I think I’ll Remove My Radios

[walrus]

If you have a radio, and for some reason miss a call (it matters not why because it’s strict liability) you are potentially a felon and up for thousands of dollars in fines. The simplest solution? Remove radios. This is the new part 91 rules.

 

Quote

91.640 Use of radio outside controlled airspaces—listening watch of radio transmissions
(1) The pilot in command of an aircraft for a flight contravenes this subregulation if:
(a) the aircraft is fitted with, or carries, a radio; and
(b) the aircraft is flown by a pilot who is qualified, eligible or authorised to use the radio:
(i) for an Australian aircraft (other than a Part 103 aircraft or a Part 131 aircraft)—under Part 61 or 64; or
(ii) for a foreign registered aircraft—under a law of the aircraft's State of registry or the State of the operator; or
(iii) for a Part 103 aircraft—by a Part 103 ASAO; or
(iv) for a Part 131 aircraft—by a Part 131 pilot authorisation; and
(c) the aircraft is outside controlled airspace; and
(d) radio transmissions are not continuously monitored by:
(i) the pilot in command of the aircraft for the flight; or
(ii) another pilot who occupies a pilot seat during the flight.
(2) A person commits an offence of strict liability if the person contravenes subregulation (1).
Penalty: 50 penalty units.

 

Edited June 15, 2021 by walrus

[walrus]

But seriously, this means that in any interaction and perhaps conflict with another aircraft, for example an RPT arriving at a CTAF at the same time as yourself, and there is some sort of reported incident, you run the risk of being charged under 91.640 if it is alleged that you missed a radio call…..and it’s strict liability, it doesn’t matter why you missed the call.

 

The protection you have against such an allegation is to sing like a canary on area frequency and CTAF, if you think that there is another aircraft within a hundred miles. As in “Melbourne Center, xyz, were you calling me? No? Well I’m listening just in case”. Yet more frequency congestion as pilots automatically demonstrate they are on listening watch.

 

‘’Can’t you just here it “xyz, the active runway is now 18 not 36, weren’t you listening ?”

 

‘’In other words silence brings the possibility of a charge.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Well they'd probably just say "There goes Sunny again" and get a cup of coffee.

Legislation has to spell out what is included and what is not included, where something is allowed and where it is not etc. 

It takes longer to read a piece of legislation than its much simpler meaning, but after a while your eye tends to skim the positioning statements and focus on the subject matter.

There will be another piece of legsilation somewhere specifiying which aircraft are to carry radios and which aircraft are required to carry specific types of radios or multiple radios, and additional instruments.

These are all little pieces of the big jigsaw.

[pmccarthy]

Perhaps the main thrust of these rules is the listening watch that you are supposed to maintain when cruising. Many pilots do not monitor Centre in cruise, instead they play Bluetooth music or make videos of their flight. All ok if your technology allows over-ride by the radio, except that Centre traffic is too frequent and annoying so it gets turned down.

[Thruster88]

Here is a short story about radio and see and avoid. The person in a building somewhere could see exactly what was happening on their screen, conveying this picture to the pilots by radio in a random VFR environment, not so easy. Now if only there was a way we pilots could have a screen in our aircraft. It is 2021 FFS.

 

 

19/5/2021	between Nepean Dam and Cataract Dam	NSW	Jabiru	230	Jabiru	3300A	STATUS: Under review EXTRACT FROM REPORT SUBMISSION: The pilot was conducting a VFR area solo wi...
STATUS: Under review EXTRACT FROM REPORT SUBMISSION: The pilot was conducting a VFR area solo within 25nm of YSHL - YSHL Kiama Bundanoon Nepean Dam Cataract Dam Thirroul Port Kembla Point YSHL. Because of the excellent flying conditions traffic was heavier than normal. The pilot had had several interactions with Mittagong and Wilton traffic prior to this incident. Initially the pilot was monitoring Wilton on COM1 and Sydney Central (124.55) on COM2. Broadcast was set to COM1. The transponder was set to ALT DISPLAY. At some point the pilot changed COM1 to Wedderburn but is not certain now as to when that was done. They heard ATC advise another aircraft of an aircraft at their 10 o'clock and concluded that their Jabiru was that aircraft (ie: the one at 10 o'clock relative to the other aircraft). They looked for the other aircraft but was unable to see it. The pilot then attempted to contact ATC but failed to set the broadcast switch to COM2 - therefore made a broadcast to either Wilton or Wedderburn traffic. They recognised their mistake within about a minute or so but continuously monitored 124.55 at all times. ATC made several further calls to the other aircraft. As it appeared to the pilot that ATC could see them they remained flying straight and level with no change in heading or course. The second aircraft passed above and in front of them shortly thereafter from their 2 o'clock to their 8 o'clock - they had perhaps 5-10 seconds visuals on that aircraft before their paths crossed. They were clearly not on a collision course however the pilot would describe the incident as a "close encounter". ATC stated shortly after that they estimated the vertical separation was about 100 feet – the pilot does not dispute that assessment. The pilots’ assessment was that the horizontal separation was not more than 300 feet. As far as they could tell the other aircraft was also flying straight and level, and must have been on a course of about 300M. The pilot then contacted ATC on COM2 to confirm that both aircraft had passed close by but were both safe. ATC asked them to identify on transponder code 1200. The pilot had not yet been trained on transponder use in the air and was unable to comply - they explained to ATC that they were a novice pilot. The flight continued without further incident but traffic at YSHL was moderately busy.

