Using other freqs to communicate between planes or ground?

Because in a relatively slow commuter aircraft, transiting horizon to horizon at
FL250 can take the better part of an hour. Chatting with your buddies along the
way pretty well takes care of what needs to be a quiet frequency for data
transmission.

Jim



zatatime
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

-
-
-I'm not being sarcastic, but wondering why a transmission "hammers the
-frequency for an hour?"


Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

Google on "FCC form 406" and be quite liberal in your story about why you need
the license...don't LIE, but use puffery to the extent you are comfortable with
it. Me? I had 350 students in my "flight school". I didn't have to tell them
that it was over the course of 35 years of instruction that I accumulated those
"students".

Jim


(StellaStar)
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

-unless the "unused" frequency is assigned by license to either
-you or the ground station.
-
-Jim, got a link for how to apply for the permit required?
-
-I learned that (perhaps it's a state law) law-enforcement types don't want you
-to use a portable scanner-type radio tunable to cop frequencies when you're
-mobile. It's understandable, given the tendency of Bad Guys to use such a
-situation to evade enforcement. But a licensed ham radio operator is exempt
-from that. I carry a printout of that regulation in my glove compartment
since
-I carry a portable scanner...even though it's programmed only with aviation
-frequencies.
-
-If it's not ferociously expensive I could see getting the required license in
-case I can ever afford a mobile radio that transmits on the av freqs, too.

Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

"Jay Masino" wrote in message ...
John Galban wrote:
Jim Wier was kind enough to patiently educate me on the subject a
few years ago. The AIM has no regulatory bearing on the use of radio
frequencies. What is legal and what is not legal is determined by the
applicable FCC regs. According to them, 122.85 is NOT a general use
air to air frequency. The AIM table is misleading, in that respect.

I've seen articles in aviation periodicals, AOPA Pilot in
particular, that continue to refer to both 122.75 and 122.85 as
general use air to air frequencies. When I've sent corrections to
the authors, they're convinced that the misleading frequency table in
the AIM is all the justification they need. Oh well :-(

I seriously doubt that the FCC gives a damn, one way or the other. They
have better things to do than chase air to air conversations off of
122.85 (like listening to every single word that Howard Stern mutters).

--- Jay




It'll get to the point of the CB radio stuff someday - used to be you needed a license for the CB, but that disappeared
when they were everywhere...

Jim Weir wrote:

The FCC. Unless it is a violation that threatens ATC or something like that,
the FAA wants nothing to do with it. As a matter of fact, the unofficial FAA
position on the FCC "bad radio" list is that they could care less if we say or
do anything about it on an inspection.

Thanks. Thought that would be the case, but I got the impression they were a little
lax on enforcing some of their other rules. Glad to know they can move when
necessary.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

Ohhh, I thought somehow one or two transmissions mucked up the works
that long, although I guess most people don't share just one or two
comments.

Thanks for the reply.

z


On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:05:04 -0700, Jim Weir
wrote:

Because in a relatively slow commuter aircraft, transiting horizon to horizon at
FL250 can take the better part of an hour. Chatting with your buddies along the
way pretty well takes care of what needs to be a quiet frequency for data
transmission.

Jim



zatatime
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

-
-
-I'm not being sarcastic, but wondering why a transmission "hammers the
-frequency for an hour?"


Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

there are no unused frequencies.. all are allocated..

but there are dedicated "air to air" frequencies..

I hope that FBO using 127.775 has FCC approval..

BT

"Gary G" wrote in message
...
I've wondered if it is legal to utilize an "unused" frequency to
communicate between planes or
to someone on the ground for non-critical communication?
I don't know what for, but let's say you want to talk to your friend or
CFI on the ground who
might give "additional instructions" on things.
Or, another pilot close by wants to exchange some restaurant info or
something.
Or maybe a flying club wants to communicate or something.

Is that legal?
Is it ok?
(Let's assume your monitoring other freqs that you need to).

"Jim Weir" wrote in message I'll fry your ass. Got it?

And all this time I thought you were a gentleman. Take your arrogant
attitude and shove it right up your ass. If I pushed your "hot button", too
****ing bad. The US is not the whole world. I'll start using 'your' test
frequency from now on just to be spiteful. You are a civilian- how about
acting like one?

D.