![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
1966 Cessna 172G N3906L, s/n 17254075
3420 TT Continental Engine majored with new main and rod bearings and Six New Superior Millenium cylinders Yellow tags from Aircraft Specialties and Piedmont Triad for camshaft, lifters, and crankshaft. Marvel-Schebler Carburetor rebuilt Fresh Annual Autogas STC Wingtip strobes Lord Shimmy Dampener Garmin GMA 340 audio panel with 4-place intercom and 4-place headset jacks King KX155 with glideslope Spare Narco Comm for 123.45 King KR86 ADF with Separate Nav Head Garmin GTX 320 Transponder with encoder Electronics International 6-probe EGT for Economy Cruise Gorgeous fresh interior-new carpet, upholstery, headliner, ABS restored, leather glareshield, new eyebrow, leather hand-holds Yokes refinished in satin powdercoat New Spinner bulkheads Rebuilt Nosegear with new nosegear O-rings and seals Engine Baffling rebuilt and alodined, with new reinforced baffle seals Fuel system rebuilt with new Cessna selector valve O-rings Fresh Exterior cosmetics, including new fiberglass wing and tail tips New ELT Battery Excellent Complete Logs Rebuilt Battery Box Airframe Treated against Corrosion with ACF-50 Excellent Tires 200 Hours on New Slick Magnetos Fresh Brake Pads Clean Airframe --- No Corrosion, No Hail Damage Great IFR airplane Fresh IFR Certification $41,500 E-Mail for photos. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Why would you have a spare comm for 123.45 unless the aircraft is in Europe
where this is a legitimate, legal frequency to use? Jim "172flyer" wrote in message oups.com... 1966 Cessna 172G N3906L, s/n 17254075 Spare Narco Comm for 123.45 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Public Notice
I've done some research on the frequency 123.45 and, although having never used it, find it is not the proper frequency to use for USA air-to-air, pilot-to-pilot communications, which should be on frequencies like 122.75 or 122.85. Always check the FAR's and AIM. Weir says improper use can result in a prison sentence and $10,000 fine. In addition I saw an older post indicating he is very touchy about this frequency and even threatens to sue anyone in his bailiwick who uses it without authorization. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() 172flyer wrote: Public Notice I've done some research on the frequency 123.45 and, although having never used it, find it is not the proper frequency to use for USA air-to-air, pilot-to-pilot communications, which should be on frequencies like 122.75 or 122.85. Always check the FAR's and AIM. Weir says improper use can result in a prison sentence and $10,000 fine. In addition I saw an older post indicating he is very touchy about this frequency and even threatens to sue anyone in his bailiwick who uses it without authorization. Perhaps he invented it? It's quite a popular frequency around the northeastern US. The other day I heard what sounded like Russian over it. Nobody uses tail numbers though. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
No, the FCC invented it. I wouldn't have given a damn if they had invented
ANY frequency in the VHF com band, but the FCC has designated 123.4 and 123.45 as Flight Test frequencies. You know, like assembling expensive aircraft time, engineering time, test pilot time, and all that stuff together, getting halfway through some critical test where time is a factor, and having the whole test blown out of the water with Jerknose Joe gabbing about nothing in particular with Wingman Wally. You MIGHT ask the pilot of the Coors Silver Bullet BD-5 how much it cost him when the FCC nailed him using these frequencies as his airshow-to-ground frequencies. Capiche? Jim "Robert Chambers" wrote in message ... It's quite a popular frequency around the northeastern US. The other day I heard what sounded like Russian over it. Nobody uses tail numbers though. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
What DID it cost the Silver Bullet pilot?
It might be good for more pilots to know because I just talked to several pilots here in the East who say they have used that frequency for informal pilot-to-pilot communications. It is so easy to remember, much easier than the chat frequencies so designated. So naturally they're going to dial that one in if they can. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Maybe not legal but is commonly in the midwest also. "172flyer" wrote in message oups.com... What DID it cost the Silver Bullet pilot? It might be good for more pilots to know because I just talked to several pilots here in the East who say they have used that frequency for informal pilot-to-pilot communications. It is so easy to remember, much easier than the chat frequencies so designated. So naturally they're going to dial that one in if they can. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "172flyer" wrote in message oups.com... What DID it cost the Silver Bullet pilot? The Fed that reported back to me said that part of the settlement was "substantial monetary fine" and that part of the settlement was an agreement to keep the particulars confidential. What is "substantial" to one may be pocket change to another. I did not attempt to pry. It might be good for more pilots to know because I just talked to several pilots here in the East who say they have used that frequency for informal pilot-to-pilot communications. And I know several pilots who think that right traffic is always OK so long as the field is uncontrolled. Somehow that part of the regs didn't imprint on them during their training. It is so easy to remember, much easier than the chat frequencies so designated. So naturally they're going to dial that one in if they can. And it is easier for me just to go ahead and land unannounced at ORD rather than go through all the hassle of approach, tower, ground control and all that mess. Easy and legal generally don't bear much resemblance to one another. Jim |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I wouldn't do it around Wichita, Olathe, Alexandria, or anywhere else there
was an airframe or accessory manufacturer. Jim "Dave Stadt" wrote in message . .. Maybe not legal but is commonly in the midwest also. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
RST Engineering wrote:
No, the FCC invented it. I wouldn't have given a damn if they had invented ANY frequency in the VHF com band, but the FCC has designated 123.4 and 123.45 as Flight Test frequencies./snip/ 123.45 is also designated for "Air to Air, Worldwide Remote Oceanic Areas". Happy Flying! Scott Skylane |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1/72 Cessna 300, 400 series scale models | Ale | Owning | 3 | October 22nd 13 03:40 PM |
Nearly had my life terminated today | Michelle P | Piloting | 11 | September 3rd 05 02:37 AM |
Wow - heard on the air... (long) | Nathan Young | Piloting | 68 | July 25th 05 06:51 PM |
Thoughts on a 1966 Cessna 172G? | Malcolm Teas | Owning | 6 | April 12th 04 02:38 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |