More heading shaking from me..... I dont profess to know what goes on in your cockpit so refrain from telling you what to do.... hint!

The other 1000s of controllers you refer to dont work in London Centre. I believe the set up in the UK is unique, no other country has as far as I am aware a unit dedicated to monitoring 121.5 & 243.0 .Thats primarily the only controlling we do whilst in D&D. The other controllers you refer to are controllers routinely handling traffic day in day out thus keeping their hand in. Controlling is a profession that like flying is reliant on maintaining currency, we soon go rusty & get behind drag curves if skills are not practised.

We would benefit enormously from having PP calls that are as challenging as the real stuff we deal with but we dont try to elict those sort of calls on 121.5 as it is understood by all D&D staff that there is a repercussion to the CAT flyers and they would invariably lead to longer calls.

Yes we do practice PP calls when ac are outside radar coverage (they often are in reality due to low altitude for wx) Invariably to the tune of CAT moaning about it.

No we dont have the oppurtunity to practice with airliners as we recognise the difficulties that would cause for you therefore we dont ask.

Yes we do understand the principles of radio waves & that you can hear PP calls hundreds of miles away as we hear CAT ac every few minutes during the day on 121.5. Incidentally one of the CAT guys made an excellent job a week or so ago of stuck tx on 121.5 for about 20 mins making it impossible for anyone to tx on 121.5 from the midlands south.

I dont mean to point my finger at CAT but its attitudes like those displayed by DFC that pi$$ me right off. Telling me as an ATCO what my unit should be doing & berating anyone who dares to make use of 121.5 for practice just isnt on. WE ALL KNOW THAT ANOTHER FREQ IS NEEDED! Why wear out your heartbeats moaning at those who are legitimately operating within the system as is ???? Do something about the present system or stop moaning AT us. All that you are doing from my own personal perspectrive is making your profession (one I currently hold in high esteem) look not quite so professional.
Diddley Dee

Yeah but no but yeah but.

As has just been stated - Us commercial pilots have to 'manage' the flight. My management head says "Busy airspace, over land, constant R/t on primary frequency - more chance of danger by screwing up a clearance, autopilot changes required due level/heading changes due busy airspace - THEREFORE - Turn off box two with 121.500 and leave it to D&D to monitor or any other less busy crew member flying and use box two ONLY when absolutely necessary"

Isn't this Risk Management?

Just thought I'd mention that doing a practice pan is encouraged at my flying school. There's a notice on the noticeboard. South East UK...

Oh nooooooooooo!
 

Looks like this thread is heading straight back to where it started.....deep breath....but I would like to advise that if the notice was not written by ATC/CAA, it is not official. Suggest 121.5 is the way to go on a Mayday call, after transmitting on one's current in-use freq. But practice Pans? Well, read all the preceding stuff, mine included, and decide for yourself.

You only have to read the official view as posted by Diddley Dee. He works at D & D and has made his views very clear. I really do not understand why confusion and doubt is once again sowed. Sorry to say this once again, but can't you read?

Quote: (From CAP 413)
1.8 Training Fix
Pilots who do not wish to carry out a practice emergency but only wish to confirm their position may request a ‘Training Fix’ on 121.5 MHz. This ‘Training Fix’ is secondary in importance to actual emergency calls but takes precedence over practice emergency calls in the event of simultaneous incidents. Unquote.

To everyone quoting D&D missives, CAP documents and other sources:

Practically no one said that practise PAN's are illegal in the UK.
We are however discussing the potential implications of this practice in today's busy post ATC environment.


So please stop quoting D&D and CAP-rules. It's irrelevant in this.

PENKO

The potential implications seem to be that it saves lives, but dont listen to me, look a't Wide Body's post, he's qualified to talk about both perspectives, I'm not.

I would be the first to agree that a discrete frequency for GA use would be ideal, but it seems unlikely to happen.

So perhaps just bear a thought for us GA boys, down in the long grass, with a potential glide time that may be measured seconds following an SEP engine failure, when a CAT jock inadvertently transmits on 121.5, stopping us having access for up to a minute or two.

It's our problem, as well as yours.

Edited to say that I understand your problem too, not being aggressive!

Penko - You are quite right that rules depicting what we do doesn't always make it right either. However, we have an issue here that clearly upsets some busy pilots feeling the need to monitor 121.500 and quote that during a busy ATC environment find it difficult. If ATC is that busy it must imply that you are less likely to suffer a loss of comms etc. And when you do, you will be very quick to realise as a busy ATC environment normal means lots of frequency changes along a route - you will suss something is up.

