Mosselbay freq - which one correct

Matters of general interest
User avatar
Koevoet
I hate bird strikes
I hate bird strikes
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:20 am
Location: Diemerskraal, Paarl
Contact:

Mosselbay freq - which one correct

Postby Koevoet » Fri Jul 11, 2008 5:21 pm

Mosselbay freq

Dennis Jankle list 2008 it is given as : 124.4 twr and 118.9 app
Avimaps list Feb 2008 it is given as : 124.2 twr

Which one is correct?
Nothing is impossible in life.
Very happy Scout Piloooot
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/home ... p_activity
User avatar
Morph
The Big Four K
The Big Four K
Posts: 5176
Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 3:34 pm
Location: Cape Town

Re: Mosselbay freq - which one correct

Postby Morph » Fri Jul 11, 2008 5:47 pm

124.4 if you remain below 3500 ft

Above that you will have to talk to George Tower/Approach 118.9

It falls within a General Flying Area FAD 155
Greg Perkins
robjack
Heard about flying
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Mosselbay freq - which one correct

Postby robjack » Sun Jul 27, 2008 12:52 pm

Mossel Bay 's frequency is 124.2 because of the George Special Rules.
FAD 155 does not exists anymore. See the AIP-ENR where it is not listed anymore. In the AIRAC supplement where the new George Rules were announced in Oct 06 it speaks about a certain area below the TMA "has been identified for general and training flying" and not that this area is now the new FAD 155. Also the AIP lists the FAMB frequency as 124.2. I did ask FAGG ATC who confirm all this.
Mossel Bay tell on their website mosselbayaero.com that the frequency is 124.4 but I just spoke to local pilot Roger Brink who says that this is wrong.
After the change there nearly two years ago it is time that people do the right thing. :!:
robjack
Heard about flying
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Mosselbay freq - which one correct

Postby robjack » Sun Jul 27, 2008 2:39 pm

in the last message FAMB should be FAMO. Mossel Bay is meant and not Middelburg.
User avatar
skybound®
Frequent Flyer
Frequent Flyer
Posts: 1223
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 12:51 pm
Location: Port Elizabeth

Re: Mosselbay freq - which one correct

Postby skybound® » Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:01 am

I think ATNS/CAA need to take some responsibility here too as to why it got so confusing.

In the AIP supplement that was mentioned earlier here, the changes had been made. Then in the next AIP cycle, they simply disappeared making the supplement 'outdated' and now superceded by the 'incorrect' info. Seems someone had forgotten to carry these changes through into the next full publication. I think it has been corrected and carried forward correctly since.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests