Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
By PaulisHome
#1663532
chevvron wrote:
PaulisHome wrote:I wouldn't be very surprised by a gliding field not answering - don't forget there is no ATSU there. The frequency is generally used for air to air calls for situational awareness. There might be someone on the ground with a radio, but it's entirely possible it's someone without much experience or an FRTOL. [If someone calls my home field, they might get a reply from someone experienced flying locally, but are much less likely to get a reply from the ground)

An FRTOL doesn't 'qualify' anybody on the ground to operate AGCS even using 129.975, the radio operator must still hold an ROCC which is signed by the licensee of the radio station.
I know larger gliding airfields like Lasham (131.025) have an A/G frequency allocated but whether the persons answering it from the ground (if any) have an ROCC I don't know; they should do as it is not a BGA frequency.
It's a pity the list of gliding sites notified in ENR 5.5 doesn't include contact frequencies (only phone numbers) for civil glider sites where a frequency other than 129.975 has been allocated but it does contain a frequency where the gliding takes place on an MOD airfield.
In my opinion, all these gliding airfields, along with unlicensed airfields used for training eg micolight sites, should be listed in the AD section of the AIP anyway rather than the ENR section.



Agree. Should have said "not even an FRTOL".

It could well be useful to list them - but I guess the lack of a service available might preclude that. I don't know of any pure gliding airfield that would have people with an ROCC - the frequencies are used largely for air to air situational awareness and not at all for any sort of air traffic service. So don't be surprised if you don't get a response calling a gliding airfield, even if you know the frequency.

Paul
By Silvaire
#1663533
riverrock wrote:On USA vs Europe - we have a much higher density of flights, as well airports with their own ACSs compared to USA, concentrated in a circle with a circumference between Oxford and Frankfurt. That includes 4 of the 15 busiest airports in the world within radio range of each other when aircraft are at cruise altitudes. Apparently organising a single new en-route frequency / channel can require changing at least 5 other providers and it has been getting exponentially harder to do this - hence the need for 8.33.


And that requires 2280 channels, doesn't it? 760 is not enough. :lol:
By chevvron
#1663536
Silvaire wrote:
riverrock wrote:On USA vs Europe - we have a much higher density of flights, as well airports with their own ACSs compared to USA, concentrated in a circle with a circumference between Oxford and Frankfurt. That includes 4 of the 15 busiest airports in the world within radio range of each other when aircraft are at cruise altitudes. Apparently organising a single new en-route frequency / channel can require changing at least 5 other providers and it has been getting exponentially harder to do this - hence the need for 8.33.


And that requires 2280 channels, doesn't it? 760 is not enough. :lol:

I didn't think the USA used 8.33 channels; they somehow seem to manage on 25 kHz spacing.
By chevvron
#1663538
PaulisHome wrote:It's a pity the list of gliding sites notified in ENR 5.5 doesn't include contact frequencies (only phone numbers) for civil glider sites where a frequency other than 129.975 has been allocated but it does contain a frequency where the gliding takes place on an MOD airfield.
In my opinion, all these gliding airfields, along with unlicensed airfields used for training eg micolight sites, should be listed in the AD section of the AIP anyway rather than the ENR section.


Agree. Should have said "not even an FRTOL".

It could well be useful to list them - but I guess the lack of a service available might preclude that. I don't know of any pure gliding airfield that would have people with an ROCC - the frequencies are used largely for air to air situational awareness and not at all for any sort of air traffic service. So don't be surprised if you don't get a response calling a gliding airfield, even if you know the frequency.

Paul

Surely a blind call (ie no response required) for situational awareness on a particular gliding site's frequency is better than a powered aircraft blundering through the area just as a competition task is launching, but I know what you mean, I've had people inbound to Lasham but not to the maintenance base and instructed them to call 131.025, then they come back saying 'there's no reply' so you have to tell them to just make blind calls.
When ferrying aircraft to Lasham from Blackbushe for maintenance back in the '80s, I always made blind calls and never expected a reply.
By Skylaunch2
#1663569
chevvron wrote:
PaulisHome wrote:I wouldn't be very surprised by a gliding field not answering - don't forget there is no ATSU there. The frequency is generally used for air to air calls for situational awareness. There might be someone on the ground with a radio, but it's entirely possible it's someone without much experience or an FRTOL. [If someone calls my home field, they might get a reply from someone experienced flying locally, but are much less likely to get a reply from the ground)

An FRTOL doesn't 'qualify' anybody on the ground to operate AGCS even using 129.975, the radio operator must still hold an ROCC which is signed by the licensee of the radio station.
I know larger gliding airfields like Lasham (131.025) have an A/G frequency allocated but whether the persons answering it from the ground (if any) have an ROCC I don't know; they should do as it is not a BGA frequency.
It's a pity the list of gliding sites notified in ENR 5.5 doesn't include contact frequencies (only phone numbers) for civil glider sites where a frequency other than 129.975 has been allocated but it does contain a frequency where the gliding takes place on an MOD airfield.
In my opinion, all these gliding airfields, along with unlicensed airfields used for training eg micolight sites, should be listed in the AD section of the AIP anyway rather than the ENR section.


Lasham and the other few large gliding sites with their own frequency are in their own special category coordinated by the regulator, similar to A/G but running approved to operate without ROCC by the CAA, they should not use the 'radio' callsign as part of the dispensation.
129.975 (and it's successor) is a sporting frequency and is pretty much SafetyCom for Gliders, so again, no ROCC required.

Agreed concerning AD/AIP.