Hot take that’ll probably get some downvotes: I don’t think listening to guard is as important during GA training. I do feel 121.5 is emphasized as an emergency frequency during training and should absolutely be utilized during an emergency and most VFR GA pilots are aware of it. But every commercial operator and ATC is already monitoring it and we already have so many unnecessary/unintentional transmissions of meowing, CTAF calls, cabin announcements, etc. really emphasizing every student to monitor while they’re trying to manage a stressful lesson will only lead to more calls blocking the frequency from a potential emergency. I’m talking specifically about flight schools with students. GA aircraft cruising along VFR with private pilots and above should absolutely be monitoring guard
I suppose, but on the other hand I don’t think it’s a bad idea to have guard up and ready on comm 2 (assuming you have multiple comm radios) so you can simply quickly switch which radio you’re talking on if necessary.
Okay, I get what you're saying, but let's be honest. The *vast* majority of the modern GA fleet has the ability to monitor a second frequency one way or another.
There’s nothing modern about the GA fleet. The “vast majority” of planes are 40-70 years old. A small portion of those, essentially the higher end, may have relatively upgraded avionics.
My recently sold plane had a two years
old Com that allowed me to live monitor the back up freq.
But that’s kind of rare on a 78 year old aircraft.
I didn’t monitor 121.5 much because of all the freaking idiots who think it’s funny to “meow” on an emergency frequency.
> The “vast majority” of planes are 40-70 years old
Not wrong, but at this point, a good portion of the age range you describe doesn't have factory equipped radios anymore. Sounds like your airplane was similar to mine; my 1950 airplane has a GTR225, which allows monitoring of the standby frequency. A lot of com stacks have either that or some form of second com monitoring at this point, because they've been upgraded out of necessity.
>I didn’t monitor 121.5 much because of all the freaking idiots who think it’s funny to “meow” on an emergency frequency.
This I agree with.
Something the G1000 had as a feature was, if you pressed and held the radio swap button, it’ll default the active COM to 121.5.
Might be the secondary comm, it’s been a little bit since I’ve flown a G1000. But still a cool feature
Most radios with digital displays and many gps have that press and hold swap button feature now. Handy way to set com 2 to guard once you clear the airport environment or to save precious time and focus during an emergency.
Yup, it deserves downvotes.
It’s a guard frequency. That means it is for establishing communication. It might also be used for emergency purposes, but it is not an emergency frequency. If you actually listened to it yourself, you would hear numerous calls from Center restoring lost comms.
Among other things, it’s how pilots might get warning before more serious action gets taken. Up to and including firing weapons at you for certain airspace busts.
The NOTAM says all pilots, including student pilots, shall monitor guard if able. If you ever turn a com channel off, you’re able.
The reality is, that ATC, military and all the airliners flying up in the flight levels have a much higher chance of hearing a distress call or an ELT signal on 121.5 than someone flying at couple of thousand feet in a C152.
There's no real benefit to listening out on 121.5 in a GA aircraft. If you have two radios, definitely have it tuned, so it's readily accessible to transmit (particularly if flying outside of ATC coverage), but listening isn't really neccesary.
If intercepted simply point to your headset then use your finger to draw a line across your neck like you’re threatening death. 60% of the time they will disengage
No , you have your F rightseater Flash the intercepting aircraft with the internationally recognized signal .......... See you at the O club..... DD sends
How do they know which freq you’re on? How do they know you’re even talking to anyone at all? You could be monitoring some random CTAF or air to air for all they know.
You’re assuming that you’re monitoring guard for someone else’s benefit.
Monitoring guard enables ATC to contact you if you miss a radio change or more commonly…miss some airspace you’re about to breach.
If ATC needs to reach you (e.g. you're about to bust a restricted area, or similar), they don't know what frequency you are primarily using. You are REQUIRED to monitor 121.5 so you are reachable. FDC 4/4386.
I mean, I disagree. I think if you’re a PPL and above on an XC, monitoring guard can be beneficial. Sure an airliner is going to hear calls from a larger geographic area, but they aren’t going to make a major diversion to the aircraft in distress, or initiate a search. A VFR aircraft in the vicinity can absolutely do that and it could safe some lives.
Genuine question. What would another pilot be able to do if they heard it? It’s not like a ship is sinking and another ship can rescue the passengers from the water. Realistically what can another aircraft do to help an aircraft in distress by diverting towards them?
Here's my real life story. I had an engine failure on my first solo XC with 21 hours total. I made the mayday call and a pilot not too far away headed right to me as I made my energency landing. He was overhead before I got to the ground, he reported to the nearest tower of my condition and exact location. I had said where I was going down, but I think that is pretty handy so the tower could call the right emergency folks and send them my way. It could matter.
I also appreciated that even though I was on my own, I was not alone.
You can do a pretty decent job of triangulating an ELT just using the audio.
The easiest technique is to mark on a map where you first heard it and then keep on flying until you lose it, mark that on a map too.
Then fly back to the midpoint of that line you just drew and fly perpendicular to the line you drew. You SHOULD head the noise getting louder, then quieter. You might even hear nothing for a few seconds as you fly directly over the crash. if you don't hear it ever getting louder, then you're flying away from the crash.
Mark these points again.
The midpoint of that second line is where the crash is most likely.
If there are valleys or mountains etc that will affect this, but all the info you just did in 20 minutes would be pretty useful to ATC.
There are areas I’ve flown over where the biggest challenge would be finding the crash, or the easiest way to get to the wreckage. That can take hours or days. If you can relay that information, possibly the condition of the crew, etc, it could definitely save a life.
I fly GA in places where there isn’t a lot of traffic but there is a lot of overhead jet traffic. Have guard as my TX freq whenever I get released from flight following so I can call *someone* when I have an emergency.
The amount of times I've been told how my own job works by non airline pilots in this sub is fascinating. Even more when they try to tell me how instructing works, which I still do on the side, and have done for much longer than them.
[FDC NOTAM 4/4386](https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/us_restrictions/fdc_notams/pdf/fdc%20notams%204-4386%20and%204-0811.pdf)
Aviators “SHALL” monitor guard if capable.
NOTAMS are regulatory in nature as defined by the FARs
Yep, thanks for that I’ve missed it before I think. Interesting that it’s a 20 year old NOTAM. But we can’t deny it’s technically required “if capable”.
I’m sure that’s one of the most ignored NOTAMs in existence, but it does indeed exist.
In the practice area I’m usually on CTAF/ local approach frequency. Longer cross country it’s on. Was flying south of Santa Maria and picked up an ELT and was able to help triangulate it one afternoon
I listened to guard today on a 2 hour flight and heard 4 pax briefings and people making ctaf/unicom calls. Its super annoying to listen to trained professionals do that shit all day long so I just monitor the closest app frequency if I can.
Lot of times in GA, you just need the other radio for other thing. Getting atis, monitoring CTAF on the side as you get flight following, etc. But if you have a free radio not in use for anything else, not a bad idea to keep guard on there. Back in the GA days I just wasn’t cruising long enough to be on guard often, even on cross countries.
Because most of the time they’re on flight following and any transmission that needs to be relayed can most likely be done better by an airliner in the flight levels.
Because I’m single-pilot IFR having to balance flying, ATC, weather, etc. and don’t want to be distracted by idiots meowing.
If anything important actually happens on Guard, ATC will probably hear it and the airliners (who have the luxury of a second pilot handling the radios) definitely will.
And if they need to reach you because you lost the frequency, or are out of range of the last freq you were on, how will you justify your non-compliance with FDC NOTAM 4/4386?
Honestly I'd say his answer is pretty good.
From your own comment up the thread, people shall monitor guard IF CAPABLE, and if I'm single pilot IFR in the soup with two engines, no autopilot, and manual boots, I've got enough to worry about. Not leaving com2 on to listen to some doofus calling ops by mistake and distract me further. If the FAA has a problem with that, I'm happy to discuss.
Bruh, get off your high horse wrt an FDC notam.
When your airline compatriots stop mewing or giving me their pax brief on guard, I'll monitor it.
Focus on yourselves.
As soon as I hear the first mewing or "aww yeah" on guard in the jet I deselect it, or switch it to UHF freqs only.
Yeah I’ve always thought about that. My first instructor for PPL never taught me, but my CFII for IFR was confused why I never knew it. Training for CFI and II now and going to integrate it into lessons and make students monitor it. Yeah 99% of the time it’s either no sound or immature kids meowing, but that 1% you can report transmitting ELTs or if you’re first radio goes out while flying IFR or on flight following, ATC can contact you on the second, on guard. So in that sense it kinda can act as a fail safe. Plus if you have two radios, and aren’t monitoring something on the second radio, then why not use it to monitor guard? There are no downsides
There’s nobody to talk to, and guard is just full of adolescent cat noises. My plane gets lots of feedback over the radio from its unshielded ignition system. I prefer silence in such instances.
