www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30108947
Not normally into that sort of thing, but this is pretty good.
|
|
I'm not a spotter but i do live 5 miles from Birmingham Airport on the flightpath. I've always wanted to listen in to communications to and from aircraft, is it legal/doable without forking out huge amounts ?
|
From Heathrow website:
It can be fairly confusing knowing if you’re allowed to listen to ATC/Aircraft communications. Equipment and information is freely available, and there are websites which stream ATC communications – here is some clarification about the UK law.
Is it legal to own a scanner? Yes – a license is required when owning a transmitter, but radio recievers require no license.
Is it legal to listen to ATC in the UK? It depend upon the specific circumstances.
What transmissions can I listen to? Any transmission intended for you or for general reception. This would mean, ATIS announcements, and by some interpretation, emergency broadcasts.
So it is illegal to listen in on ATC communications between ATC and pilots if you’re not required to be listening (for instance, if you’re flying in the same region).
You can listen to ATC if given permission, e.g. at an air show.
|
>> I'm not a spotter but i do live 5 miles from Birmingham Airport on the
>> flightpath. I've always wanted to listen in to communications to and from aircraft, is it
>> legal/doable without forking out huge amounts ?
As CGN say's 'eavesdropping' on AT is strictly speaking illegal. It's one of those laws though that provided you are reasonably discrete, is very unlikley to be enforced. Not only are scanners on display at airshows but if you visit the (few remaining) spectator facilities at a UK airport you'll see any number of scanners in open use.
I've been doing it without any problem for around forty years and I believe Zero of this parish has similar form.
To listen you need a receiver capable of picking up transmissions in the frequency range 118 to 138 in AM mode. There are several dozen models available. Whatever you get though reception on airband is pretty much line of sight. If you're more than 10 miles from BHX you're unlikley to be able to hear the 'ground' side of transmissions.
The very cheapest simply extend the FM broadcast band to 140mhz but reception of AM airband is pretty poor/useless.
Base model scanners from Bearcat start around the £100 mark. Moonraker (www.moonraker.eu/) will do a very basic set for around £50. Maplin also have a range www.maplin.co.uk/c/gadgets-toys-and-hobbies/radio-communications/vhf-and-uhf-scanners. I've heard some good reports of the Maycom.
There are a couple of airband scanner threads in the Spotters section on www.pprune.org. There is also a more general scanner thread here www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?t=18169&v=f with further models named/recommended. The best were Yupiteru's airband specific VT125/225 but those ceased to be imported into UK a dozen or more years ago and are rare on ebay etc.
If you've got MAplin nearby they may be worth a try as it shouldn't be a struggle to get a refund if what you choose doesn't pick up. You can get a good idea as soon as you get it home by tuning to the ATIS transmission, an automated voice boradcast of the airfield weather etc. At Birmingham this is on 136.025, though as it's a busy airport periods of silence on the towet 118.3 or approach 118.05 are rarely silent for long.
Good luck, it's a fascinating passtime.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 20 Nov 14 at 10:48
|
EDIT:
Links above for Moonraker and Maplin are broken due my use of bracket and stop.
The correct links are:
www.moonraker.eu/
www.maplin.co.uk/c/gadgets-toys-and-hobbies/radio-communications/vhf-and-uhf-scanners
Apologies.
|
I'm only a part time pedant, but some misuses really start me off.
Discrete is NOT the posh form of discreet.
I'l go and get out more.
However, thanks for the interesting post
8o)
Last edited by: neiltoo on Thu 20 Nov 14 at 10:55
|
>> I'm only a part time pedant, but some misuses really start me off.
>> Discrete is NOT the posh form of discreet.
>>
>> I'l go and get out more.
>>
>> However, thanks for the interesting post
>>
>> 8o)
Than you. I'm prone to grammatical imprecision and am a carp typist. That one though was genuine ignorance.
Surprised I was never picked up for it by one of the pedants at work......
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 20 Nov 14 at 10:59
|
|
I wonder about the listening in thing, do other types of spotter do it? Or is it just an a/c thing?
|
>> I wonder about the listening in thing, do other types of spotter do it? Or
>> is it just an a/c thing?
You can listen to shipping too. Someday I'll spend a half day or so on the cliff at Dover and listen to the ferries and other traffic.