[Jaba-who]

I think this is an overreaction. Removing the radios will then limit your access to many airfields. So it’s throwing the baby out with the bath water. 
 

There are a myriad of (“legal”) reasons why a pilot will not hear a specific radio call even while listening diligently from terrain shielding to other stations transmitting at the same time to high cockpit workload at the time and probably heaps more. 

The legislation doesn’t say you must hear the call it says you must monitor  the frequency. There’s a world of difference. 

[RFguy]

radio  and or antennas can go faulty. That's a defense. might need a good barrister.

 

Unless they legislate that a electronic equipment is 'infalible' ... which would be a first in the universe.

 

Was that aircraft in that incident fitted with ADSB-OUT / skyecho ?

[RFguy]

WHAT is missing and is really stupid in aviation, if I may say so myself is SELCALL to radios.

IE your radio goes beep beep beep if it receives a specific code, entered by another radio user

 

This SHOULD HAVE been mandated in radios 30 years ago. 

 

If couriers and mobile dispatch people in the 1970s can have it....

 

In that case, the ADSB-OUT that carries the ship's callsign  would be used by ATC to alert the operator with a direct code sent to their radios.  (Mode S has this facility) 

 

AND it could be sent out on 50 frequencies simultaneously in 0.1 second.....

 

 

Edited June 16, 2021 by RFguy

[walrus]

My concern is that the next time f there is a separation incident involving RPT and a light aircraft, if there is a missed broadcast involved, then CASA will hang the light aircraft pilot out to dry.

 

In addition, if you listen to area (AS I do), you will frequently hear ATC trying to get in touch with non responsive aircraft. Each one of them is a potential prosecution under 91.640 IMHO.

[RFguy]

if they're trying to identify "unidentified VFR" etc etc, they dont know the callsign, they're just seeing 1200,  little chance of (ground) trouble.

 

Now, start bellowing out your callsign with ADS-B  , and not listening to the radio, that might get you a citation.

 

The radio/antenna faulty excuse will probably get you out of trouble 2 times, that's all. Dual radios doesnt help, they're usually on different freqs.

[Thruster88]

38 minutes ago, RFguy said:

radio  and or antennas can go faulty. That's a defense. might need a good barrister.

 

Unless they legislate that a electronic equipment is 'infalible' ... which would be a first in the universe.

 

Was that aircraft in that incident fitted with ADSB-OUT / skyecho ?

Just a mode C transponder I think, if it had ADSB the controller would have been able to call them by call sign?

[RFguy]

yep. 

[FlyBoy1960]

Use your drone in the back of the plane, just turn it on and leave on as many have adsb out.   

 

That should do it.   They will blame some new drone doing 120 kts at 8,000 feet !

[nomadpete]

2 hours ago, RFguy said:

WHAT is missing and is really stupid in aviation, if I may say so myself is SELCALL to radios.

IE your radio goes beep beep beep if it receives a specific code, entered by another radio user

 

This SHOULD HAVE been mandated in radios 30 years ago. 

 

If couriers and mobile dispatch people in the 1970s can have it....

 

In that case, the ADSB-OUT that carries the ship's callsign  would be used by ATC to alert the operator with a direct code sent to their radios.  (Mode S has this facility) 

 

AND it could be sent out on 50 frequencies simultaneously in 0.1 second.....

 

 

RF Chap,

What is really missing is the increased safety that would be brought to aviation by changing from antiquated AM, to FM.

 

Can't see why shipping has a more functional VHF system than aviation. Marine radios can instantly add GPS coordinates to a voice transmission.

[RFguy]

agreed. it is sad.

although the AM radios could add GPS position with every start or end of transmission. 

doesnt have to be FM .  the could just have used DTMF (touch tones) to wake up a pilot. 

FM would require a new channel plan. which could be interleaved between active channels. etc etc

(this is regularly done in comms) .

AM provides for some workability if two stations transmit simultaneously, but not much if the frequency spacing is more than a few hundred Hz and the radio of signals is more than 10dB.  in some ways, they should have gone SSB. 

 

[BirdDog]

You are actually not reading that regulation correctly!

 

I deal with CASA regulation every day, and you need to read it, as it is written.  For example... The regulation states...

 

 

(1) The pilot in command of an aircraft for a flight contravenes this subregulation if:
(a) the aircraft is fitted with, or carries, a radio; and
(b) the aircraft is flown by a pilot who is qualified, eligible or authorised to use the radio:
(i) for an Australian aircraft (other than a Part 103 aircraft or a Part 131 aircraft)—under Part 61 or 64; or
(ii) for a foreign registered aircraft—under a law of the aircraft's State of registry or the State of the operator; or
(iii) for a Part 103 aircraft—by a Part 103 ASAO; or
(iv) for a Part 131 aircraft—by a Part 131 pilot authorisation; and
(c) the aircraft is outside controlled airspace; and
(d) radio transmissions are not continuously monitored by:
(i) the pilot in command of the aircraft for the flight; or
(ii) another pilot who occupies a pilot seat during the flight.
(2) A person commits an offence of strict liability if the person contravenes subregulation (1).
Penalty: 50 penalty units.

 

So let's break it down....

If the aircraft is fitted with a radio, AND there is a radio qualified pilot in it, radio transmissions must be monitored.  It does not say anything about missing the radio call  It simply means that you must have your radio on and be listening!  If you didn't hear it because you were sneezing, or chatting to your mate next to you, you are not in breach, of your radio is on, and you are monitoring transmissions.  Nothing more, nothing less.

 

 

 

[spacesailor]

 What is 'part 103 & part 131' Australian  aircraft ?.

spacesailor

[BirdDog]

15 hours ago, spacesailor said:

 What is 'part 103 & part 131' Australian  aircraft ?.

spacesailor

Google is your friend....

Part 103 of CASR will consolidate the rules applying to people who carry out recreational aviation private flight operations, maintenance, and training for recreational aviation in the following kinds of aircraft:
 

• gliders (including sailplanes, hang gliders, paragliders and powered variants thereof meeting defined criteria)
• rotorcraft that meet defined criteria and are administered by a recreational aviation administration organisation
• ultralight aeroplanes (defined by weight and stall speed) that are administered by a recreational aviation administration organisation.

Edited June 16, 2021 by BirdDog

[walrus]

To Monitor: observe and check the progress or quality of (something) over a period of time; keep under systematic review.

 

And the regulation states that the radio must be " continuously monitored.

 

So you are required by my reading to maintain continuous situational awareness, that is why the word is "monitor" and not "listening watch".. Yes, you might miss a transmission but if it's the vital one you are in trouble if it changes the situation.

 

Since it is a strict liability offence, it doesn't matter if there was intent. So changing playlists on your phone is not an excuse.

 

This strikes me as a catch all provision for the next time there is a mid air or near miss.

[Thruster88]

There are many reasons for VFR pilots not to monitor the area frequency. Most of us only have a single com, we could be on CTAF or listening to ATIS. I can't recall ever hearing any useful info on area frequency.  

[Garfly]

On 16/06/2021 at 8:39 AM, Thruster88 said:

Here is a short story about radio and see and avoid. The person in a building somewhere could see exactly what was happening on their screen, conveying this picture to the pilots by radio in a random VFR environment, not so easy. Now if only there was a way we pilots could have a screen in our aircraft. It is 2021 FFS.

 

 

I totally agree, and it's not only controllers in Brisbane or Melbourne who get to see what pilots involved cannot.  And it's not just weekend warriors who must wander the skies needlessly blind to each other's proximity.

 

Some days ago, I was sitting comfortably on the ground tuned in to the local (Port Macquarie/Taree area) CTAF when I got listening to a belaboured conversation between a Cessna 421 doing survey work at 5,000'  and a Q-LInk Dash 8 on approach to Port Macquarie.  They were busy trying to arrange separation since their flight paths were clearly in conflict. The problem seemed to be that the Cessna twin could not just get out of the way of the RPT due to the requirements of the survey job. And, it seemed as if neither had the on-board gear to paint the other's ADSB target on their PFDs.

 

Meanwhile, though, on my iPhone I could see - as well as hear - the performance playing out on Flightradar24.  Out of interest, I snapped a couple of screen-shots of the scenario (below).  Anyway, the separation-anxiety chat continued between them for a while until eventually the Dash 8 changed its intended straight-in to 03 at Port and manoeuvred clear to join the circuit, and it all worked out.

 

But, like Thruster88, I was surprised that in 2021 even two commercial aeroplanes need to rely on the vagaries of radio chat to arrange their separation around non-controlled airports.  

 

Roll-on universal ADSB IN-OUT (made affordable for amateurs).

 

 

 

 

Edited June 17, 2021 by Garfly

[BirdDog]

3 hours ago, walrus said:

To Monitor: observe and check the progress or quality of (something) over a period of time; keep under systematic review.

 

And the regulation states that the radio must be " continuously monitored.

