Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 27, 2016, 06:05:08 PM
Home Help Login Register      
News: Check out: FlightSimCon 2016 June 11-12, 2016

+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Recent Posts
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10

 41 
 on: June 10, 2016, 08:32:31 AM 
Started by theman280 - Last post by GeoffSM1
On Jun 10th 2016 Egypt's CAA reported that the vessel "John Lethbridge" of Deep Ocean Search has arrived on site. The vessel is tasked to locate and recover the black boxes from the sea floor.
(From www.avherald.com)


 42 
 on: June 10, 2016, 08:21:01 AM 
Started by GeoffSM1 - Last post by GeoffSM1
The same aircraft had had to return to Saint Petersburg the previous day due to a hydraulic leak (see http://avherald.com/h?article=49932613&opt=0)

 43 
 on: June 09, 2016, 10:18:52 AM 
Started by semperflyer797 - Last post by Kmo2486
Another story like this happened with a delta flight hours after the Egypt air 804 disappeared. Reports say the pilots fell asleep.

 44 
 on: June 09, 2016, 08:57:35 AM 
Started by attic conversion - Last post by attic conversion
I'm at an advanced stage of an atc recruitment programme. I have done a lot of reading and researching to familiarise myself, but haven't been able to find the answer to one thing in particular. I wonder could a current controller briefly describe the differences between the activities of enroute and ground/tower controllers. I understand the fundamental differences, but is one seen as being...more challenging, continuously busy, desirable, etc...than the other? (For instance, my vague perception would be that enroute requires more "brain power" but that there are lulls when aircraft only need procedural instructions, whereas ground, despite not requiring the same mental exertion, generally involves having a greater workload.)

Thanks in advance and hope this isn't in the wrong place.

 45 
 on: June 08, 2016, 02:13:48 PM 
Started by KL591 - Last post by tyketto

Not to be a downer on this, but if you're wanting to get this in to Parliament for debate, your petition is missing one major thing: JUSTIFICATION. And to be honest, simply saying, "Well, the US/Germany/Australia/<insert country here> can do it!" isn't justification.

The big issue here (and I'm going off of 13 years memory here, which was the last time I debated this, and in this forum, now that I think of it) is you are fighting what is now 67 years of precedence, and need to answer why that precedence should be changed. That precedence is the British Telegraphy Act of 1949. To put it very short and sweet, that Act stated that all communications between two parties are only meant to be heard or shared between those two parties only. Basically, any monitoring or rebroadcasting of those telecommunications by a third party is illegal. It is this last part that is what makes the rebroadcast of ATC in the UK illegal. You can take a scanner to an airport and listen to them, which is fine; you aren't rebroadcasting it. But the moment you stream it online, you're in trouble.

You will need to justify why that section should be repealed/overturned, and saying that <xxx country> can do it isn't justification for them to overwrite 67 years of precedence.

NOW.....

With that said, You may not need to petition Parliament after all.

I did some quick searching through Google and Wikipedia and while I knew that it was updated by the Telegraphy Acts of of 1967 and 1990, I didn't know it parts of it were superseded by the Broadcasting Act of 1984. But The Telegraphy Act of 1949 was fully repealed in 2003.

What you should do is this. Of the signatories in your petition, someone needs to take the lead and write a carefully worded letter and send it OFCOM (both email and written), and state that while you've studied up on all Telegraphy and communications acts from the past 70 years, you currently see nothing in any of those acts that forbid the act of streaming ATC of UK Airports. Seek clarification from that from OFCOM, and explicitly ask them for the ruling, writ of law, all the way down to the wording. You need them to give you the exact words for their justification.

CAVEAT: Quick Wikipedia search for the Wireless Telegraphy Act of 2006 shows Section 48:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/36/part/2/chapter/5

You'll need to read through it and re-read through it again, especially sections 46 - 50, to clearly understand it as it relates to ATC streaming, as OFCOM can construe that as 'intercepting'. And that isn't even getting into the main section of it on if this even requires a license.

Regardless, you should also verify that ATC services in the UK are taxpayer funded. If they are, then you may have a right to listen to those services; again, this doesn't provide info on if to provide a feed for those services requires a license. All of those questions are for OFCOM and possibly a telecom lawyer to answer.

BL.

 46 
 on: June 08, 2016, 12:49:24 PM 
Started by jkaleel - Last post by JetScan1
Quote
I've noticed that after a few minutes into a flight's departure, most of them are told to switch to frequency 127.27, Los Angeles Center.

The frequency is 125.27 (not 127.27), which is Los Angeles Center to the east of LAX. It's not covered by LiveATC as far as I can tell.

Of course more dedicated Los Angeles Center feeds to cover these enroute sectors would be great if anyone in the area can set them up (I'll donate $ to help).




 47 
 on: June 07, 2016, 03:19:01 PM 
Started by KL591 - Last post by Alex_UK
I shared your petition on Facebook, Twitter, and on http://www.manchesterairport.live/ and we've got from 8 to 120 signatures in just 8 hours.

Please keep sharing - we need at least 10,000 signatures by 30 November 2016!
This should be doable: 100 signatures/day x 176 days left = 17,600 signatures.

If we can get 100,000 signatures - "this petition will be considered for debate in Parliament", which is what we want.
So please keep sharing the URL!
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/127620

 48 
 on: June 07, 2016, 12:44:47 AM 
Started by semperflyer797 - Last post by semperflyer797
http://avherald.com/h?article=49960394&opt=0

There's only really the tower audio that I could find before they switched to ground, where nothing of any importance was discussed, and then to another frequency I couldn't pull up on LiveATC.

The real thing of interest to me about the whole incident is the fact that this occurred just after 10 PM local, and the tower was able to see something wrong with the aircraft.  Now sure 26L is the inboard/closer runway to the tower but still, that place isn't exactly lit that well.  If you ever watch on one of their webcams you'll see what I mean.  They exited the runway at E3 which is more or less at the end of 26L so they were probably moving pretty good down the runway also.  Anyhow good job to the flight crew and tower for their professionalism in this instance.

I didn't edit the audio in anyway so this was all real time and there's a low altitude alert given by the tower to a Southwest flight on final for 26R as well.

 49 
 on: June 06, 2016, 09:06:11 AM 
Started by GeoffSM1 - Last post by GeoffSM1
The audio also covers Delta Airlines flight 44 arrival from Las Vegas - met by an ambulance (but no info found re the circumstances).

Details of the Ryanair issue here - http://avherald.com/h?article=4993ea5b&opt=0

 50 
 on: June 05, 2016, 11:39:33 PM 
Started by jkaleel - Last post by dave
We don't necessarily have feeds for every frequency in the ATC system...I don't recognize that LA Center frequency and we definitely don't have a feed covering.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!