Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Not using the radio (or transponder) when you have one

OK, so here we go:

Rwy20 wrote:

On the other few, yes, you could land NORDO, but it would be bloody bad airmanship to have a radio on board and not use it

Coolhand wrote:

I strongly disagree. The intention of an increasing number of small uncontrolled airfields of using the radio as they were Dallas Fort Worth it’s a plague that would make a better world if eradicated.
But I reckon this would be a new topic for another looooooong thread, so maybe better not to open this new can of worms.

First of all, the “field” doesn’t use the radio if it’s uncontrolled. It is pilots among each other.

But I fail to see how not using the radio would make “a better world”? Care to elaborate on your line of thought?

Last Edited by Rwy20 at 08 Jun 14:45

In the UK A/G radio does get abused with endless read backs of airfield information when ideally it should only be used for inter traffic calls.

I sympathise with Coolhand, if flying into an uncontrolled and unmanned field I would rather keep a good look out. There have been times when pilots arriving at these fields announcing intentions think other traffic are monitoring and then proceed to cut up some innocent on downwind. Use of radio at a field without an ATZ might give a false sense of security, although certainly some uncontrolled fields appreciate the courtesy.

Oxford (EGTK), United Kingdom

This is huge and likely endless topic of discussion. If you look at eg Egelsbach EDFE, you’ll find it works almost like a controlled field with proper ATC but it is AFIS. You are expected to call “Egelsbach Apron” for a short taxi from the gras tie down to the fuel pump. If you don’t you’ll be advised to do so. The locals in German announce what they want to do instead of asking for a permission but the answer is always granting some sort of permission. A similar thing happens on the “Egelsbach INFO” frequency.

Then you have “IFR traffic” that departs the field VFR. The AFIS relays messages for Langen RADAR. For that they switch to English and use IFR phraseology including “startup approved” and other instructions. They are just relaying information but to others it might sound different.

In the end it’s a mix and pretty unclear. It provides a false feeling of being controlled. Once I tried to simply announce my intentions and was advised by the AFIS operator that at Egelsbach one is supposed to ask. At a different airfield with AFIS, Schoenhagen EDAZ, that’s totally the opposite and really like you would expect: pilot to pilot and INFO answers questions but doesn’t tell people what to do.

In the end you have a different culture and probably most German pilots who don’t fly around much kind of expect the guy on the tower, the AFIS, to provide instructions. That topic has been wildly discussed already.

Frequent travels around Europe

RobertL18C wrote:

… I would rather keep a good look out.

Why not do both: Keep a good lookout and report your position and intention via radio?

EDDS - Stuttgart

The German “Flugleiter” scene is a whole different issue, yes. I agree it’s a broken system.

But I was talking about uncontrolled fields, i.e. where pilots just make brief statements about position and intentions, and nobody answers them. That is a huge safety net, not a big effort, and I fail to see one good reason why some pilots have problems with using their radio to inform others about their presence.

w_n I do, just don’t think it enhances safety as much as suggested. Most traffic in some fields is NORDO, pressing the PTT in these circumstances may give a false sense of security, and in my experience it sometimes does.

Oxford (EGTK), United Kingdom

100% with Rwy20. Proper radio calls at unattended airfields are very useful.

Also, I don’t agree that lots of traffic is Nordo anyway. In most parts of Europe, even the most basic of ultralights do have some simple radio. They may not use it properly, but that’s a different story.

Vintages, etc. with no radio at all are the exception, not the rule.

Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

RobertL18C wrote:

pressing the PTT in these circumstances may give a false sense of security

Let’s not use our radio then, that’ll teach ’em to keep a better lookout!

You could start a very similar thread on why people don’t switch on the transponder.

There is a large “cultural” / “freedom of expression” element in this. People do it to make a point – that they can.

There is a small % of planes which have no electrical system but it is really very small when you can buy a handheld radio and mount it somewhere.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

There is a small % of planes which have no electrical system but it is really very small when you can buy a handheld radio and mount it somewhere.

We have one in our club, but it has a battery operated radio. Admittedly it doesn’t work great, so that after 20 minutes you get complaints like “I read you two” – “yeah, I know”, so I’d sometimes use my handheld instead. But still, the important point is that now the others know I’m around, even if they didn’t understand a word.

But then, there are people with perfectly good radios who don’t use them… that is beyond me. Please @Coolhand, still waiting for your arguments on why that would make the world better.

Last Edited by Rwy20 at 08 Jun 16:55
26 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top