When the Shuttle was being used to supply the ISS it's post launch track took it close to UK and a few brief messages from it were audible on a UHF frequency. I only heard it a couple of times though.
|
|
Presumably this is all analogue. Why haven't they gone digital - just to keep it simple? I'm not suggesting they should, but it seems to be the fashion these days.
|
It is and remains analogue with both air and ground on same frequency.
Frequencies used were originally at 50khz intervals 118.00>118.05>118.10 etc. That was reduced to 25khz in the seventies (giving a theoretical 720 channels) and spacing of 8.33khz has been phased in more recently, mainly in Upper Airspace in Europe (inc UK).
That probably provides sufficient channels for time being and any 'digital switchover' would be a massive logistical exercise at huge cost. Although modern systems allow airliners to 'see' nearby traffic electronically being able to hear other aircraft being worked in the same control zone helps pilots situational awareness.
Digital data is used for some communications, airways clearances (ie advice of the confirmed routing to destination) which used to be passed by voice for example now use a text/data system known as CPDLC.
|
|
Everything (apparently) will be 8.33kHz spaced quite soon thanks to EASA. No, I don't know why.
|
>> I've been doing it without any problem for around forty years and I believe Zero
>> of this parish has similar form.
Oh yes, form is right At one time I got raided by HM Customs and Excise and the Radio Regulatory Department of the Home Office I think they were called. More by luck than judgement I never got prosecuted.
From a legal perspective, because you can legally buy the kit, legally use it and there is no specific offence in hearing the broadcasts, which after all could be done accidentally. However there is the aspect of "acting upon information received" which if you did, would have course been "illegally obtained" because it wasn't broadcast for your use.
So in short, you can listen to it, but you mustn't tell anyone or use the information in any way.
|
What on earth did you do to get busted?
The OK to listen/offence to tell theory is a red herring, both are specific offences. See Radio Communications Agency (now Ofcom) guidance:
stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/enforcement/spectrum-enforcement/guidance
'Listened by accident' might have worked years ago if it was the Rozzers on your household transistor set. It's not going to fly if you have radios specific to airband and have numerous active frequencies in the memories.
|
>> What on earth did you do to get busted?
Raided, not busted.
Importing, distributing and selling illegal CB rigs, organising cb radio gatherings, obstruction (warning user of other raids) and illegal broadcasting.
>> 'Listened by accident' might have worked years ago if it was the Rozzers on your
>> household transistor set. It's not going to fly if you have radios specific to airband
>> and have numerous active frequencies in the memories.
Well as no-one has been nicked, ever, just for listening its not really a red herring now is it.
|
>> Raided, not busted.
Is there a difference?
>> Well as no-one has been nicked, ever, just for listening its not really a red
>> herring now is it.
If anyone has ever been prosecuted, never mind convicted, for airband listening then it's unreported. Plenty been done for offences on other frxs though.
There was an account in a forum of somebody who got a fine and kit confiscated for reporting what he claimed were emergency transmissions on 121.5 but I doubt it's veracity and if true it was probably gross failure of attitude test. I've also seen it suggested that guidelines require CAA to consent to prosecute ATC listeners and that their policy is not to do so over what they regard as a harmless pursuit.
At one time they were certainly sympathetic to, for example, case of a prospective student pilot listening in to his local airfield ATCU. They even went so at as to suggest writing to ATCU manager seeking his consent so as to cover the 'consent' point in legislation.
|
>>
>> >> Raided, not busted.
>>
>> Is there a difference?
>
Yes, Busted means you were caught and prosecuted, Raided means they tried to bust you but failed. In my case HMC&E literally knocking down the door.
>> >> Well as no-one has been nicked, ever, just for listening its not really a
>> red
>> >> herring now is it.
>>
>> If anyone has ever been prosecuted, never mind convicted, for airband listening then it's unreported.
>> Plenty been done for offences on other frxs though.
Only ever for acting upon, or reporting stuff they heard.
|
|
How did they know who's collar to feel, did you have a dirty great big antanna in your back garden?
|
|
Dobbed in by some local cyclist, I imagine.
|
|
Why does HMCE raid houses? Illegal importing via planes? I thought this was about broadcasts from planes on open frequencies. And if you used the info for no good - would it not be other agencies interested?
|
>> How did they know who's collar to feel, did you have a dirty great big
>> antanna in your back garden?