So in my view the only need to listen to 121.500 is for distress of other aircraft in the area. Well if you are that busy, concentrate on your own task and worry about others when you have time - big deal? It is frowned upon within the operation that I fly to listen to two frequencies at once. You either have box one or box two - not both. This is because it is recognised that assessment of risk suggests that if we do not concentrate on the task in hand - a busy ATC environment - a potentially more disastrous incident will happen over any incident we may be able to "capture" by listening to 121.500.
So a practice pan is annoying and distracting. Is it the case that as London give you a very demanding clearance that requires immediate action you will ignore this cos some poor sod has called a mayday? Surely you will get your house in order first by prioritising on your safety before others...Or are you just going to be a saint and ignore London to be the Helping Hand as you crash into the other airliner......hmmm. Dramatic I know but some people are being rather dramatic about a rather easily minimised facet of todays ATC environement which is not wholly the cause of the puddle jumpers.

We can all help the issue as it clearly is apparent that many incidents are avoided by puddle jumpers being more forthright with the use of 121.500. There are most definately two sides to this little gem.

Not irrelevant at all!
However, it's mainly a CRM and procedural issue. If you can't cope, change your SOPs. Or use the volume control - that's what it's there for.

Don't know whether they're already in use somewhere, but it would seem to me that a VHF frequency close to 121.5 could be allocated for practice emergencies eg 121.475 or 121.525. It would require international agreement of course, as the frequency could potentially be used anywhere within UK airspace, but it would seem sensible to put an upper limit on its use eg FL100 in order to avoid interference with other users in neighbouring FIR's.

Er, yes.

I am a 34 hour UK PPL who is now very happy to talk to anyone on the radio - very different to when I was at 10 hours who was asked to contact 121.5 for a practice pan. After just talking to AFIS and A/G, actually talking to a "real" controller was quite a scary thought :rolleyes:

A couple of practice Pans later, I was at ease and would use the frequency if I was in any sort of trouble. Without the practice pan calls, I can quite imagine trying to talk myself out of calling them.

RK

Geometry...
 

Well we live and learn!

It is funny to see a triangulation thread going in circles.

I have said my piece before but maybe I'm square!

Maybe we should all toe the line, if you get my angle...

And please - no more going off at a tangent!

FC.

When I was instructing full-time 6 years ago, I was told by one of the D+D controllers that they wanted practice pans for training some of their junior controllers.
Recently monitoring 121.5 on box 2 in MAN area. listened to GA aircraft genuinely lost. Poor guy couldn't see his airfield despite being vectored virtually overhead and sounded v unsure of himself. I wonder how he felt to hear the occasional voice say "You're on Guard" (US accents mainly). It was annoying to hear so-called professional pilots not actually listen to the transmissions and keep their gobs shut. It's filed as a difference by the UK and published as such. If operating to HAJ or DUS (and probably plenty of other German airfields) the plates say there is uncontrolled VFR traffic up to FL100. That's not ideal either but you read the relevant notes and take heed.
Regards

Diddley Dee,

You can shake your head all you want. Let me simply say that even if you did cycle between radar and D+D in the MASOR, you would be simply shaking your head at a max of 3 tracks. :p

There is a frequency where you can get all the practice you want - using RAF aircraft and not affecting either the civil or military distress frequencies.

There is also some very expensive sims available to you but under used I think.

What everyone who says this is necessary and one can turn off 121.50 if it is busy fails to see is that nearby ATC units can not turn off 121.50 and while the pilot can turn it off to avoid the distraction, the ATC unit can not and a distracted controller is just as bad as a distracted pilot during a busy period.

There is also the issue that pilots operating in quiet areas of the Brest FIR heading out over the pond should not have to turn off 121.50 because the frequency is being abused hundreds of miles away.

The D+D controller allows the practice pan to continue based on there being no emergencies in progress with them. Do they ask Scottish or all the other adjacent units first? - They should.

They should check with everyone likely to be affected and that would include the B747 miles away who has just started to pick up a real signal.

-------

MrBitsy,

Why not travel a bit and talk to various ATC units enroute for a service. The experience you gain would be more benificial than drilling holes in the sky within 10nm of base chatting "with real controllers" on 121.50.

I never train students to call 121.50 unless in a real emergency and no help available on the current frequency. That works for the 99.9% of pilots so why not the 0.1% that think practice pans are necessary.

