8.33Khz In ALL airspace
Moderators: John Dean, Moderator
-
- Posts: 203
- Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 8:35 pm
-
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:39 pm
-
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:49 pm
- Location: Southampton
- Contact:
Thanks Donald...didn't find my Bendix set in the Honeywell (EASA) listings, but instead found it in the CAA system!
John,
thanks for the 'heads up' from the CAA, however, the questions begs the answer; why haven't any manufacturers bothered to do so? I presume there is a cost involved and a paper trail to write up? Or are we stuck in a 'techno time-warp' with hand-helds?
Andrew
John,
thanks for the 'heads up' from the CAA, however, the questions begs the answer; why haven't any manufacturers bothered to do so? I presume there is a cost involved and a paper trail to write up? Or are we stuck in a 'techno time-warp' with hand-helds?
Andrew
034852
-
- Posts: 203
- Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 8:35 pm
Andrew,
Here is the answer to your question:
"Notice for use
The IC-A24E/A6E complies with requirements of the European Radio and Telecommunication Terminal Directive 1999/5/EC and is RTTE and CE approved. At present full approval for air use is not attainable for this product or any other product at this level in the market place. Therefore, IC-A24E & A6E are both intended for use in Europe for ground use only*.
Under the Wireless and Telegraphy Act of 2006 this radio can be used for emergency communication and navigation (VOR) should your life be at risk.
*Unless an Aviation body in an EU member state gives dispensation for it to be used in the air. "
Here is the answer to your question:
"Notice for use
The IC-A24E/A6E complies with requirements of the European Radio and Telecommunication Terminal Directive 1999/5/EC and is RTTE and CE approved. At present full approval for air use is not attainable for this product or any other product at this level in the market place. Therefore, IC-A24E & A6E are both intended for use in Europe for ground use only*.
Under the Wireless and Telegraphy Act of 2006 this radio can be used for emergency communication and navigation (VOR) should your life be at risk.
*Unless an Aviation body in an EU member state gives dispensation for it to be used in the air. "
-
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 2:47 pm
*Unless an Aviation body in an EU member state gives dispensation for it to be used in the air. "
Exactly. And when I asked on the BMAA forum why the BMAA had not done so, they tartly remarked that "BMAA doesn't do the work for the manufacturers." Nor, I gathered, for their own members, either.
Is it too much to expect the LAA to give a dispensation in this case, to improve safety and reduce costs. It would appear that we have the power to do so.
Exactly. And when I asked on the BMAA forum why the BMAA had not done so, they tartly remarked that "BMAA doesn't do the work for the manufacturers." Nor, I gathered, for their own members, either.
Is it too much to expect the LAA to give a dispensation in this case, to improve safety and reduce costs. It would appear that we have the power to do so.
-
- Posts: 203
- Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 8:35 pm
It is the manufacturer or its agent that would have to make the submission, not the BMAA or LAA.
The French ICOM importer has chosen to do this and obtained DGAC authorisation for the A6 and A24, now designated A6FR and A24FR. The only difference is an FM immune aerial. It cannot be bought separate from the radio, which costs 690 euros.
http://www.icom-france.com/aviation.php
I can't see many LAA or BMAA wanting to pay that much for the privilege of a legal handheld, which incidentally is not as good as the older models.
The French ICOM importer has chosen to do this and obtained DGAC authorisation for the A6 and A24, now designated A6FR and A24FR. The only difference is an FM immune aerial. It cannot be bought separate from the radio, which costs 690 euros.
http://www.icom-france.com/aviation.php
I can't see many LAA or BMAA wanting to pay that much for the privilege of a legal handheld, which incidentally is not as good as the older models.
-
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 2:47 pm
But the LAA is
" an aviation body in an EU member state." If we can grant a permit to an RV10 then we can grant one to a Vertex handheld. I can see no reason why not. The CAA is unlikely to object, in my view and legal is always better than illegal, especially if the equipment has been used for some time on a Nelson without ill effects.