Yes
|
>> Yes, Busted means you were caught and prosecuted,
Well there you go. I always thought a bust was a raid whether by HMCE, Drugs or Obscene Publications.
>> Only ever for acting upon, or reporting stuff they heard.
That may be so but if there were to be a clampdown, based on an ill publicised and little known law, then misunderstanding would not be a defence.
|
I don't know much about this listening in to a/c hobby, but what are they trying to stop you from listening to? I mean isn't it all, go higher/lower/slower/faster for the vast majority of the time?
I mean listening in to all that is a bit odd, but harmless I would have thought. If it were that important no-one listened in it would be on secure comms with crypto.
|
>> I don't know much about this listening in to a/c hobby, but what are they
>> trying to stop you from listening to? I mean isn't it all, for
>> the vast majority of the time?
>>
>> I mean listening in to all that is a bit odd, but harmless I would
>> have thought. If it were that important no-one listened in it would be on secure
>> comms with crypto.
I think that's exactly the point Sooty. To me it's primarily about a fascination with how they do this stuff, how the go left/right/higher/lower/slower/faster 3 dimensional chess gets the planes correctly sequenced miles from their destination and to just the right point in place and altitude to intercept the runway's centreline.
That and both as a spotter and now identifying unusual stuff I might be able to (get to) see.
|
>>
>> I think that's exactly the point Sooty. To me it's primarily about a fascination with
>> how they do this stuff, how the go left/right/higher/lower/slower/faster 3 dimensional chess gets the planes
>> correctly sequenced miles from their destination and to just the right point in place and
>> altitude to intercept the runway's centreline.
>>
>> That and both as a spotter and now identifying unusual stuff I might be able
>> to (get to) see.
>>
Oh I get that people are interested in all that sort thing. I mean not for me, once they get wheels up pffft...
But why is it illegal to listen in? There's nothing really that secret. I know it's hardly that often that people are being locked up/arrested, but still I just wonder what is being protected?
|
>> That may be so but if there were to be a clampdown, based on an
>> ill publicised and little known law, then misunderstanding would not be a defence.
Precedence, or lack of it, is however.
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 21 Nov 14 at 01:37
|
|
Perhaps they're concerned you could interfere with the transmissions or block them.
|
>> Perhaps they're concerned you could interfere with the transmissions or block them.
The restriction goes back to, IIRC, the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1948 with substantially same provision re-enacted in subsequent Acts. It was/is a catchall intended to cover ALL transmissions other than those intended for public.
The blocking question has some history. Some superhetrodyne receivers sold in sixties/seventies had the characteristic of rebroadcasting a spurious signal n mhz above/below the frequency to which they were atually tuned. These were a problem!
At some sites, I think MAN was one, staff from the ATSU would examine and approve (or reject) receivers intended to be used in the public viewing areas. At the time there were extensive terraces overlooking the aprons and you could walk along the roof of two of the piers. There were signs telling you which gate you were above so you could wave to your rellies as the walked out to the aircraft. Up there you were only a handful of feet from the flightdeck window and even low powered spurii might well have caused a problem.
Occasionally nutters have got hold of a portable transceiver (the sort of transmit capable set that might be used in glider or other aircraft without a fitted COMM set) and either broadcast abuse or attempted to impersonate ATC. These are prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
|
>> The blocking question has some history. Some superhetrodyne receivers sold in sixties/seventies had the characteristic
>> of rebroadcasting a spurious signal n mhz above/below the frequency to which they were atually
>> tuned. These were a problem!
They weren't, they really were not. The output of the receiver oscillation was never enough to cause an issue. It was a technical feature merely used as an excuse to control what was allowed.
|
>> They weren't, they really were not. The output of the receiver oscillation was never enough
>> to cause an issue. It was a technical feature merely used as an excuse to
>> control what was allowed.
>>
Your knowledge of RF is ahead of mine and I therefore take your point. The quote about sixties/seventies superhets though came from correspondence I had with the CAA c1978.
|
>>
>> Your knowledge of RF is ahead of mine and I therefore take your point. The
>> quote about sixties/seventies superhets though came from correspondence I had with the CAA c1978.
