with some guy who is lost, has no transponder & you cant see him on radar. Or maybe you are suggesting that GA ac fit UHF to their ac & use PETF?
5. Yes ( yawn ) we do liase with SCATCC
6. Check with B747 before Tx on 121.5. So, let me get this right.... you are now suggesting that we perhaps go out on 121.5 first & say "excuse me does anyone object if we do a PP for a couple of minutes on 121.5..."
In which order do you forsee them replying, alphabetically perhaps?
In which order do you forsee them replying, alphabetically perhaps?
If there were so many objections that a list was required then it would be sensible not to proceed.
Should another aircraft tell a practice pan to stop transmitting are you going to counter that by telling the practice pan to proceed?
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd just like to say that I once had occasion to use 121.5. First solo, lost and scared and painfully aware that my last known position was quite close to a major regional airport.
I was (a) very glad of the immediate and efficient assistance of D&D
(b) very glad that I had been able to carry out a "real" practice pan in training, so I knew what to do and what to expect.
I was (a) very glad of the immediate and efficient assistance of D&D
(b) very glad that I had been able to carry out a "real" practice pan in training, so I knew what to do and what to expect.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Having read through 10 pages of this stuff, I am amazed at some of the 'tosh' being presented. Look at the facts:
The UK has filed a difference with ICAO regarding the use of 121.5. This was not done as a whim.
Nobody ever had a problem until the world started to get twitchy about being shot down. All of a sudden the airliners start monitoring 121.5.
The airline pilots' associations, quite within their rights, made representations to the Regulator (the CAA) about excessive, practice, transmissions from GA pilots on 121.5. The Regulator initiated a fact finding exercise.
Results, collated by D&D demonstrated that by far the most significant amount of use of 121.5 was by airliners who had either checked in on the wrong freq, chose to chat to each other or kept shouting "On Guard".
Now let us speculate:
The risk of being shot down because someone is not monitoring 121.5 is minimal.
If you are on a busy, or even medium intensity, ATC freq then there is no need to monitor Guard. Turn it down. IMHO that you only need to listen-out if things are spookily quiet.
Most professionals in aviation can adeptly manage two or more radio freqs at once. That is why each radio has a volume control.
The CAA will continue to monitor and, if necessary, change UK policy. After all, considering their risk averse nature, they would not want to be party to a flight safety incident.
As long as there are idiots who chose to use Guard for reasons other than those promulgated in National AIPs (including those of other countries), there is no case against sanctioned procedures.
An exchange heard on 121.5 yesterday:
London Centre is broadcasting details of a TDA around a specific incident.
German pilot "You are on Guard"
Other pilot "She is broadcasting an an emergency message, you silly man!"
The UK has filed a difference with ICAO regarding the use of 121.5. This was not done as a whim.
Nobody ever had a problem until the world started to get twitchy about being shot down. All of a sudden the airliners start monitoring 121.5.
The airline pilots' associations, quite within their rights, made representations to the Regulator (the CAA) about excessive, practice, transmissions from GA pilots on 121.5. The Regulator initiated a fact finding exercise.
Results, collated by D&D demonstrated that by far the most significant amount of use of 121.5 was by airliners who had either checked in on the wrong freq, chose to chat to each other or kept shouting "On Guard".
Now let us speculate:
The risk of being shot down because someone is not monitoring 121.5 is minimal.
If you are on a busy, or even medium intensity, ATC freq then there is no need to monitor Guard. Turn it down. IMHO that you only need to listen-out if things are spookily quiet.
Most professionals in aviation can adeptly manage two or more radio freqs at once. That is why each radio has a volume control.
The CAA will continue to monitor and, if necessary, change UK policy. After all, considering their risk averse nature, they would not want to be party to a flight safety incident.
As long as there are idiots who chose to use Guard for reasons other than those promulgated in National AIPs (including those of other countries), there is no case against sanctioned procedures.
An exchange heard on 121.5 yesterday:
London Centre is broadcasting details of a TDA around a specific incident.
German pilot "You are on Guard"
Other pilot "She is broadcasting an an emergency message, you silly man!"
Last edited by London Mil; 6th Jun 2006 at 16:01.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The DGAC (French CAA ) issued a NOTAM last year requiring A/C that were able to listen on 121.5. This is to stop the number of intercepts that have occured when A/C cross FIR boundaries without radio contact. If commanders do enter French airspace without radio contact and they are intercepted the French have reserved the right to charge the commander with the costs of the interception. This is one of the reasons that CAT now are complaining.
