47 AIM 87.107 talks about how aviation stations should identify themselves. It pretty much relegates the issuance of identifiers to the FAA but unfortunately as I have already said, the FAA guidance is obsolete and predates the requirement for station licenses.
Thanks for the clarification. It is NOT regulation, merely advice and we can use language on the radio that helps provide other pilots effective information that helps them see us but an N-number is not required info.
To address the original question about ultralights on the radio, this translates into the Ultralight guys announcing their type, "Ultralight", maybe their color, and position. Additional information consumes airtime and may or may not contribute to safety.
Thanks,
Wes
Why even use a radio? You are just bothering others whom are doing more then just flying for fun. I myself found its better to use a TAS for the fast movers and keep your eyes open for all others. I found that flying this close to class C airspace all traffic uses the channel for towered airports and I am using the channel for a none towered airport. I have yet to hear one fast mover announce before landing. They all are talking to Capital Airport.
After many many incursions into the area I am flying and no one announcing I wanted to take the radio and throw it out the window. It was then I thought something had to be better. Now I see the fast movers coming no need for a radio, I never even take it with me.
A friend whom flies ultralights saw this unit announcing when I was on the ground talking with him standing next to my airplane. He said I saw that thing and thought it was more of a novelty type of thing, but I want one of those.
Every slow mover such as an Ultralight or EAB that is just a step above ultralight should check these units out. They are nice and way better then a radio.
The down fall, it only picks up traffic with a transponder installed, but that is the traffic I worry about, the slower traffic I should see coming.
It is regulation. Jeez. I pointed you right at the regulation. It may be a commonly disregarded one, but it is a regulation.
Except the J-3 or Champ (with a handheld radio) descending into the pattern above you that never knew you were there before impact because you didn't announce your position........Originally Posted by 1600vw
Flying in the pattern without a radio is a great way to increase the possibility of collision. It also reinforces negative stereotypes about "those untrained ultralighters".
You are confusing the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR's) with advisory material. The Federal Air Regulations are codified in volume 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations are are commonly referred to as "14 CFR" as in "14 CFR Part 91". The AIM that you refer to has no regulatory authority. The AIM is what the FAA decided back when aeronautical dinosaurs roamed the earth might be their idea of best practices.
Now you can argue that there is content in the AIM that contributes to safety. That said, you have noted that some content might be out of date, and I will suggest that I agree that the section on radio language no longer describe examples that contribute to increasing safety. So taking a hard look at what is effective in the modern world of limited frequency channels and air time, rather than listen to a lot of ineffective blather and squealing as multiple transmitters step on each other, I will suggest that there are shorter and more effective statements that will get the job done in a manner that actually helps improve the situational awareness of the population of pilots milling around an airport.
It is important to not confuse the actual FAR's, advisory text, and the actual FAA policy directives for its staff that are available online in FAA Order 8900.1, the Flight Standard Information Management System (FSIMS). It is complicated enough.
Best of luck,
Wes
N78PS
How exactly does the FCC regulation for AIRCRAFT station license apply to ultralight vehicles? Not trying to be snarky, I'd really like to know how one is supposed to arrive at that conclusion.
Ultralight vehicles have used aviation band transceivers for +30 yrs and the FCC hasn't seen the need to address that use with a specific regulation. Not sure what an ultralight vehicle operator is required to use for a call sign because no regulations or recommended guidance exist. I think if I had the need to operate an ultralight in communication required airspace, I'd just ask the controller what callsign to use when making the phone call to get authorization to operate in that airspace. Otherwise, I'd just make something up. "Ultralight 1" sounds cool as Homer would say.
I don't think FlyingRon is referring to the Aeronuatical Information Manual (AIM), but rather a specific FCC regulation codifed with the letters "AIM"
Well actually, I will hazard a think-like-a-beaurocrat guess that since 14 CFR Part 103 addresses ultralight aircraft, the FCC assumes that ultralight use of the spectrum reserved for aircraft is being supervised by the FAA. Does not mean that the FAA actually is, but the FCC might think that they are.
Have not seen the FCC pay any attention to aviation spectrum use in a while. 1440 channel spacing was the last FCC action on spectrum use. And of course in the area of equipment, they propose to do away with ELT's that transmit on 121.5.
Best of luck,
Wes
N78PS
The FCC section of the CFR's is Chapter 47 and Aviation Services are in Part 87. The Subparts are numbered alphabetically A through S. There is no section that has the numbering suggested above. This is all on the FCC's internet web site. Easy to look up and correctly reference.
Best of luck,
Wes
N78PS
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote