Aviation Handheld Radios

[Outta Control]

This, “...If it’s an imminent safety-of-flight situation with a manned aircraft I’d have no problem with using the transmitter...”

If you are aware of a potential hazardous incident may occur, an experienced rPIC should have no issue getting on that transmitter to advise, and help as part of good CRM.

 

[Weaponized]

I have a Yaesu and use it but I do question their effectiveness when used on the ground. They use line-of-sight frequencies so receiving or transmitting from a ground station that is often obscured is hit or miss. Having flown my airspace in heavy fixed-wing I know for a fact there is more radio chatter than what I can hear from the deck at a job site. Its better than nothing but you're limited nonetheless.

 

[Flying Horse]

Thank You !

 

[Arvada]

This has been an interesting thread to read as it has evolved a little over the last year. I have been needing some definitive answers to this problem due to my involvement in public safety. To that end, I want to add (in an edifying way if I may) some considerations to the issue of using a handheld radio.

If some of you don't have time to read this thread, I suggest you read this article posted. It is helpful and may give you some thoughts on how and why one might have a handheld radio as a part 107 pilot.

What You Need to Know About Getting Your Handheld Aviation Radio License - Public Safety Flight

Drone pilots should have an aviation handheld radio to communicate with nearby aircraft, transmit blind announcements about operations near an uncontrolled airport, and most importantly, to communicate with helicopters flying above incident scenes. I regularly communicate with news helicopters...

psflight.org

My background....Part 61 pilot with instrument endorsement, Part 107 Pilot, Amateur Radio License (General Class), GMRS, and RR License with FCC.

So, the real issue. A key significant emphasis of radio use for any pilot is communication of intention and situational awareness. Yes, there are defined zones and airspaces which means in an ideal world, there should be no reason for communication at all. But ideal and humans are a bit of an oxymoron. I have in my years nearly been hit by planes squeaking into a pattern where they shouldn't be and they never announced intention. I live in a remote part of my state and my house routinely gets flown over by a helicopter pilot at about 350 ft AGL because he thinks it's fun. So.....would making an announcement for situational awareness be valuable? Well as an "ounce of prevention" kind of guy I think it would help. I'd rather tell that knucklehead to stay clear rather than scrape his wreckage off my driveway. Let me use another example. I often used to fly in and out of an airport that had parachutes. Every time they threw humans out of a perfectly good aircraft, they'd announce "jumpers" so we could watch out for them. I often mused over what I was supposed to do with that information. If one smashed into my windshield, I'm not sure I could do anything to avoid it....but no pilot would say that the announcement was frivolous or should be banned from the airwaves. So why not a courteous single positional announcement that you are operating, location, and altitude? I think that's not such a bad idea if you are within 5 miles of an airport. But that's just me.

So, I applaud the FAA in their attempts to create a safe sky environment. Now the reality of FAA meets FCC and the implications. The aviation licenses in the continental US are collocated to a physical aircraft which means the FCC has waived the need for a pilot to hold a radio license. As some of you have commented on talking to towers or even the FCC, the answers and mystery shouldn't surprise anyone. Appropriate judicious use of aviation frequencies has a benefit but consider what would happen if the FAA or FCC told every part 107 pilot they needed to do it. You'd have every person and their dog chatting up the CTAF and UNICOM bands and really creating a safety problem. Yet....if you are truly a part 61 pilot, you have to admit, there are people out there who do not follow the rules with altitudes. So, is a handheld a good idea for general broadcast if you are in an airport vicinity. I think so. Can you legally transmit on one? Well guess what, there may actually be a bit of a loophole on that. If you read the article I attached, a pilot may use a portable radio to transmit if he is inside his own aircraft. That is the verbiage quoted in this thread that most part 61 pilots are familiar with. But what most forget is that the United States has deviated slightly from international rule. Pilots in international countries must also possess a radio license. The FCC equivalent to the is the Restricted Operational License. (RR Class). This allows the user to operate on aviation bands and if you look at FCC form 605 part C, it does have a section for a "portable radio."