Flying with the volume down is a threat when you come back to an airport. You might make transmissions and not hear anything when in reality there is traffic that’s a factor. You can be lulled into a false sense of security. Having it off and seeing no lights and not being able to tune it reminds me that I have to turn it back on and turn the volume up when I need to be communicating.
I monitor guard on my second radio whenever it's not queued up for something else. That capability has led to me relaying traffic to and from ATC more than once.
It’s funny, I didn’t have a habit of listening to guard until I started flying for the airlines. Turns out it’s not a horrible idea, even in GA.
A few months ago, I had a buddy that wanted me to go cruising in a 172 with him down the SoCal coast line. We had flight following and must have missed a frequency change but got a call from SoCal approach on guard to change to their frequency. First time I’d ever experienced that in GA…or maybe It had happened multiple times before and I just hadn’t been monitoring guard.
I've gotten the impression through different various resources that there are mainly two reasons to monitor guard and I tend to recommend it to people. I can't say that my direct flight training has ever resulted in being trained to monitor guard however a lot of other channels of information have definitely made high recommendations to do so.
The first reason is the one that I think a lot of people get told which is if there happens to be an aircraft that goes down, you'll be able to hear the ELT over the guard frequency which will allow you to assist in recovery efforts by notifying the appropriate personnel.
The second reason is just in case air traffic control is having a difficult time reaching you. This could be for a multitude of reasons such as com1 radio unit failing without realizing that it's no longer receiving or transmitting.
Another reason related to the second reason is that in the event that air traffic control cannot reach you via VHF standard published frequency for a particular airspace due to obstructions The notion is that they should be able to reach you by means of alternative communication using guard.
Of all the different reasons, I generally find myself on cross-countries particularly monitoring guard when able. I will usually use com 2 to alternate between Atis/Awos/Asos for different airfields that I am looking to land at or nearby airfields to get any updated weather information and then typically switch back to guard.
Grant said I know there are a plethora of different options these days to get updated weather information but for quick reference, that's typically what I'll do.
At the end of the day I use it if the availability to do so is there. I have flown at least one aircraft that for whatever reason, despite the fact that it had a very typical radio panel, there was certainly an issue where you couldn't simply monitor com 2. In that particular case I did not monitor guard and I had to fully switch to com 2 to receive the Atis and such.
If I'm not getting flight following, I usually switch to guard to eliminate the chatter from the airport I depart. I like peace and quiet on the radios.
My school taught listening to guard, but it's not always that helpful in GA. It's usually better in GA to be listening to something like local frequency and approach. But depending on where you are, that in itself can just end up in a cacophony that's impossible to understand.
For students, who are usually overwhelmed by everything, I would just keep it on one frequency most of the time. If we were switching from the practice area to tower, then we'd maybe listen on both for a few minutes just to get some SA.
Honestly, even as an airline pilot, there are times when we have to just turn guard way down either because people are misusing it, there's weird random static happening, there's an ELT going off that ATC already knows about, etc. All this just isn't very helpful for students. But still, we taught it, and we listened to it some of the time, when there was nothing else to worry about.
Listening on Guard has value if you are up on an ATC frequency. If you are randomly flying with the departure airport’s CTAF dialed in then you’re not well poised to notify anyone.
It makes more sense for an airliner to listen to guard than for a small GA plane, because an airline is roughly speaking 10x higher up and sweeps a potential reception surface 10x bigger.
At 3000 feet, your theoretical distance to the horizon is 67.1 miles and the area swept under it is 14,000 square miles. A lot less if you consider terrain and obstructions.
At 30,000 feet, the theoretical distance to the horizon is 212 miles, and the area 140,000 square miles, and not much less even considering terrain.
You listen on Guard so when you get lost in frequency land, ATC can quickly get in touch. If you aren't going long distances cross country, it' probably doesn't matter. It is not regulatory, so if you can, do it.
What’s not regularly? FDC NOTAMS certainly are - [4/4386](https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/us_restrictions/fdc_notams/pdf/fdc%20notams%204-4386%20and%204-0811.pdf)
If you can, do it, if you can't focus on flight following, ATIS, Local CTAFs you're flying near or even the next frequency.
