tcj wrote:122.75 is the set air to air frequency down here.

Are you sure? I seem to remember a long discussion about air to air frequencies a few years ago and there were some differing opinions but no established standard.

tcj wrote:

A1Skinner wrote:

tcj wrote:I'm Just wondering why nobody seems to use 122.75 for air to air?

So you guys dont have a set air to air frequency down there? Interesting. In Canada we use 126.7. Its nice to have a set frequency that all traffic should be on or monitoring outside of airport airspace.

122.75 is the set air to air frequency down here.

From my experience so far, air to air frequency 122,75 is used mostly in the practice areas around here, dont hear other pilots using it as air to air in other areas, most use 122.90, or the closest airport freq.
In this specific area 122.90 for sure since its between two airports not too far apart using that frequency

Zzz wrote:

tcj wrote:122.75 is the set air to air frequency down here.

Are you sure? I seem to remember a long discussion about air to air frequencies a few years ago and there were some differing opinions but no established standard.

No, after trying to look it up I'm not sure any more. I'ts what I learned to use during my initial training in 1984. The correct frequency to use for air to air seems to have "Evolved".

tcj wrote:

Zzz wrote:

tcj wrote:122.75 is the set air to air frequency down here.

Are you sure? I seem to remember a long discussion about air to air frequencies a few years ago and there were some differing opinions but no established standard.

No, after trying to look it up I'm not sure any more. I'ts what I learned to use during my initial training in 1984. The correct frequency to use for air to air seems to have "Evolved".

Some discussion on it in a (as usual) heated thread here: Air to Air Frequencies. But according to MTV, you are right.

tcj wrote:I'm Just wondering why nobody seems to use 122.75 for air to air?

Not true-- on nice days around Puget Sound you'll hear a position report about every 2 minutes on 122.75:
"Cessna 123, northeast practice area, doing airwork at 3000 feet" or similar.
Sometimes just "practice area" which is even better, as you can get two different student pilots
asking each other (repeatedly!!) where they are, when they're really in two completely different areas.
Freq congestion probably isn't an issue down in the weeds flying the Sauk River though.
A lot of guys I know who work the bars usually aren't talking, unless there's more than one airplane involved.

Visibility in turns is much better in low wing airplanes.

A lot of pilots in my experience use 123.45, because they are simple folk and it is easy to remember.

contactflying wrote:Visibility in turns is much better in low wing airplanes.

Wapner's on at 4.

If you fly airplanes, the only FAA designated air-to-air frequency is 122.75. The reference for this is AIM table 4-1-3.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The only frequency I use is Winchester when playing. I don't have the option of monitoring so I would shit my pants if I say him coming at me at 160 down low.

I almost had a mid air with a friend last week, I saw him at my 4:00 and maybe 50 to 75 feet in a turn coming at me. Split second no time to react it was just plain luck the we did not hit because he saw me at the last second also. He thought I was somewhere else when he made a turn back to see what I was talking about on the radio. He never lifted his wing to look before the turn and banked, there I was.

That was scary!

Lateral visibility, in the steep energy management turn, is a bit better than level turns in high wing airplanes. We are looking around and down through the upper windscreen.