Now here is what is NOT clear by the FCC. They clearly state that if you operate within the US, you "are not required to have a restricted operational license." This phraseology, however, is NOT equivalent to saying, " you cannot use one." Hence a federal loophole unless there is a legal eagle out there that can fill in something I haven't found.

So why would the FCC leave this open? Who knows. Maybe they and the FAA realize there is occasional benefit to transmitting on an aviation band while you are on the ground. But (and I agree with them on this) don't want to open a flood gate to inappropriate use of bandwidth by people who are not familiar with aviation communication.

I don't think this thread should become old or archived. I think more should happen here. The LAANC system gives permission to fly. But not everyone winds up where they are supposed to be. So....maybe the FAA and FCC should consider allowing a restricted operational license within the United States for such purposes.

Again, I suggest you read the article written above and consider it in this discussion.

Kind Regards,

Arvada

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

This has been an interesting thread to read as it has evolved a little over the last year. I have been needing some definitive answers to this problem due to my involvement in public safety. To that end, I want to add (in an edifying way if I may) some considerations to the issue of using a handheld radio.

If some of you don't have time to read this thread, I suggest you read this article posted. It is helpful and may give you some thoughts on how and why one might have a handheld radio as a part 107 pilot.

What You Need to Know About Getting Your Handheld Aviation Radio License - Public Safety Flight

Drone pilots should have an aviation handheld radio to communicate with nearby aircraft, transmit blind announcements about operations near an uncontrolled airport, and most importantly, to communicate with helicopters flying above incident scenes. I regularly communicate with news helicopters...

psflight.org

My background....Part 61 pilot with instrument endorsement, Part 107 Pilot, Amateur Radio License (General Class), GMRS, and RR License with FCC.

So, the real issue. A key significant emphasis of radio use for any pilot is communication of intention and situational awareness. Yes, there are defined zones and airspaces which means in an ideal world, there should be no reason for communication at all. But ideal and humans are a bit of an oxymoron. I have in my years nearly been hit by planes squeaking into a pattern where they shouldn't be and they never announced intention. I live in a remote part of my state and my house routinely gets flown over by a helicopter pilot at about 350 ft AGL because he thinks it's fun. So.....would making an announcement for situational awareness be valuable? Well as an "ounce of prevention" kind of guy I think it would help. I'd rather tell that knucklehead to stay clear rather than scrape his wreckage off my driveway. Let me use another example. I often used to fly in and out of an airport that had parachutes. Every time they threw humans out of a perfectly good aircraft, they'd announce "jumpers" so we could watch out for them. I often mused over what I was supposed to do with that information. If one smashed into my windshield, I'm not sure I could do anything to avoid it....but no pilot would say that the announcement was frivolous or should be banned from the airwaves. So why not a courteous single positional announcement that you are operating, location, and altitude? I think that's not such a bad idea if you are within 5 miles of an airport. But that's just me.

So, I applaud the FAA in their attempts to create a safe sky environment. Now the reality of FAA meets FCC and the implications. The aviation licenses in the continental US are collocated to a physical aircraft which means the FCC has waived the need for a pilot to hold a radio license. As some of you have commented on talking to towers or even the FCC, the answers and mystery shouldn't surprise anyone. Appropriate judicious use of aviation frequencies has a benefit but consider what would happen if the FAA or FCC told every part 107 pilot they needed to do it. You'd have every person and their dog chatting up the CTAF and UNICOM bands and really creating a safety problem. Yet....if you are truly a part 61 pilot, you have to admit, there are people out there who do not follow the rules with altitudes. So, is a handheld a good idea for general broadcast if you are in an airport vicinity. I think so. Can you legally transmit on one? Well guess what, there may actually be a bit of a loophole on that. If you read the article I attached, a pilot may use a portable radio to transmit if he is inside his own aircraft. That is the verbiage quoted in this thread that most part 61 pilots are familiar with. But what most forget is that the United States has deviated slightly from international rule. Pilots in international countries must also possess a radio license. The FCC equivalent to the is the Restricted Operational License. (RR Class). This allows the user to operate on aviation bands and if you look at FCC form 605 part C, it does have a section for a "portable radio."