I sugest the following solution.
PF listens to ATC and 121.5 and PNF only ATC or visa versa.
I sugest the following solution.
PF listens to ATC and 121.5 and PNF only ATC or visa versa.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 425 Likes
on
224 Posts
Originally Posted by ray cosmic
But that goes a bit against procedures of monitoring and confirming clearances with the other crewmember..
I still don't understand why these complainers can't simply listen to 121.5 at a lower volume than the main ATC volume, or turn it down / up again as required!!
IF all practice emergencies and training fixes were stopped and the frequency became totally quiet, how would these pilots (possibly a little paranoid about being intercepted?) be sure that 121.5 was actually "live"? Surely this would result in crews having to do "radio checks" every few minutes?
Actually, the requests on the freq. for toilet emptying and re-rationing, made on the frequency by careless professional operators would negate the requirement, because the major cause of "extraneous r/t chatter" would still be there.....
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: LHR/Surrey
Age: 39
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today I was flying my PPL profile, and on the climbout from Cranfield the tower asked us if we could call D&D, they wanted someone to help with training.
We gave them a call on 121.5 and they asked us to call back in 2 minutes for a training fix, and advised us that it would be a trainee D&D controller(?) working the call.
We call them and within 2 seconds they identified exactly where we were "just east of Northampton".. We thanked him and changed back.
None of my instructors have shown me a training fix before and I had no idea either how fast or accurate it was. Absolutely invaluable lesson was learned.
I don't understand why people here seem so against the idea of using training on this frequency when clearly they are so desperate for people to call and help train them that they are phoning up airfields and asking them for help from departing aircraft.
999 operators don't need practice calls because they get so many real ones to learn from, all the time!
We gave them a call on 121.5 and they asked us to call back in 2 minutes for a training fix, and advised us that it would be a trainee D&D controller(?) working the call.
We call them and within 2 seconds they identified exactly where we were "just east of Northampton".. We thanked him and changed back.
None of my instructors have shown me a training fix before and I had no idea either how fast or accurate it was. Absolutely invaluable lesson was learned.
I don't understand why people here seem so against the idea of using training on this frequency when clearly they are so desperate for people to call and help train them that they are phoning up airfields and asking them for help from departing aircraft.
999 operators don't need practice calls because they get so many real ones to learn from, all the time!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: London
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Aerial Jock
I'd just like to say that I once had occasion to use 121.5. First solo, lost and scared and painfully aware that my last known position was quite close to a major regional airport.
Lost in the circuit?
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by timelapse
None of my instructors have shown me a training fix before and I had no idea either how fast or accurate it was. Absolutely invaluable lesson was learned.
I must wonder if the service was withdrawn, would instructors put more care into teaching and assessing navigation during training since there would not be the simple....."if you get lost, call on 121.50 for a training fix" message to the solo student who probably is not as good at navigation as they should be before being sent solo.
Is 121.50 in the UK being used as a navigation aid? (don't have a VOR or ADF or DME - call 121.50 for a training fix).
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: LHR/Surrey
Age: 39
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think experiencing it first hand is an important factor, you can be briefed all you like but demonstration is a much better learning aid.
I was told if ever getting lost to do VOR/DME, ADF, Call current frequency if radar.. I wasn't even told about 121.5 until yesterday. I've read about it but never thought it would really be any good if you were lost apart from telling them that you were.
Tony
I was told if ever getting lost to do VOR/DME, ADF, Call current frequency if radar.. I wasn't even told about 121.5 until yesterday. I've read about it but never thought it would really be any good if you were lost apart from telling them that you were.
Tony
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Swanwick
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DFC
If your instructor had provided you with a full and correct briefing on what services are available and the limitations, would you have still required to actually make a call?
I must wonder if the service was withdrawn, would instructors put more care into teaching and assessing navigation during training since there would not be the simple....."if you get lost, call on 121.50 for a training fix" message to the solo student who probably is not as good at navigation as they should be before being sent solo.
Is 121.50 in the UK being used as a navigation aid? (don't have a VOR or ADF or DME - call 121.50 for a training fix).
Regards,
DFC
I must wonder if the service was withdrawn, would instructors put more care into teaching and assessing navigation during training since there would not be the simple....."if you get lost, call on 121.50 for a training fix" message to the solo student who probably is not as good at navigation as they should be before being sent solo.
