Aviation Handheld Transceiver Rules

[KatanaGuy]

I found only two entries in a search of all of RcGroups for "aviation transceiver". The one that comes close became a dead end. (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=995288&highlight=aviation+transceiver).

So here is my attempt to ask the question and hopefully help find the answer: When operating UAVs or High Altitude Sailplanes, what are the radio procedures for communicating with general aviation aircraft sharing the same airspace? Receive only, or is there a condition where we can communicate with them, and in what etiquette?

I've found a thread that somewhat addresses this question at the qrz Ham radio forums and have submitted the question there.

http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=197089

Otherwise, I haven't found the answer from any of the sources listed there or from general Google searches.

I'll post the information that comes from the qrz thread, if someone here doesn't beat me to it, or whatever.

-Steve

[Apep]

When operating UAVs or High Altitude Sailplanes, what are the radio procedures for communicating with general aviation aircraft sharing the same airspace? Receive only, or is there a condition where we can communicate with them, and in what etiquette?

Why do you want to communicate with them?

Maybe this helps:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airband
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrument_Flight_Rules

[Magician]

Steve,

There are no established procedures for communicating with manned aircraft when flying any unmanned vehicles (UAVs or models) in the national airspace. Manned aircraft have the right of way at all times, it is our responsibility to see and avoid them. Many general aviation pilots don't monitor common air to air comms and simply change from airport freq to airport freq. In most airspace, especially rural areas, they are not required to have a radio nor are they required to actually use it if one is installed.

For UAVs in restricted airspace all comms are via range control or the local tower if at an airfield. In the past when operating UAVs in the national airspace a NOTAM (notice to airmen) was posted for the flight area, altitudes and times of the UAV activity. This is less common due to the recent FAA actions but it was still only useful to those pilots who actually checked for NOTAMS and many local fliers did not. Even with a NOTAM, manned aircraft still have the right of way, it was just a courtesy notice.

Chris

[c_matt92]

This is one of the issues that needs to be overcome to ever have a chance of having UAV's become accepted by the FAA. There are three ideas that I have heard of being pitched out there. One is that every piece of aircraft have a transponder in it, but like has been mentioned, most planes don't have them or use them now, and probably wouldn't even with UAV's in the air. Second is a video based avoidance system, basically making the plane have "eyes" just like a manned pilot would have, so that it could avoid other aircraft. The last is to put a radar like system in your UAV which would also give it the ability to locate and avoid other aircraft.

Again, none of these are standard yet, but I truly hope that the FAA makes it to where you have to have one of the later two (your choice, not theirs). Otherwise, manned aircraft pilots would never accept UAV's.

[Quandumphone]

I think you would invite all kinds of unwanted attention if you started transmitting on any air frequencies. Your best approach would be to monitor only and make sure your aircraft stay well clear of other manned aircraft. About the only way I could imagine it being acceptable to transmit would be a pre-arranged situation that all forms of notification for pilots and controllers takes place. That is a bit of fantasy talk because it just wouldn't happen except maybe in some very uncommon situations.

[aperture]

There has been some inference by those negotiating rules for UAVs with the FAA, that one might have to basically file a flight plan. If that is the case, a UAV pilot would contact the local area flight service station and file a flight plan for the airspace to be used. The responsible air traffic control facility e.g. Chicago Center, would then caution pilots flying in your area. Problem will be that from the ground, you might not be able to communicate with the ATC without additional antenna. All this will have to be worked out when/if the new rules are decided upon, which includes probably training and certification. It's a nightmare and won't be happening overnight.

It is correct that much of the airspace in the US is uncontrolled airspace, and aircraft do not have to be in contact with any ATC facility. In that case, it is 'see and avoid' which could be a crap shoot. NOTAMs are oftentimes not read, especially in rural environments, or by no radio (NORDO) pilots. Who knows how the FAA is going to handle these issues.

[rich smith]

It is illegal to operate one unless you are a pilot or controller. The penalty is severe and they do enforce. Like chatting on a police or ambulance frequency.


I found only two entries in a search of all of RcGroups for "aviation transceiver". The one that comes close became a dead end. (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=995288&highlight=aviation+transceiver).

So here is my attempt to ask the question and hopefully help find the answer: When operating UAVs or High Altitude Sailplanes, what are the radio procedures for communicating with general aviation aircraft sharing the same airspace? Receive only, or is there a condition where we can communicate with them, and in what etiquette?

I've found a thread that somewhat addresses this question at the qrz Ham radio forums and have submitted the question there.

http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=197089

Otherwise, I haven't found the answer from any of the sources listed there or from general Google searches.

I'll post the information that comes from the qrz thread, if someone here doesn't beat me to it, or whatever.

-Steve

[Quandumphone]

Regarding the ATC aspect, Magician's post is right on the money and applies to what the expectation will be. The UAV operator will be expected to operate their aircraft in a way that doesn't interfere with manned aircraft. Intermixing in a manner that might require manned aircraft to deviate will not be an available option in almost all cases. The types of unmanned aircraft that would be and are allowed to interact with ATC and other manned aircraft are those that have a need, such as: military, law enforcement, fire fighting, etc... Keep in mind, this is true in controlled and uncontrolled airspace. Don't be confused by the term "uncontrolled airspace" because that airspace is still regulated, just with different rules.

[KatanaGuy]

I had feared that it wasn't possible. For any radio call, there has to be a declaration of who your are and what facility or area you're addressing Example: "Provo Traffic, Katana 465US, yada yada... Provo Traffic". My gut feeling was that a radio has to be involved with a full-scale airplane, service or facility; no broadcasting in the middle of no-where from the ground. (How do you say: "Middle of no where traffic, XYZ university UAV flight team, our UAV at 8000 feet, Northbound..." ?) It also makes since that there isn't anything we say anyway, as we yield to them, period. So until the FAA thing gets figured out, we will probably have to just listen.

I've joked with my professor that we can directly address the issue of general aviation pilots being in the vicinity of our UAV by being the GA pilot in question. (Yes, I'm a private pilot). Rich is right: From your comments and my researching this, the aviation frequencies indeed appear to be a federally regulated and enforced service. But.... if I'm the pilot in a plane circling the flight area of the UAV, I can make position reports on the local area traffic frequency (as I shadow our UAV). With rental rates at $80 to $100 an hour, its a pretty pricey way of deconflicting our UAV with GA traffic.

-Steve