Now here is what is NOT clear by the FCC. They clearly state that if you operate within the US, you "are not required to have a restricted operational license." This phraseology, however, is NOT equivalent to saying, " you cannot use one." Hence a federal loophole unless there is a legal eagle out there that can fill in something I haven't found.

So why would the FCC leave this open? Who knows. Maybe they and the FAA realize there is occasional benefit to transmitting on an aviation band while you are on the ground. But (and I agree with them on this) don't want to open a flood gate to inappropriate use of bandwidth by people who are not familiar with aviation communication.

I don't think this thread should become old or archived. I think more should happen here. The LAANC system gives permission to fly. But not everyone winds up where they are supposed to be. So....maybe the FAA and FCC should consider allowing a restricted operational license within the United States for such purposes.

Again, I suggest you read the article written above and consider it in this discussion.

Kind Regards,

Arvada

You'll get the digital restricted radiotelephone operator permit overnight. No expiration.... Anyone gives me static for using my aviation radio to ensure safe flying, I'll whip that puppy out...

 

[Fred Garvin]

Thanks for those links. I’m going to get this taken care of. I’m the type who tries to get my ducks in a row. I have the GMRS license for my little field radios....I even got out of a ticket once because I had a “Helmet Exemption” sticker on my bike’s plate.....the officer said it was the only one he’d ever seen and he was so impressed with my diligence to do the right thing, he let me off with a “pay attention” warning! (43 in a 35)

It may or may not be necessary....but if questions or situations did arise, at least I’d have something that shows I’m trying, at least, to do the right thing.

 

[Arvada]

Thanks both for the comments. I talked by phone last night with Steve Rhodes, the author of the article I posted. He told me that he only uses the radio for positional awareness when he is either right up against the airport property or if there is helicopter traffic right above him. His work in public safety often has news helicopters above him taking pictures for the evening news. He said he has even taken the time to meet them personally so they know who he is. I think for responsible Part 107 pilots his solution is a wise one. Judicious use for positional awareness with a card in his pocket to show he means proper intent and use. I'm no attorney but I think that will stick. Just like a helmet sticker on the back of a bike. Good comment! Intent in our legal system is very important. I'm just trying to promote safety.

 

[Fred Garvin]

That was fast! I submitted my application this afternoon and received my approval and link to my license certificate an hour ago. Printed one for the logbook and one for the wallet.

 

[OFAP]

i went with the sporty's sp-400, although the icon and yaesu models are highly rated.

gold seal recommends making your presence known if you are working (under authorization, of course) in a sensitive area.

 

[Phaedrus]

Now here is what is NOT clear by the FCC. They clearly state that if you operate within the US, you "are not required to have a restricted operational license." This phraseology, however, is NOT equivalent to saying, " you cannot use one." Hence a federal loophole unless there is a legal eagle out there that can fill in something I haven't found.

So why would the FCC leave this open? Who knows. Maybe they and the FAA realize there is occasional benefit to transmitting on an aviation band while you are on the ground. But (and I agree with them on this) don't want to open a flood gate to inappropriate use of bandwidth by people who are not familiar with aviation communication.

They left it open because when those rules were written they were not even imagining the advent and popularity of commercial drones. Hence not a loophole per se, or even an oversight.

It is also clear when looking at the materials the FAA has published right down to what we know is in the Part 107 test that they see us using aviation band radios as an information source and not for communication with ATC or other aircraft. With the exception that in an emergency a pilot is clear to do whatever it takes to end the flight successfully.

In addition, the FAA clearly does not require the use of a radio for sUAS operations in airspace where they are required for manned aircraft.