Is 121.50 in the UK being used as a navigation aid? (don't have a VOR or ADF or DME - call 121.50 for a training fix).
Regards,
DFC
DFC
Timelapse kindly made the call because we asked him to in order provide training for one of the D&D assistants.
Where is your evidence for 121.5 being used as safety blanket by instructors in sending out student pilots who arent capable of navigating correctly? Or is that another of your factually incorrect statements that you throw around with such regularity?
And no 121.5 is not being used in the UK as a Nav aid, to suggest so is ridiculous.
As an aside in the couple of minutes I have been typing this there have been 4 inappropriate transmissions on 121.5 (yes I am at work), one guy has even just called for start on 121.5
I kid you not.Regards
Diddley Dee
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: LHR/Surrey
Age: 39
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How often do you ask aerodromes to get people to talk to you to do practices?
Maybe you should punish people who call for start etc on the frequency by making them help you do training once they're airborne
Maybe you should punish people who call for start etc on the frequency by making them help you do training once they're airborne
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Swanwick
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TL
Its not something we do very often at all. I rang Cranfield because we could seee on radar there were a few of you about. The only reason we did on this particular occasion was because we would have apprecaited a call there & then for the benefit of one of our trainee assistants. They have to be compotent at being able to handle a freq & know what they are doing up to a point so that if the controller (during the quiet hours when there is only one controller on), nips to the loo they are able to handle the call for the v short period he is out the ops room.
Regards
DD
Its not something we do very often at all. I rang Cranfield because we could seee on radar there were a few of you about. The only reason we did on this particular occasion was because we would have apprecaited a call there & then for the benefit of one of our trainee assistants. They have to be compotent at being able to handle a freq & know what they are doing up to a point so that if the controller (during the quiet hours when there is only one controller on), nips to the loo they are able to handle the call for the v short period he is out the ops room.
Regards
DD
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: LHR/Surrey
Age: 39
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh so we actually spoke to you? Awesome.
Makes sense with the assistant training, must be a lot that you need to learn and not much opportunity to practice most of it doing that job.
Makes sense with the assistant training, must be a lot that you need to learn and not much opportunity to practice most of it doing that job.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Diddley Dee
And no 121.5 is not being used in the UK as a Nav aid, to suggest so is ridiculous.
A pilot who is a bit unsure of their location or who simply wants to confirm it can;
1. Use visual navigation techniques and map reading to resolve position.
2. Use a VOR and co-located DME to obtain a position
3. Use two or more VORs to obtain a fix
4. Use an NDB and DME to obtain a fix
5. Use 2 or more NDBs to plot a fix
6. Obtain a QDM from two or more ATS units and plot position
7. Forget that palavah and call up 121.5 for a training fix.
I have absolutely no doubt that the navigation training in the UK suffers because of the mentality that 121.5 is there to sort it out. The evidence is the high number of airspace infringements compared to other places and the fact that 121.5 detailed fixing on your lovely OS street maps displays is deemed nesessary in the vicinity of the London TMA.....because of the danger of infringements!
How on earth does the Paris TMA ever survive without the same system?
Regards,
DFC
PS glad to see you have toned down your last response!
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Swanwick
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DFC
I didnt tame down my last response, must have been the moderators & thats fair enough.
I can only speak from my own expierience as regards 121.5 being used improperly instead of correct navigational procedures.
Once in a while yes we will get someone calling for a training fix that we believe is not owning up to being lost. If that is the case we ask if they are lost and they usually spill the beans and we proceed with them accordingly. The huge majority of the training fixes we get are genuine training fixes.... How do I know, you can just tell.... by the way they comment on the accuracy (or not), by the way they say they are switching back to XXXX radar on 111.11 mhz or by the way the instructor comes on the freq to say TVM.... You can tell.
As for navigation training suffering, well again I can only speak from my own personal expierience. I have just completed my PPL and at no stage did any of my instructors steer me to using 121.5 as an aid to my poor nav. Instead with me, like every other student there, I went through class room sessions on Nav before airborne instruction and only when demonstrated a satisfactory level of navigation was I let loose. There was certainly no ethos of If you get a bit lost call 121.5. It was definately keep you logging up to date, fly accurately, turn back early if the wx looks like worsening etc etc.
Yes in the SE of England particularly there is a risk of airspace infringment, and the system is there to help prevent that when people make mistakes... like tx on 121.5 when they didnt mean to, or perhaps a Eirjet (Ryanair) landing at the wrong airport. We are all human & therefore will all make mistakes at some or other.