If practice pans are such a good thing, and so necessary and every British PPL needs to do one can anyone explain why they can not be done in the Channel Islands?

Not available over the majority of the FIR and not permitted in other parts of airspace. Sounds like a "necessary only in certain areas" type of necessary to me! :rolleyes:

Regards,

DFC

A little bit difficult with the instructor sitting next to me, telling me to call 121.50 for a practice pan :O

RK.

DFC: as far as I'm aware, very few civil ATC units have 121.5 installed, hence they can't turn it down or off; oh they may have an ICOM to dial it up, but it's certainly not on their main radio installations.

I'm glad to see that the UK CAA still maintains it's hypocritical attitude to all with such arrogance.

Last year they issued a circular warning aircraft operators and pilots not to use 123.45 for air to air comms within range of UK airspace. So, even if you were outside UK airspace, these effers were trying to tell you what to do.

A few years ago the UK CAA issued a notam stating that the UK MoD were engaged in GPS jamming trials. These trials actually interfered with GPS signal reception in areas beyond the UK. So it's ok for the Brits to interfere with aircraft operations outside of the UK whilst they don't want interference from outsiders to their operations.

Arrogant sheites.

Whilst it's out of character for me to defend the CAA, it seems necessary to do so in the light of the misinformation quoted.

No they didn't. They specifically mentioned that the information was to clarify the situation regarding use of 123.450 within the UK FIR. Not within range of, not outside, but within. It also did not tell pilots to not use the frequency. It merely pointed out it's correct function in UK airspace, the problems it could cause if misused, and then left it to the pilot to make the correct decision (i.e. ''Attention is brought to the fact that the resulting interference from unauthorised use of this channel is potentially detremental to flight safety.'')

Nothing to do with the CAA being arrogant. GPS is, and always has been, primarily a Military system. Civil use piggy backs it through the generosity of the US Department of Defence (or Defense [sic]). Military authorities worldwide have a legitimate right to either experiment against signals, or conduct training in system degradation and jamming. It's how people train for war or build defensive systems for their own purposes. The UK is a close ally of the US, both are in NATO. Co-ordination of activities and exchange of experience is useful to both sides.

Now, if the constellation was a civil funded system with operators paying for it, you could have a whinge about it. But until the 'still looking for a purpose' Gallileo system comes along, freeloaders will just have to put up with the fact that they have no say over the availability of GPS, especially if the inconvenience is being caused by military users.

DFC you are certainly consistent in your "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" mentality....

1. Max of three tracks. Usually yes but certainly not a max, and for a very good reason, ever tried three FJs in different areas of the the country all wanting different things under Radar Control & trying to route around CAT?Maybe you have I dont know. Three tracks, ever controlled a busy tanker slot with multiple chicks often handed over at V short notice. "oh cant take those two I've already got three ahead"..... Dont think so!

2. The sims are there to train new arrivals before going live as trainees on console.To suggest they could be used to maintain currency on is laughable, we have neither the staff or the time.

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?

4. Frequency being abused hundreds of miles away.... Where???? PP & TF calls are legitimate use of 121.5 as mandated by the CAA. Now if you are talking of ther abuse on 121.5 made by CAT talking on it....Then yeah okay I see your point.

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?


We are I assume, sitting on opposite sides of the same problem, I dont understand why you feel the solution is to bang on at D&D & the pilots who use 121.5 for practice. If you feel that strongly about it why dont you either ....

A. Adapt like so many of the other CAT guys on here do
B. Lobby to get things changed from within your work environment.

Regards

Diddley Dee

Diddley Dee :D :D :D :D :D

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

Perhaps the RAF could use the (large) fleet of GA aircraft it has to provide realistic training scenarios for you on the training frequency that has been provided for that purpose.

and Amsterdam and Paris and Reims and Brest and Dublin and Shannon and the other agencies that monitor 121.50 outside the UK but within range of practice pans?

If there was no objection then there would be silence!

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

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.

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 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.

But that goes a bit against procedures of monitoring and confirming clearances with the other crewmember..

How is that so, if both are listening to ATC??

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.....:rolleyes:

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!

First Solo?

Lost in the circuit?

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 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

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 :ugh: I kid you not.

Regards
Diddley Dee

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 :p

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

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.

No you spoke to the trainee assistant, I was the controller on duty at the time.............. watching what he was up to:ooh:

Diddley Dee

Is it?

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!

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.

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.

Excellent. Small world, especially on pprune. *looks around*