Yes it would, it was a long held excuse by those in authority who did not wish to change anything. Even in 1978. Believe me, there is nothing dirtier in radio terms than oldish aircraft radio and radar transmitters. In consequence everything important on board was tempested against its own interference!
|
I guess that if RF re-emission from radios is a non problem it's one that persists. The reason given for Yupiteru's withdrawal from UK market was EU rules on re-emission promulgated in mid/late nineties.
I started listening to ATC on a radio/cassette I was given for Xmas at age 13. It would pick up Leeds Approach/Tower, then on 123.75, at around the 100mhz mark. Oceanic for US based a/c on 123.95 tended to stamp on it though - there were a lot of MAC flights in those day!! . Subsequent reading suggests the set may have had an intermediate frequency of around 11mhz and that I was hearing an image signal.
One of the early affordable Airband scanners, the WIN108, had the same problem in reverse. Leeds, either Tower 120.3 or approach 123.75, was drowned out by an image of Radio 1 from Holme Moss. IIRC it was Tower.
|
Even in 1978. Believe me, there is nothing dirtier in
>> radio terms than oldish aircraft radio and radar transmitters. In consequence everything important on board
>> was tempested against its own interference!
>>
Still goes on these days.
|
>> Even in 1978. Believe me, there is nothing dirtier in
>> >> radio terms than oldish aircraft radio and radar transmitters. In consequence everything important on
>> board
>> >> was tempested against its own interference!
>> >>
>>
>> Still goes on these days.
Only once but I got what I suspect was an out of band transmission by an aircraft cut into a broadcast on Classic FM; a BA Shuttle flight checking in with London and reporting his route as direct Westcot. Took me a second or two to catch on as I routinely had the scanner on while washing up and I thought at first it was that but set wasn't even in the room. Never happened before or since on same radio
The one thing that always interferes with my current kit (Yupi VT225 and Sony ICF-SC1 Wave Hawk) is the 'Watchman' radar at Leeds/Bradford - a blip sound co-incident with each rotation of the aerial.
|
We once got a visit from one of the spooks (MI6? a man in a suit and a trilby anyway) because my father reported the interference from a nearby radar on our TV.
Wanted to know how he knew the radar was there, (its hard to hide a sodding great dish spinning round) how we had a list of times of interference, etc etc.
|
>> Wanted to know how he knew the radar was there, (its hard to hide a
>> sodding great dish spinning round) how we had a list of times of interference, etc
>> etc.
Even if you can't see the antennae because it's hidden under a 'golf ball' the presence of something is pretty obvious cf 'RAF' Menwith Hill or Croughton.
|
First an approach to Dublin in poor visibility:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj3mNQnOuQA
(speeded up in places)
And then Queenstown NZ:
www.chonday.com/Videos/pilotnewzdalnd1
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 24 Nov 14 at 20:30
|
|
The latter was impressive . I have flown into Innsbruck several times in winter but that approach to Queenstown was 100x more impressive. Several years ago I managed to 'hitch' a lift from Wanaka to Milford Sound in a Cessna and I certainly don't remember the scenery being so impressive. Mind you there was a lot of turbulence and I did occasionally close my eyes for a few seconds!
|
Cant fn the thread about SDR radio, its on here somewhere.
Anyway I bought one of the SDR dongles, and played around with it on the Mac and the PC.
However, the interesting bit is I now have it working on the Hudl2 So now its really "mobile"
I shall be off to Calshot tomorrow to visit some friends - I'll take the set up to listen to the marine band chatter around the wreck of the car transporter.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 6 Jan 15 at 16:24
|
It could be an interesting day.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30699744
A cargo ship which is stranded in the Solent after it was deliberately run aground could be refloated on Wednesday, salvors have said
|
>> It could be an interesting day.
>>
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30699744
>>
>> A cargo ship which is stranded in the Solent after it was deliberately run aground
>> could be refloated on Wednesday, salvors have said
high tide is about 12:30
|
Sky News ticker tape now saying
The salvage company tasked with righting the Hoegh Osaka grounded in the Solent says it will not refloat it on Wednesday.
|
>> Cant fn the thread about SDR radio, its on here somewhere.
Here: www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?t=18169&v=f
>> Anyway I bought one of the SDR dongles, and played around with it on the
>> Mac and the PC.
>>
>> However, the interesting bit is I now have it working on the Hudl2 So now
>> its really "mobile"
What are you using for an aerial in this setup?
|
timelapse for spotters - maltrap