 

So you are required by my reading to maintain continuous situational awareness, that is why the word is "monitor" and not "listening watch".. Yes, you might miss a transmission but if it's the vital one you are in trouble if it changes the situation.

 

Since it is a strict liability offence, it doesn't matter if there was intent. So changing playlists on your phone is not an excuse.

 

This strikes me as a catch all provision for the next time there is a mid air or near miss.

 

Like I said before, you are not reading the legislation, and how it will be enforced,  So here is an example...

Mr Birddog, it appears you missed a vitral radio call.  Is that true?
 - Yes, that appears to be the case.

You do know there is legislation that states you must monitor the appropriate frequencies right?
- Yes.  I do.

So, did you have your radio on, and on the appropriate freq?
 - Yes.  I did.

So how did you miss the vital call?
 - I don't know.  I certainly didn't hear it - even though I was obeying the regulation and was monitoring the correct frequencies.  I did not hear the call.

Case closed.



 

[Flying Binghi]

23 minutes ago, Garfly said:

 

I totally agree, and it's not only controllers in Brisbane or Melbourne who get to see what pilots involved cannot.  And it's not just weekend warriors who must wander the skies needlessly blind to each other's proximity.

 

Some days ago, I was sitting comfortably on the ground tuned in to the local (Port Macquarie/Taree area) CTAF when I got listening to a belaboured conversation between a Cessna 421 doing survey work at 5,000'  and a Q-LInk Dash 8 on approach to Port Macquarie.  They were busy trying to arrange separation since their flight paths were clearly in conflict. The problem seemed to be that the Cessna twin could not just get out of the way of the RPT due to the requirements of the survey job. And, it seemed as if neither had the on-board gear to paint the other's ADSB target on their PFDs.

 

Meanwhile, though, on my iPhone I could see - as well as hear - the performance playing out on Flightradar24.  Out of interest, I snapped a couple of screen-shots of the scenario (below).  Anyway, the separation-anxiety chat continued between them for a while until eventually the Dash 8 changed its intended straight-in to 03 at Port and manoeuvred clear to join the circuit, and it all worked out.

 

But, like Thruster88, I was surprised that in 2021 even two commercial aeroplanes need to rely on the vagaries of radio chat to arrange their separation around non-controlled airports.  

 

Roll-on universal ADSB IN-OUT (made affordable for amateurs).

 

 

 

 

Hmmm... what yer going to do when the GPS system gets turned off ?..🤔

 

 

 

 

.

[KRviator]

On 16/06/2021 at 12:26 AM, walrus said:

If you have a radio, and for some reason miss a call (it matters not why because it’s strict liability) you are potentially a felon and up for thousands of dollars in fines. The simplest solution? Remove radios. This is the new part 91 rules.

 

 

Note, it doesn't say what frequency you must be monitoring, be it Area, a nearby CTAF, 123.45, 121.5, 122.7 (for possible gliders) or trying to get a nearby AWIS to broadcast the QNH so you're complying with the AIP. Definitely more than one way to remove the epidermis from a feline.

2 hours ago, Garfly said:

 

I totally agree, and it's not only controllers in Brisbane or Melbourne who get to see what pilots involved cannot.  And it's not just weekend warriors who must wander the skies needlessly blind to each other's proximity.

 

Some days ago, I was sitting comfortably on the ground tuned in to the local (Port Macquarie/Taree area) CTAF when I got listening to a belaboured conversation between a Cessna 421 doing survey work at 5,000'  and a Q-LInk Dash 8 on approach to Port Macquarie.  They were busy trying to arrange separation since their flight paths were clearly in conflict. The problem seemed to be that the Cessna twin could not just get out of the way of the RPT due to the requirements of the survey job. 

 

The thing that troubles me about that is the RPT seemed to "expect" the survey job to get out of its' way. Captain Fourbars ain't paying for his fuel the way the survey operator is. Try that with me when I'm out and about and you'll get a not-so-polite reply. RPT does not equal right of way, though, I will try to help commercial operators out where I can, I object to them telling me to do so because they think they're better than everyone else by virtue of skippy on the tail.

1 hour ago, Flying Binghi said:

Hmmm... what yer going to do when the GPS system gets turned off ?..🤔.

Damn good question - but one better directed at CASA - since they ae banking on GPS availability by allowing sole-means GNSS navigation for IFR in IMC with no backup! 

[walrus]

Quote

   17 hours ago,  Flying Binghi said:

Hmmm... what yer going to do when the GPS system gets turned off ?..🤔.

Damn good question - but one better directed at CASA - since they ae banking on GPS availability by allowing sole-means GNSS navigation for IFR in IMC with no backup! 

The USA, China, Russia, Europe, wouldn’t dare to turn off their GNSS systems without CASAs permission and your GNSS receiver isn’t allowed to fail for the same reason..