It is also interesting to me how often I see threads like this discussing the nuances and potential loopholes in FAA/FCC regulations and yet when I point out that FCC Pat 15.203 specifically and clearly defines the use of any other antenna on a Part 15 device other then the one/type used to certify it is flatly prohibited. Yet all kinds of aftermarket, and illegal, antennas are in use, and often under the guise of saying they make flying safer. That may well be true, but the FCC has no "loophole" that allows for it.

I hold a General Class amateur radio license. I have a handheld radio that receives airband. I monitor that when near airports for situational awareness.

 

[Phaedrus]

That was fast! I submitted my application this afternoon and received my approval and link to my license certificate an hour ago. Printed one for the logbook and one for the wallet.

Which license?

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

Which license?

What You Need to Know About Getting Your Handheld Aviation Radio License - Public Safety Flight

Drone pilots should have an aviation handheld radio to communicate with nearby aircraft, transmit blind announcements about operations near an uncontrolled airport, and most importantly, to communicate with helicopters flying above incident scenes. I regularly communicate with news helicopters...

psflight.org

 

[Phaedrus]

Thanks. Still not 100% clear it is permitted in anything other than an emergency, but good to know about it.

Seems like it is not required:

An RR is NOT needed to operate the following:

• Aircraft stations which operate only on VHF frequencies and do not make foreign flights.

But for $70 if there is a chance you are dealing with an ignorant LEO, etc. it might help. But I would still not see it as a permit to openly use aviation band frequencies in anything other than an emergency, where it would be permitted in any case.

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

Thanks. Still not 100% clear it is permitted in anything other than an emergency, but good to know about it.

I will use it anytime I feel is appropriate now that I have the FCC license and am not going to worry about it.
PS- have been using mine near airports anyway and aviation lingo is old stuff to me. If any pilot gets miffed then let her/him file a complaint. RPIC w/o aviation cockpit experience should seek coaching before getting on the airwaves.

 

[Phaedrus]

I see your point, but in this case the license is completely un-needed since it is intended for international use. I agree about learning how to talk on the radio.

For fun people should dial up LiveATC on their computer or get the phone app. Lets you listen in to a huge number of aviation frequencies, tower, approach, etc. Get a feel for what it sound like.

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

I see your point, but in this case the license is completely un-needed since it is intended for international use. I agree about learning how to talk on the radio.

For fun people should dial up LiveATC on their computer or get the phone app. Lets you listen in to a huge number of aviation frequencies, tower, approach, etc. Get a feel for what it sound like.

Well, the "un-needed" aspect seems to be a grey area. Either way, I'm cool with it...

 

[Phaedrus]

How so? They clearly state that it is not needed unless operating internationally, which is what it is intended for.

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

How so? They clearly state that it is not needed unless operating internationally, which is what it is intended for.

You are correct, but each aircraft is issued an FCC license and the rules were meant for manned aviation. These rules are very old and predate drones. When I started flying (1969) an FCC radiotelephone operator license (I think that's what it was called) was required but If memory serves that requirement was deleted.
So, I am not completely sure a UAS pilot can operate on aviation spectrum w/o an FCC license.

 

[PatR]

I bought my first hand held two way aviation band transceiver back in 1989. I had no qualms using it then in communicating with students during their initial solo flight and would have no reservations using one now if in situations where monitoring full scale and advising of activities aided safety.

As Phaedrus mentioned, a pilot can deviate from regulations as needed to assure the safe outcome of a flight. The law does not distinguish who’s flight is the one being saved, yours or someone else’s.

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

I bought my first hand held two way aviation band transceiver back in 1989. I had no qualms using it then in communicating with students during their initial solo flight and would have no reservations using one now if in situations where monitoring full scale and advising of activities aided safety.

As Phaedrus mentioned, a pilot can deviate from regulations as needed to assure the safe outcome of a flight. The law does not distinguish who’s flight is the one being saved, yours or someone else’s.

We agree, that wasn't his comment, though.