How many of you routinely monitor 121.5? Would you be more likely to if...

I

ISaidRightTurns

Pre-Flight
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
89
Display Name
Display name:
ISaidRightTurns
...there was a low power transmission in the vicinity of TFRs advising of the restriction?

Nothing extreme, low power (~60 miles from TFR center) advisory starting one hour before continuing through the TFR. About a 15 second transmission giving the time, FRD of the TFR, radius, altitude and ending time, repeating every 10-15 minutes.

Think it'd make a difference for GA?
 
Nope. The pilots it might possibly help aren't the ones monitoring guard. Besides we don't need another way of being told what we aren't allowed to do.
 
I monitor 121.5 pretty much anytime I'm not in need of the second radio for another reason (like getting weather). The benefits as I see it:

-Get someone looking for me when center forgets a hand off (happens regularly)
-Hear an ELT going off and potentially help a downed pilot (never happened yet to me)
-Help a fellow aviator looking for a frequency (happens occasionally)
-Get warned of an impending TFR bust (not happened yet)

Makes good sense to me.
 
I was monitoring 121.5 on my way home from Oshkosh. I heard someone declaring an emergency from about 200nm away near KMKT airport. A Center controller asked them to switch to an approach frequency which I was too far away to listen to.
 
I always monitor with my spare/unused radio. Makes sense for so many reasons.
 
I regularly watch 121.5, here's the general order of things:

Transmissions on 121.5 mistake, followed by a dozen people saying "on guard" in response.
ATC (or relays from ATC) looking for missed handoffs
One panicky low time trying to get less turbulent air (serious, why don't you just land dude).
One lost student pilot (this one was actually intriguing to listen to, FSS got her a squawk code and had the nearby ATC sites help locate her).
ATC asked me to check on an ELT transmission they were hearing.


The only real emergency I ever heard was on GYY's tower frequency when the legend cub dumped into Lake Michigan. I still had them dialed up in the #1 as I had just flown through their class D.
 
timwinters said:
+1

Though I'm still sipping on my first cup of coffee and haven't thought it out.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but what do I know? I think certification has benefits. ;)
 
There are logistical issues with the idea. The broadcast would need to be stronger than a AWOS, considering it would need need to radiate 80 miles from the center of a presidential TFR. Further, around election season, "whistle stop" TFRs include a chain of TFRs that could extend hundreds of miles and would be very hard to describe. The recording would force the listener to check in with FSS for details, which is what they should have done in the first place.

I agree with the other comment that TFR busters aren't likely to be listening to guard, if my experience in the SFRA is any indication. USAF is constantly yelling at pilots squawking 1200 here but no one ever replies or changes course.

For things like fire or crime scene TFRs, you're relying on law enforcement on the ground to record and broadcast the TFR message. That's not ideal.
 
I do.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Nope. The pilots it might possibly help aren't the ones monitoring guard. Besides we don't need another way of being told what we aren't allowed to do.
Click to expand...

+1, and I always monitor guard on comm 2 in cruise phase of flight. I normally set up destination weather on the standby freq and switch between during terminal phase of flight.
 
Wouldn't the announcement of the TFR on 121.5 clutter up the freq for actual emergencies?
 
Geico266 said:
No more than ATC looking for an airliner that got "lost" in the system.
Click to expand...

Or why not broadcast the TFR info on the nearest HIWAS equipped VOR? Although I cannot remember the last time I listened to HIWAS.
 
Once while flying down south I heard Chewbacca on the guard frequency, followed by a terse voice saying "Chewbacca on guard!".

Like Ted Said, makes sense to monitor it with the number 2 radio.
 
A ) I switch my number one and only radio to 121.5 when I am not talking to someone else as per whatever notam that says to monitor 121.5 "when able". And, it turns out that "when able" is most of the time since I don't use the radio to talk to anyone except when entering a pattern.

B ) As I understand it, if radar picks up someone approaching a TFR, ATC will make an announcement on 121.5 requesting aircraft at location / direction to contact someone. So, what would be the advantage of an additional random broadcast?
 