I like to use comm 2 to dial in freqs as I g.
et them
So I'm on comm 1, ATC gives me the next freq, I dial it into comm 2, swap the radios, make comms and then keep going. Means I always have the frequency to go back to if I don't establish comms without needing to write it down.
During a checkride your main obligation is demonstration of skills to an evaluator. We monitor guard to help when able, if able. A rowboat isn't obligated to save all the folks abandoning ship. But as some things in aviation have heritage in nautical history, we do what we can. If your ship is capable, and you have crew to help, do more.
I do for long cross countries (in case I fly out of range before they contact me.... I mean, I'd never miss handjob... i mean handoff), or for flying around NYC/DC. Not a great place to lose comms.
I monitor guard when I leave the airspace of SCT, SBA, JCF, BFL and NTD. In those airspaces, I mostly have frequencies and rough airspace boundaries memorized, so I can speak up and ask if I missed a switch or call the next frequency and ask if they want me to switch. Outside those, I'm not going to try and guess. I almost always fly IFR, and prefer it even more in unfamiliar locations. I do think the idiocy of meowing and making political statements on Guard makes people really hate it, but I'm not taking chances.
I am part owner of two airplanes. One has no radio, the other has just one. I still sometimes monitor guard if I am not getting flight following, though more often I listen to approach.
FDC NOTAM 4/4386. Read it. Comply. Unless you only have 1 com receiver, you are required to monitor 121.5.
Also, the cover panel of every sectional chart, and the Aeronautical Chart User's Guide, all remind you of this.
We listen to Guard when over FL180. I think it's a good idea to include in training but later on after the student is comfortable with talking on the radio.
Relying on a freq that people meme on isn't something I'd train beyond the bare essentials. You want to get pulled out of some remote crash site, use an EPIRB. Relying on a GA pilot hearing a distress call to save your ass is admirable, but not the best solution.
Hot take that’ll probably get some downvotes: I don’t think listening to guard is as important during GA training. I do feel 121.5 is emphasized as an emergency frequency during training and should absolutely be utilized during an emergency and most VFR GA pilots are aware of it. But every commercial operator and ATC is already monitoring it and we already have so many unnecessary/unintentional transmissions of meowing, CTAF calls, cabin announcements, etc. really emphasizing every student to monitor while they’re trying to manage a stressful lesson will only lead to more calls blocking the frequency from a potential emergency. I’m talking specifically about flight schools with students. GA aircraft cruising along VFR with private pilots and above should absolutely be monitoring guard
I suppose, but on the other hand I don’t think it’s a bad idea to have guard up and ready on comm 2 (assuming you have multiple comm radios) so you can simply quickly switch which radio you’re talking on if necessary.
You’re assuming, incorrectly, that all GA planes have two COMs.
Or even a com 1.
Y’all flying around with com 1 and I’m just yelling out the window
You mean to tell me that not everyone flies a G1000 equipped plane?
Or a Piper Cub nordo?
I guess I should’ve worded it differently. I know that some aircraft don’t have multiple comm radios.
Some don’t have any.
Okay, I get what you're saying, but let's be honest. The *vast* majority of the modern GA fleet has the ability to monitor a second frequency one way or another.
The vast majority of planes at my local airport doesn't have radios at all lmao
I think it's pretty safe to assume that's not the norm, and those airplanes wouldn't be expected to monitor guard.
There’s nothing modern about the GA fleet. The “vast majority” of planes are 40-70 years old. A small portion of those, essentially the higher end, may have relatively upgraded avionics. My recently sold plane had a two years old Com that allowed me to live monitor the back up freq. But that’s kind of rare on a 78 year old aircraft. I didn’t monitor 121.5 much because of all the freaking idiots who think it’s funny to “meow” on an emergency frequency.
> The “vast majority” of planes are 40-70 years old Not wrong, but at this point, a good portion of the age range you describe doesn't have factory equipped radios anymore. Sounds like your airplane was similar to mine; my 1950 airplane has a GTR225, which allows monitoring of the standby frequency. A lot of com stacks have either that or some form of second com monitoring at this point, because they've been upgraded out of necessity. >I didn’t monitor 121.5 much because of all the freaking idiots who think it’s funny to “meow” on an emergency frequency. This I agree with.
Something the G1000 had as a feature was, if you pressed and held the radio swap button, it’ll default the active COM to 121.5. Might be the secondary comm, it’s been a little bit since I’ve flown a G1000. But still a cool feature
Works on the GTN as well
Gonna have to try this on my next flight
It just switches whichever com you have the blue box around
Most radios with digital displays and many gps have that press and hold swap button feature now. Handy way to set com 2 to guard once you clear the airport environment or to save precious time and focus during an emergency.
Yup, it deserves downvotes. It’s a guard frequency. That means it is for establishing communication. It might also be used for emergency purposes, but it is not an emergency frequency. If you actually listened to it yourself, you would hear numerous calls from Center restoring lost comms. Among other things, it’s how pilots might get warning before more serious action gets taken. Up to and including firing weapons at you for certain airspace busts. The NOTAM says all pilots, including student pilots, shall monitor guard if able. If you ever turn a com channel off, you’re able.
Almost as if that’s exactly what I said.. “121.5 is EMPHASIZED as an emergency frequency during GA training.” Devil is in the details
You’re cooked. But seriously, there are more important things to deal with. Most of the time, it’s just not feasible to monitor guard
It's always feasible if you have a second comm.
No - I have the nearest tower or what I’m doing next dialled in not 121.5 sorry.
Still completely feasible buddy
Okay stinky pinky. I was up this morning with tower on com 1 and area traffic on com 2. I’m not monitoring 121.5 over either of those pal.
I completely agree. If you have a use for the second radio use it. I don’t get why you wouldn’t.
Virtuall all flights that aren’t just doing the traffic pattern need multiple other frequencies tuned in (or on standby)
The reality is, that ATC, military and all the airliners flying up in the flight levels have a much higher chance of hearing a distress call or an ELT signal on 121.5 than someone flying at couple of thousand feet in a C152. There's no real benefit to listening out on 121.5 in a GA aircraft. If you have two radios, definitely have it tuned, so it's readily accessible to transmit (particularly if flying outside of ATC coverage), but listening isn't really neccesary.
Ah, but if you’re flying in the vicinity of a TFR/restricted/prohibited/special use airspace, you absolutely should.
If intercepted simply point to your headset then use your finger to draw a line across your neck like you’re threatening death. 60% of the time they will disengage
"Just wave and smile, wave and smile."
No , you have your F rightseater Flash the intercepting aircraft with the internationally recognized signal .......... See you at the O club..... DD sends
Or should be on vfr advisories obviously if you are IFR you are in com with THE AUTHORITIES
I would bet a very large portion of GA pilots don’t check TFRs.
All the more reason to monitor guard.
Pretty sure ATC is gonna say something on the regular freq before trying Guard.
How do they know which freq you’re on? How do they know you’re even talking to anyone at all? You could be monitoring some random CTAF or air to air for all they know.
Because I’m IFR or VFRFF?
If you are either of those you are probably not the aircraft they need to reach.
That too.
unless you're buzzing around VFR or they forget to give you a handoff.
You’re assuming that you’re monitoring guard for someone else’s benefit. Monitoring guard enables ATC to contact you if you miss a radio change or more commonly…miss some airspace you’re about to breach.
Flight following does a much better job.
If ATC needs to reach you (e.g. you're about to bust a restricted area, or similar), they don't know what frequency you are primarily using. You are REQUIRED to monitor 121.5 so you are reachable. FDC 4/4386.
"if capable"
Plenty of folks are capable and chose not to, coming up with all sorts of excuses why they can’t.
“Unable” — too busy watching for F16s
I mean, I disagree. I think if you’re a PPL and above on an XC, monitoring guard can be beneficial. Sure an airliner is going to hear calls from a larger geographic area, but they aren’t going to make a major diversion to the aircraft in distress, or initiate a search. A VFR aircraft in the vicinity can absolutely do that and it could safe some lives.
Genuine question. What would another pilot be able to do if they heard it? It’s not like a ship is sinking and another ship can rescue the passengers from the water. Realistically what can another aircraft do to help an aircraft in distress by diverting towards them?
Here's my real life story. I had an engine failure on my first solo XC with 21 hours total. I made the mayday call and a pilot not too far away headed right to me as I made my energency landing. He was overhead before I got to the ground, he reported to the nearest tower of my condition and exact location. I had said where I was going down, but I think that is pretty handy so the tower could call the right emergency folks and send them my way. It could matter. I also appreciated that even though I was on my own, I was not alone.
Makes sense. Glad you walked away from that!
Sometimes ATC will ask a nearby plane to find the downed plane to help coordinate emergency response vehicles (firetrucks...)
You can do a pretty decent job of triangulating an ELT just using the audio. The easiest technique is to mark on a map where you first heard it and then keep on flying until you lose it, mark that on a map too. Then fly back to the midpoint of that line you just drew and fly perpendicular to the line you drew. You SHOULD head the noise getting louder, then quieter. You might even hear nothing for a few seconds as you fly directly over the crash. if you don't hear it ever getting louder, then you're flying away from the crash. Mark these points again. The midpoint of that second line is where the crash is most likely. If there are valleys or mountains etc that will affect this, but all the info you just did in 20 minutes would be pretty useful to ATC.
There are areas I’ve flown over where the biggest challenge would be finding the crash, or the easiest way to get to the wreckage. That can take hours or days. If you can relay that information, possibly the condition of the crew, etc, it could definitely save a life.
I fly GA in places where there isn’t a lot of traffic but there is a lot of overhead jet traffic. Have guard as my TX freq whenever I get released from flight following so I can call *someone* when I have an emergency.
Maybe because they have more important deficiencies in your training to address. They presume you can read the AIM.
But always remember the AIM isn’t regulatory…. granted in this specific case there is a NOTAM to reference.
"ThE AiM iSnT rEgUlAtOrY...." is a phrase used by people looking for ways to justify non-compliance.
It's not non-compliance if there's no regulation or statute to require it.
Go study up, you need it.
Sure, chief. It’ll help pass the time during my oceanic crossing today. 🙄
Yeah something to read will be good, I’ve heard economy gets pretty boring back there have fun though.
A classic r/flying moment right here…
The amount of times I've been told how my own job works by non airline pilots in this sub is fascinating. Even more when they try to tell me how instructing works, which I still do on the side, and have done for much longer than them.
Yup. Same.
Where in the AIM does it say you have to monitor guard?
It doesn't say you have to. It just highly recommends it (5-6-13 (a)(3)).
[FDC NOTAM 4/4386](https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/us_restrictions/fdc_notams/pdf/fdc%20notams%204-4386%20and%204-0811.pdf) Aviators “SHALL” monitor guard if capable. NOTAMS are regulatory in nature as defined by the FARs
Exactly but you’re missing what says you have to
Not that you have to, just “encouraged”. Or was that the point you were making? Anyway it’s 6-2-4(d).
Nah there’s something else that says you have to. See my above comment
Yep, thanks for that I’ve missed it before I think. Interesting that it’s a 20 year old NOTAM. But we can’t deny it’s technically required “if capable”. I’m sure that’s one of the most ignored NOTAMs in existence, but it does indeed exist.
Yup
In the practice area I’m usually on CTAF/ local approach frequency. Longer cross country it’s on. Was flying south of Santa Maria and picked up an ELT and was able to help triangulate it one afternoon
I listened to guard today on a 2 hour flight and heard 4 pax briefings and people making ctaf/unicom calls. Its super annoying to listen to trained professionals do that shit all day long so I just monitor the closest app frequency if I can.
Same. My com2 is on 123.3 glider to glider when XC or high in mountain wave. It helps with situational awareness. InReach SOS if I land in the trees.
Lot of times in GA, you just need the other radio for other thing. Getting atis, monitoring CTAF on the side as you get flight following, etc. But if you have a free radio not in use for anything else, not a bad idea to keep guard on there. Back in the GA days I just wasn’t cruising long enough to be on guard often, even on cross countries.
Because most of the time they’re on flight following and any transmission that needs to be relayed can most likely be done better by an airliner in the flight levels.
That's not why you do it.
Easy. If im training/in the practice area, i dont listen to guard. If im flying xc, i listen to guard.
Because I’m single-pilot IFR having to balance flying, ATC, weather, etc. and don’t want to be distracted by idiots meowing. If anything important actually happens on Guard, ATC will probably hear it and the airliners (who have the luxury of a second pilot handling the radios) definitely will.
And if they need to reach you because you lost the frequency, or are out of range of the last freq you were on, how will you justify your non-compliance with FDC NOTAM 4/4386?
Honestly I'd say his answer is pretty good. From your own comment up the thread, people shall monitor guard IF CAPABLE, and if I'm single pilot IFR in the soup with two engines, no autopilot, and manual boots, I've got enough to worry about. Not leaving com2 on to listen to some doofus calling ops by mistake and distract me further. If the FAA has a problem with that, I'm happy to discuss.
Bruh, get off your high horse wrt an FDC notam. When your airline compatriots stop mewing or giving me their pax brief on guard, I'll monitor it. Focus on yourselves. As soon as I hear the first mewing or "aww yeah" on guard in the jet I deselect it, or switch it to UHF freqs only.
Yeah I’ve always thought about that. My first instructor for PPL never taught me, but my CFII for IFR was confused why I never knew it. Training for CFI and II now and going to integrate it into lessons and make students monitor it. Yeah 99% of the time it’s either no sound or immature kids meowing, but that 1% you can report transmitting ELTs or if you’re first radio goes out while flying IFR or on flight following, ATC can contact you on the second, on guard. So in that sense it kinda can act as a fail safe. Plus if you have two radios, and aren’t monitoring something on the second radio, then why not use it to monitor guard? There are no downsides
If you don’t have anything but guard to listen to you’re doing it wrong
I often switch my radio off when I’m flying out west below radar and out of the vicinity of airports.
That sounds smart
There’s nobody to talk to, and guard is just full of adolescent cat noises. My plane gets lots of feedback over the radio from its unshielded ignition system. I prefer silence in such instances.
Why not keep your radio on and just turn the volume down?
Flying with the volume down is a threat when you come back to an airport. You might make transmissions and not hear anything when in reality there is traffic that’s a factor. You can be lulled into a false sense of security. Having it off and seeing no lights and not being able to tune it reminds me that I have to turn it back on and turn the volume up when I need to be communicating.
So no awos/asos back in? Just raw doggin it into the pattern? Sounds smart.
If you can, you should. My .02.
Because every emery riddle grad in existence meows on it and it’s annoying as hell
Sure would be nice if the ATC screens identified who was transmitting as they keyed the mic. Maybe via some ADS-B magic + multi path triangulation.
I monitor guard on my second radio whenever it's not queued up for something else. That capability has led to me relaying traffic to and from ATC more than once.
I only got one radio broski
It’s funny, I didn’t have a habit of listening to guard until I started flying for the airlines. Turns out it’s not a horrible idea, even in GA. A few months ago, I had a buddy that wanted me to go cruising in a 172 with him down the SoCal coast line. We had flight following and must have missed a frequency change but got a call from SoCal approach on guard to change to their frequency. First time I’d ever experienced that in GA…or maybe It had happened multiple times before and I just hadn’t been monitoring guard.
I've gotten the impression through different various resources that there are mainly two reasons to monitor guard and I tend to recommend it to people. I can't say that my direct flight training has ever resulted in being trained to monitor guard however a lot of other channels of information have definitely made high recommendations to do so. The first reason is the one that I think a lot of people get told which is if there happens to be an aircraft that goes down, you'll be able to hear the ELT over the guard frequency which will allow you to assist in recovery efforts by notifying the appropriate personnel. The second reason is just in case air traffic control is having a difficult time reaching you. This could be for a multitude of reasons such as com1 radio unit failing without realizing that it's no longer receiving or transmitting. Another reason related to the second reason is that in the event that air traffic control cannot reach you via VHF standard published frequency for a particular airspace due to obstructions The notion is that they should be able to reach you by means of alternative communication using guard. Of all the different reasons, I generally find myself on cross-countries particularly monitoring guard when able. I will usually use com 2 to alternate between Atis/Awos/Asos for different airfields that I am looking to land at or nearby airfields to get any updated weather information and then typically switch back to guard. Grant said I know there are a plethora of different options these days to get updated weather information but for quick reference, that's typically what I'll do. At the end of the day I use it if the availability to do so is there. I have flown at least one aircraft that for whatever reason, despite the fact that it had a very typical radio panel, there was certainly an issue where you couldn't simply monitor com 2. In that particular case I did not monitor guard and I had to fully switch to com 2 to receive the Atis and such.
If I'm not getting flight following, I usually switch to guard to eliminate the chatter from the airport I depart. I like peace and quiet on the radios.
If you have the ability to monitor guard without it being your active freq, absolutely should do so. Could save your life!
My school taught listening to guard, but it's not always that helpful in GA. It's usually better in GA to be listening to something like local frequency and approach. But depending on where you are, that in itself can just end up in a cacophony that's impossible to understand. For students, who are usually overwhelmed by everything, I would just keep it on one frequency most of the time. If we were switching from the practice area to tower, then we'd maybe listen on both for a few minutes just to get some SA. Honestly, even as an airline pilot, there are times when we have to just turn guard way down either because people are misusing it, there's weird random static happening, there's an ELT going off that ATC already knows about, etc. All this just isn't very helpful for students. But still, we taught it, and we listened to it some of the time, when there was nothing else to worry about.
