Obtaining a new CTAF at a 122.8 field

[Ross Statham]

I serve on the airport board for the Tri-County Airport in Bonifay & Chipley, Florida.  Last year one of our projects was to work to migrate the airport off of the over-used 122.8 over to a lesser used frequency-- of which there are quite a few to choose from.  It was a lengthy process, but I thought you guys and gals might find it interesting.  Here goes:

• Got the Airport Board (good folks, by the way) to recognize that our sharing 122.8 with all the other small airports around us had the potential for some safety issues, and that moving to a lesser-used frequency only made good sense.  (In fact, the FAA and AOPA recommend it.)  
• I used online tools to get a list of all airports within a 120 mile radius of ours, and created a report listing the airport, distance and CTAF frequency each were using.  I then looked up the multiple CTAF frequencies available (nice article on the AOPA website), and compared them against that list.  Found only one airport using 122.725, and at about 100 miles distant- so that was our logical choice.  I presented the report and frequency recommendation to the board, which approved it after lengthy discussion about safety issues and discussing how we would notify our local pilot community and those in our area.
• A note about 122.725-- most of the older King and Narco radios only have five digits; they display 122.72, but it's actually 122.725.  (One of our most commonly asked questions.)
• Now to the FCC bit.  I got details on our proposed antenna location at our FBO (it was our existing location) and transmitter power, height of antenna, etc.  Then went to the FCC website, and after a few phone calls to their helpdesk, I finalized our application in their system (after some minor wrangling).  Six weeks later they ok'd our application, assigned us a "call sign".  Some back and forth with them about some details, but not too bad.
• I simultaneously discussed our choice and thoughts with our FAA FSDO as well as our FAA representative in our state that "handles" our airport.  I also discussed with our Florida DOT airport guru.  All said they thought we were on the right track and had "no issues" with what we had planned.  Our FDOT guru even gave us an attaboy.  One of the FAA folks gave me the name of the person that helps enter and track that in the FAA database.   VERY helpful.
• I formally submitted our requested change to the FAA, and included our FCC approval documentation.
• After several managers and folks at the FAA reviewed it, I got an email back stating it was approved "without comment" after about six weeks.  At that point, I was instructed which FAA database to use to enter it into a second time(??) and eventually worked with the FAA guru in Oklahoma City who helped me do so, and who next gave me a planned "chart release date" of November 5th, about four or five months out.
• Key point:  We planned the cut over date to be on the upcoming chart release date. In other words We didn’t put it into affect until the charts said it went into affect. Less confusion.
• When we got six weeks out from the cutover, I reached out to all of the EAA chapter presidents within 75 miles and told them of our new frequency and cutover date.   We also emailed Cairns and Tyndall Approach and gave them an early heads up.
• We had two large banners printed up listing our new CTAF and the effective date.  Posted one on our vehicle entry security gate, and the second one at the fuel farm.  (We plan to keep those up about two years.)
• Our airport manager did some research, and confirmed that he could change the DIP switches that control our runway and taxi lights, and he tested doing so.  Important detail.  (He did not make that change until November 5, however. )
• We pushed out one final email to all aircraft owners based on the field at the one week out mark.
• When I went to bed on November 4th, my ForeFlight charts and information had the old frequency.   The next morning (November 5), Foreflight listed the new frequency on its charts and information for the field.  How about that?
• Since our ASOS did not allow us to record a message, we had volunteers with handheld radios the first two weekends after the change was made. However no one used the old frequency.

The result?  A seamless cut-over come November 5, 2020.  No issues.  Amazing.

[EricJ]

Nicely done!    One of the fields in central AZ did this a few years ago and had NOTAMs out, and it was on the their AWOS tape for a long time, too.

 

[Ross Statham]

9 hours ago, EricJ said:

Nicely done!    One of the fields in central AZ did this a few years ago and had NOTAMs out, and it was on the their AWOS tape for a long time, too.   We had volunteers from the EAA Monitoring handheld radios the first two weekends just in case We needed to tell an inbound aircraft to switch to the other frequency, but we had no issues to deal with. 

 

We had hoped to be able to include it on our AWOS, but ours is an older system without the capability.  But- great point!   Anything we can do to increase safety is always a good idea.  We also had volunteers the first two weekends we had the new frequency that were monitoring handheld radios just in case. 

[carusoam]

Nice details Ross!

Thanks for sharing them...

I think my home drome followed your change of frequencies...  except our lights still use 123.05 to get turned on... (a decade later...) 

...and the missing BK digit is a throw back from ages ago...  wonder how much they saved in materials cost when they made that decision... 

Best regards,

-a-

[PT20J]

On 1/26/2021 at 7:35 PM, carusoam said:

Nice details Ross!

Thanks for sharing them...

I think my home drome followed your change of frequencies...  except our lights still use 123.05 to get turned on... (a decade later...) 

...and the missing BK digit is a throw back from ages ago...  wonder how much they saved in materials cost when they made that decision... 

Best regards,

-a-

Back when those radios were designed, the channel spacing was 50 kHz so there was no need for the third digit — it would have always been a zero. When 25 kHz spacing came in, there were retrofit kits to update them but there wasn’t room on the display for another digit. I remember changing a couple of old KX 170Bs to 25 kHz tuning 30 years ago which mostly involved installing a bunch of new parts for the mechanical display. 

Skip

[jaylw314]

We had about 3 local airports change CTAF frequencies.  Only one had an AWOS (and it didn't advise pilots of the change, annoyingly enough).  There was a LOT of confusion since we get a lot of transient pilots used to just puttering around the valley.

Long story short, expect confusion and remind local pilots to stay vigilant until the CTAF is changed on the VFR sectional.  It was only at that point that the problem mostly went away.

[Ross Statham]

12 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

We had about 3 local airports change CTAF frequencies.  Only one had an AWOS (and it didn't advise pilots of the change, annoyingly enough).  There was a LOT of confusion since we get a lot of transient pilots used to just puttering around the valley.

Long story short, expect confusion and remind local pilots to stay vigilant until the CTAF is changed on the VFR sectional.  It was only at that point that the problem mostly went away.

Good point about the sectional!  We made sure the cutover didn't take place until the date the sectional cutover took place.  Seemed to really help.  Was really looking at a sectional the evening before-- November 4, 2020-- and seeing the old frequency on the sectional, then getting up the next morning and seeing the new frequency on the sectional. But yep, that was one of my biggest worries.

[0TreeLemur]

Good job Ross!  This is a pet peeve of mine and I wonder why more fields don't change.  

Freqs 122.8 and 122.9 ridiculously oversubscribed in many areas.  Not only clogged with the training crash-n-dash traffic, but I've noticed a general lack of etiquette with folks talking about all kinds of stuff on CTAF frequencies,often 50+ nm away.   Why can't 122.52 be a CTAF?   What about 122.67? 

Why do so many airports have to be crammed onto two of the available 720 frequencies???  Major safety issue, especially when you are turning final, and some other aircraft announces a turn to final but either mumbles the airport name or doesn't say it at all.

[Ross Statham]

On 1/28/2021 at 4:36 PM, 0TreeLemur said:

Good job Ross!  This is a pet peeve of mine and I wonder why more fields don't change.  

Freqs 122.8 and 122.9 ridiculously oversubscribed in many areas.  Not only clogged with the training crash-n-dash traffic, but I've noticed a general lack of etiquette with folks talking about all kinds of stuff on CTAF frequencies,often 50+ nm away.   Why can't 122.52 be a CTAF?   What about 122.67? 

Why do so many airports have to be crammed onto two of the available 720 frequencies???  Major safety issue, especially when you are turning final, and some other aircraft announces a turn to final but either mumbles the airport name or doesn't say it at all.

Thanks.  One of the things that I learned while researching this was that frequency changes don’t just apply to fields with 122.8.   Generally speaking, and it’s not a hard and fast rule, airports do have some flexibility in selecting the CTAF frequency and changing it.  The reason that most don’t is because it is quite a bit of work to do the research, but the biggest problem is what I described above, the cut over. So I don’t condemn anyone who doesn’t really want to go through all of that, but I did find the process simpler than I thought it would be.  Most airport leadership is already pretty busy just trying to take care of a host of other problems, so I don’t blame them if frequency changes are not on their immediate radar.

One of the biggest problems the FCC faces is overcrowding. There just aren’t enough frequencies to go around, As any HAM radio operator will tell you.  But by keeping the transmitter power fairly low, and by prudent planning, this can be dealt with.

Also appreciate your point about many pilots using 122.8 can often times be poor communicators on the radio, and like you I get concerned when pilots aren’t communicating well on a ‘pilot controlled airport.’  Frankly, on smaller airports, including my own, I keep a sharp eye peeled for other airplanes all the time.  Just like learning to drive, you can’t do this fully on trust..... that’s why it’s VFR.

[carusoam]

20 hours ago, Ross Statham said:

a ‘pilot controlled airport.’ 

Hmmmmm .....

Quote of the day award worthy!

 

Some things in aviation only made sense the day they were coined...

Even then their definition doesn’t match reality of the day...

experimental, uncontrolled, etc...

Best regards,

-a-