If I have been rude I apologise, however I really do not understand your attitude at all. You have a go at those using a facility that whether you like it or not, under the present setup is there to be used for training as well as for real. As I have stated on several occasions, yep I agree another freq would be better all round.... but there isnt one. So why you feel the need to continue berating anyone who uses 121.5 for training fixes or pracice pan calls ( or those on the other end of the call!) is beyond me.
Now your latest tack that TFs are just a means of getting away with poor nav by the student PPLs in the UK ...... That just sounds like a slur on students and instructors alike and has no basis whatsoever in fact! Feel free to offer me some evidence to the contrary.... It is these wild so called statement of "fact" that you post that I find so difficult to accept.
Regards
Diddley Dee
PS could you also state your figures for the "high number of airspace infringements" compared with other countries with simlair airspace congestion.
I didnt tame down my last response, must have been the moderators & thats fair enough.
I can only speak from my own expierience as regards 121.5 being used improperly instead of correct navigational procedures.
Once in a while yes we will get someone calling for a training fix that we believe is not owning up to being lost. If that is the case we ask if they are lost and they usually spill the beans and we proceed with them accordingly. The huge majority of the training fixes we get are genuine training fixes.... How do I know, you can just tell.... by the way they comment on the accuracy (or not), by the way they say they are switching back to XXXX radar on 111.11 mhz or by the way the instructor comes on the freq to say TVM.... You can tell.
As for navigation training suffering, well again I can only speak from my own personal expierience. I have just completed my PPL and at no stage did any of my instructors steer me to using 121.5 as an aid to my poor nav. Instead with me, like every other student there, I went through class room sessions on Nav before airborne instruction and only when demonstrated a satisfactory level of navigation was I let loose. There was certainly no ethos of If you get a bit lost call 121.5. It was definately keep you logging up to date, fly accurately, turn back early if the wx looks like worsening etc etc.
Yes in the SE of England particularly there is a risk of airspace infringment, and the system is there to help prevent that when people make mistakes... like tx on 121.5 when they didnt mean to, or perhaps a Eirjet (Ryanair) landing at the wrong airport. We are all human & therefore will all make mistakes at some or other.
If I have been rude I apologise, however I really do not understand your attitude at all. You have a go at those using a facility that whether you like it or not, under the present setup is there to be used for training as well as for real. As I have stated on several occasions, yep I agree another freq would be better all round.... but there isnt one. So why you feel the need to continue berating anyone who uses 121.5 for training fixes or pracice pan calls ( or those on the other end of the call!) is beyond me.
Now your latest tack that TFs are just a means of getting away with poor nav by the student PPLs in the UK ...... That just sounds like a slur on students and instructors alike and has no basis whatsoever in fact! Feel free to offer me some evidence to the contrary.... It is these wild so called statement of "fact" that you post that I find so difficult to accept.
Regards
Diddley Dee
PS could you also state your figures for the "high number of airspace infringements" compared with other countries with simlair airspace congestion.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DFC - If life was a simple as you suggest.
The JAR PPL syllabus does cover all your suggestions. The NPPL is somewhat more limiting in its scope. Either way - unless the industry can withstand a further burden on its training costs, as depicted by CAA/JAR legislation - why the hell should an instructor ensure his/her students are all trained to your professionalism?
It simply ain't gonna happen. Accept that this ideal world of yours is also occupied by lesser mortals than yourself who when the SH one T hits the fan - all your ideals get chucked out the window.
Remember this is a recreational sport as much as a profession for some.
Can't we just live with each other for once? You have the ultimate skill and cool head to turn the volume down when it gets on ya wick - a low houred PPL is not as good as you.
The JAR PPL syllabus does cover all your suggestions. The NPPL is somewhat more limiting in its scope. Either way - unless the industry can withstand a further burden on its training costs, as depicted by CAA/JAR legislation - why the hell should an instructor ensure his/her students are all trained to your professionalism?
It simply ain't gonna happen. Accept that this ideal world of yours is also occupied by lesser mortals than yourself who when the SH one T hits the fan - all your ideals get chucked out the window.
Remember this is a recreational sport as much as a profession for some.
Can't we just live with each other for once? You have the ultimate skill and cool head to turn the volume down when it gets on ya wick - a low houred PPL is not as good as you.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: LHR/Surrey
Age: 39
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Diddley Dee
No you spoke to the trainee assistant, I was the controller on duty at the time.............. watching what he was up to