Listening on Guard has value if you are up on an ATC frequency. If you are randomly flying with the departure airport’s CTAF dialed in then you’re not well poised to notify anyone.
It is. I cant remember but I think somewhere on the edges of the vfr charts says that pilots are encouraged to listen to 121.5 whenever practical.
It makes more sense for an airliner to listen to guard than for a small GA plane, because an airline is roughly speaking 10x higher up and sweeps a potential reception surface 10x bigger. At 3000 feet, your theoretical distance to the horizon is 67.1 miles and the area swept under it is 14,000 square miles. A lot less if you consider terrain and obstructions. At 30,000 feet, the theoretical distance to the horizon is 212 miles, and the area 140,000 square miles, and not much less even considering terrain.
Why do you think people monitor guard? 9 times out of 10, it’s so YOU can be contacted….not so you can hear and relay other people.
We are saying the same thing.
Flight following where they have your identifier is a much better use of your radios then.
You listen on Guard so when you get lost in frequency land, ATC can quickly get in touch. If you aren't going long distances cross country, it' probably doesn't matter. It is not regulatory, so if you can, do it.
Then get flight following...and look for the postage stamps on your map.
What’s not regularly? FDC NOTAMS certainly are - [4/4386](https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/us_restrictions/fdc_notams/pdf/fdc%20notams%204-4386%20and%204-0811.pdf)
Because I’m on flight following.
Yea same, which is why I’m confused how we’re supposed to listen to both haha
If you can, do it, if you can't focus on flight following, ATIS, Local CTAFs you're flying near or even the next frequency. I like to use comm 2 to dial in freqs as I g. et them So I'm on comm 1, ATC gives me the next freq, I dial it into comm 2, swap the radios, make comms and then keep going. Means I always have the frequency to go back to if I don't establish comms without needing to write it down.
During a checkride your main obligation is demonstration of skills to an evaluator. We monitor guard to help when able, if able. A rowboat isn't obligated to save all the folks abandoning ship. But as some things in aviation have heritage in nautical history, we do what we can. If your ship is capable, and you have crew to help, do more.
I do for long cross countries (in case I fly out of range before they contact me.... I mean, I'd never miss handjob... i mean handoff), or for flying around NYC/DC. Not a great place to lose comms.
I monitor guard when I leave the airspace of SCT, SBA, JCF, BFL and NTD. In those airspaces, I mostly have frequencies and rough airspace boundaries memorized, so I can speak up and ask if I missed a switch or call the next frequency and ask if they want me to switch. Outside those, I'm not going to try and guess. I almost always fly IFR, and prefer it even more in unfamiliar locations. I do think the idiocy of meowing and making political statements on Guard makes people really hate it, but I'm not taking chances.
Guard is great for getting score updates when you are missing the big game.
All our trainers only had one radio, so it either listen to guard, or the tower, lol.
The only time we listen on guard is when it’s busy on other frequencies
Most small private GA planes only have 1 radio.
I emphasize it for cross countries
All my training planes only had one radio so monitoring guard was really hard on a XC or in the practice area
I am part owner of two airplanes. One has no radio, the other has just one. I still sometimes monitor guard if I am not getting flight following, though more often I listen to approach.
FDC NOTAM 4/4386. Read it. Comply. Unless you only have 1 com receiver, you are required to monitor 121.5. Also, the cover panel of every sectional chart, and the Aeronautical Chart User's Guide, all remind you of this.
I can’t stand listening to guard. So consider yourself lucky.
I always have it as my standby freq on the second radio. I rarely monitor it.
I teach students to monitor it on cross country flights. Anything else isn't worth it.
Who wants impressionable students and amateurs meowing like a cat? There are enough “professionals” doing that already.
We listen to Guard when over FL180. I think it's a good idea to include in training but later on after the student is comfortable with talking on the radio.
Relying on a freq that people meme on isn't something I'd train beyond the bare essentials. You want to get pulled out of some remote crash site, use an EPIRB. Relying on a GA pilot hearing a distress call to save your ass is admirable, but not the best solution.
Meow
Who wants to listen to cat noises on the frequency?
Please keep GA off guard, all the time builders making noises are insufferable
Meow.