Already too much nonessential BS going out over Guard already. It was designed for Emeregency use only but yet it's drifted away from this. Put the TFR info out over VORs or ATIS. A little preflight planning would help as well.

I have only one radio so I'm not capable of monitoring Guard while on another freq.
 
One of my OE radios is now living way over on the right side over the glove box, I can't remember the last time it was tuned to something other than 121.5
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
A ) I switch my number one and only radio to 121.5 when I am not talking to someone else as per whatever notam that says to monitor 121.5 "when able". And, it turns out that "when able" is most of the time since I don't use the radio to talk to anyone except when entering a pattern.

B ) As I understand it, if radar picks up someone approaching a TFR, ATC will make an announcement on 121.5 requesting aircraft at location / direction to contact someone. So, what would be the advantage of an additional random broadcast?
Click to expand...
So they will let you bust the TFR, instead of giving you a warning you are about to bust it, and let you correct your mistake/ignorance before you get into trouble. If that is true that says a lot about the real reason for TFR's!
 
OH...and I heard a guy on guard (not a mistake as there was a two way conversation going) making arrival arrangements for his charter passengers.
 
douglas393 said:
So they will let you bust the TFR, instead of giving you a warning you are about to bust it, and let you correct your mistake/ignorance before you get into trouble. If that is true that says a lot about the real reason for TFR's!
Click to expand...

Apparently you do get a warning: http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showpost.php?p=676837&postcount=2 -
Did I mention monitor guard?!? When Grant, Leslie, and I were flying back from the FlyBQ a couple of years ago with 121.5 being monitored on Com2, and the pres was giving the commencement address at Notre Dame, all we heard over and over and over and over again was the AWACS plane warning planes away on guard. "Aircraft 34 miles north of South Bend, heading 170, speed 105 knots, altitude 3000 feet, you are approaching restricted airspace. Turn around immediately. Contact South Bend Approach on 1xx.xx for further information..." and in all too many cases it was followed by the same call with "You have entered restricted airspace."
Click to expand...

at least for presidential TFRs. Dunno about stadiums.
 
The people who listen to 121.5 wont bust a TFR because they will respond to the callup 'VFR aircraft at 5500 10nm east of XYZ, turn around, you are about to enter a security TFR' in time to not get into trouble.

The only thing that clutters up 121.5 is the incessant 'on guard' babble after someone happens to double-tap his flip-flop button while switching to the FBO frequency for his fuel order.
 
FAA to C172 pilot, "Did you get an FSS briefing before flying into the TFR?"
C172 pilot, "non, I was monitoring guard. Don't bust me, bust them."
Next?
VORs are reducing and I don't have a nav radio, anyway.
Monitoring guard is probably a good idea and I'll do it when able.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I monitor 121.5 pretty much anytime I'm not in need of the second radio for another reason (like getting weather). The benefits as I see it:

-Get someone looking for me when center forgets a hand off (happens regularly)
-Hear an ELT going off and potentially help a downed pilot (never happened yet to me)
-Help a fellow aviator looking for a frequency (happens occasionally)
-Get warned of an impending TFR bust (not happened yet)
Click to expand...
Ditto -- all the time. And the entertainment value should not be dismissed, either -- you sometimes get to hear some really great airline cabin announcements. :D

Makes good sense to me.
Click to expand...
More than good sense -- it's the law, and has been since 2004.

FDC 4/4386​
​
SPECIAL NOTICE
NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM INTERCEPT PROCEDURES.

AVIATORS SHALL REVIEW THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION AERONAUTICAL INFORMATION MANUAL (AIM) FOR INTERCEPTION PROCEDURES, CHAPTER 5, SECTION 6, PARAGRAPH 5-6-2.

ALL AIRCRAFT OPERATING IN UNITED STATES NATIONAL AIRSPACE, IF CAPABLE, SHALL MAINTAIN A LISTENING WATCH ON VHF GUARD 121.5 OR UHF 243.0.
[snip]​

WIE UNTIL UFN [that's "with immediate effect, until further notice"]
Click to expand...
FDC NOTAMs are regulatory (i.e., you can be violated for disobeying them) and by regulation, the word "shall" is used in the imperative sense.