" an aviation body in an EU member state." If we can grant a permit to an RV10 then we can grant one to a Vertex handheld. I can see no reason why not. The CAA is unlikely to object, in my view and legal is always better than illegal, especially if the equipment has been used for some time on a Nelson without ill effects.
-
- Posts: 203
- Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 8:35 pm
-
- Posts: 357
- Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 5:10 pm
- Location: Hinton in the hedges
Tom,
the LAA can only approve what their CAA approved exposition allows it to approve. I would think this onlt covers aircraft and engines and not radios, transponders etc.
Without wanting to insult our engineers, I would imagine there is no one there who has the technical expertise, or more imprortantly the test equipment to be able to test and approve any kind of radio.
However, what I dont understand is why as these radios are approved in the USA to some kind of standard, why the CAA or EASA cannot recognise this standard without having to do their own approval.
To be honest it is ridiculous as there are thousands of people flying around the UK with probably mostly unapproved handheld radios and it doesnt cause any problem!
the LAA can only approve what their CAA approved exposition allows it to approve. I would think this onlt covers aircraft and engines and not radios, transponders etc.
Without wanting to insult our engineers, I would imagine there is no one there who has the technical expertise, or more imprortantly the test equipment to be able to test and approve any kind of radio.
However, what I dont understand is why as these radios are approved in the USA to some kind of standard, why the CAA or EASA cannot recognise this standard without having to do their own approval.
To be honest it is ridiculous as there are thousands of people flying around the UK with probably mostly unapproved handheld radios and it doesnt cause any problem!
-
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 2:47 pm
Has anybody asked the CAA if we are allowed to? A suitable test house is not really a problem; (I'm an RF engineer working for a defence contractor making transmitters amongst other things like airfield lighting systems...)
I think that where there's a will there's a way but if nobody cares enough to ask, we won't get. Approval could save us bother in France, for example where they like the gear to be approved (and like it even better if it isn't, if you get my meaning.)
I think that where there's a will there's a way but if nobody cares enough to ask, we won't get. Approval could save us bother in France, for example where they like the gear to be approved (and like it even better if it isn't, if you get my meaning.)
-
- Posts: 1000
- Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:21 pm
I seem to recall that in the US manufactures self test/approve kit. If it dosen't conform, and they have declaired it does, then things fall from a great height on them. A similar thing to EAA and LAA approvals for homebuilts.However, what I dont understand is why as these radios are approved in the USA to some kind of standard, why the CAA or EASA cannot recognise this standard without having to do their own approval.
- Chris Martyr
- Posts: 584
- Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:58 am
- Location: Horsted Keynes Sussex
Donald seems a bit too keen by half in his desire to hold the EASA scabbard to all of our throats. Andrew Leak's very valid original question was dealt with admirably by Brian Hope with his assertion that nothing will appear in any sort of clarity before 2018, along with equally sensible inputs from John Brady and Nigel Hitchman.
Chat Forums are a great facility to have with regard to all that goes on today with our hobby, but it's a pity that individuals take it upon themselves to stir it up into a hornets nest by acting as some sort of self-appointed EASA advocate, as it does rather undermine the excellent inroads that are being made from within our own governance re; LAAs negotiating team with EASA.
I'm sure that a massive majority of LAAers like myself have used and will continue to use hand-helds, and my Icoms CAA approval no. and Aeronautical Transportable Radio Licence appear to document this as being perfectly legal. I think any further inputs re; the above should be referred to the answer given by The Hon. Member for Sheerness on page 1
Chat Forums are a great facility to have with regard to all that goes on today with our hobby, but it's a pity that individuals take it upon themselves to stir it up into a hornets nest by acting as some sort of self-appointed EASA advocate, as it does rather undermine the excellent inroads that are being made from within our own governance re; LAAs negotiating team with EASA.
I'm sure that a massive majority of LAAers like myself have used and will continue to use hand-helds, and my Icoms CAA approval no. and Aeronautical Transportable Radio Licence appear to document this as being perfectly legal. I think any further inputs re; the above should be referred to the answer given by The Hon. Member for Sheerness on page 1
-
- Posts: 203
- Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 8:35 pm
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 8:22 pm
-
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 2:47 pm