IMCR wrote:I think the same applies to unmanned airfields. I often hear pilots on an unmanned frequency self announcing but you dont always know if they intend to be on that frequency, and indeed what their intentions actually are.
(Edited to say I am referring to an unmanned frequency where the airfield has been allocated a frequency and you are not therefore using Safetycom to keep DavidW happy )
I disagree with this idea.
You can make a case for topping and tailing a call with the airfield name if you're on a shared frequency, such as Safetycom (there are others). The case is that its important for people at other airfields sharing the frequency to know which the call applies to - and the name at the front isn't enough.
But there's also a general presumption in RT that you keep the transmission as short as reasonably possible, leaving out unnecessary words.
And in the case of an airfield with its own frequency, but without (at least at that time) an ATSU, the argument that is given for topping and tailing doesn't apply. A call simply to 'Anytown traffic' is fine, or even just the call itself without the prefix. It's shorter, and there's little risk of someone at a different airfield hearing it.
Paul