I can't even begin to count the number of times I've heard planes repeatedly warned they were about to bust the DC SFRA, followed by the announcement that they were now in it and interceptors were on the way. Each one of those pilots could have saved him/herself a lot of trouble just by doing what that rule says. :(
 
This is one of those instances where regulation and operations meet.

If the FAA guaranteed that TFR information would be transmitted in the local area on 121.5, would more GA pilots be cognizant of the NOTAM to monitor guard.
 
We regularly monitor 121.5. Once Hubby heard a report of engine failure a short distance away and he immediately diverted to see if he could be of assistance in finding the downed airman. When he got into the vicinity, the CAP and State Police were already searching, so he left rather than get in the way.

Other uses seem to be people who call approach, center, or tower and get told "On Guard" by the other monitors.
 
Ron Levy said:
More than good sense -- it's the law, and has been since 2004.
FDC NOTAMs are regulatory (i.e., you can be violated for disobeying them) and by regulation, the word "shall" is used in the imperative sense.
Click to expand...

Point. Just before "shall" is the phrase "if capable" which means just that. No one has been violated for the sole reason of not monitoring 121.5. To be violated by not following a NOTAM it has to be attached to a enforceable regulation, i.e. one cannot be "violated" by disregarding a NOTAM on it's accord. In an enforcement the NOTAM would be supporting evidence as in a IOP (item of proof) in the EIR (enforcement investigation report).
 
RotorAndWing said:
Point. Just before "shall" is the phrase "if capable" which means just that. No one has been violated for the sole reason of not monitoring 121.5. To be violated by not following a NOTAM it has to be attached to a enforceable regulation, i.e. one cannot be "violated" by disregarding a NOTAM on it's accord. In an enforcement the NOTAM would be supporting evidence as in a IOP (item of proof) in the EIR (enforcement investigation report).
Click to expand...
I agree. You can't be written up for this if you don't have a radio. In addition, you can't be written up if you have only one radio and you need it for another purpose. But if you have two radios and you're not actively using one for another purpose, you're "capable," and if you fly into the TFR or SFRA in that situation without monitoring 121.5, that can be the issue which tips it from a careless violation to a deliberate and reckless violation -- and the sanctions go up significantly on such a basis.

Same logic the FAA uses when you bust a TFR without getting a preflight briefing. I've never heard of a 91.103 violation as the sole charge, but I have heard of the violation of 91.103 being the deciding factor in whether or not you get ASRS immunity for busting a TFR you would have known about if you'd gotten the briefing. Likewise, if they made numerous calls on 121.5 warning you of your impending entry, your deliberate decision to violate the requirement of that NOTAM could be the difference in whether or not you get waiver of sanction, or is an aggravating factor in the severity of the sanction. Plenty of support for that in FAA Order 2150.3B, and the first example comes from a case involving a friend of mine where ASRS waiver of sanction was denied.
 
We monitor 121.5 on every flight. About once or twice a month I report an ELT.
 
Anytime I am in my radio room , I have one of my handhelds sitting on 121.5 . I did hear a close ELT activation one night , called the two local airports but it was after hours and no one answered ...

In a case like that , who would you call if anyone at all ?
 
Isn't it a whole lot easier just to talk to the ATC facility who's airspace encompasses the TFR? Of course a little preflight planning would help as well. I get AOPA notices on POTUS TFRs by email and all other TFRs I get on Weathermiester. It's not very hard.
 
cavmedic said:
Anytime I am in my radio room , I have one of my handhelds sitting on 121.5 . I did hear a close ELT activation one night , called the two local airports but it was after hours and no one answered ...

In a case like that , who would you call if anyone at all ?
Click to expand...
Closest ATC tower?
 
cavmedic said:
Anytime I am in my radio room , I have one of my handhelds sitting on 121.5 . I did hear a close ELT activation one night , called the two local airports but it was after hours and no one answered ...

In a case like that , who would you call if anyone at all ?
Click to expand...
Nearest ATC facility (if you have the phone number). If that doesn't work, call Flight Service (800 WX BRIEF). Calling airport management or an FBO or the like isn't going to get the system rolling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top