airtraffic

Author Topic: Is it Allowed?  (Read 8556 times)

Offline LauraB

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Is it Allowed?
« on: March 04, 2009, 01:14:57 AM »
I'm traveling on United in a couple of days, and I'm wondering if it's allowed to make a recording of what you hear on their Channel 9. I can't imagine it's top secret, but I don't want to do anything forbidden. I think it would be cool to have a recording of the whole flight. You could listen to it again and reconstruct the flight based on altitude, weather conditions, etc., and I think I could learn a lot through this kind of exercise. But...I don't want to get in trouble or freak anyone out.

Does anyone know the answer? Many thanks!  :-)



Offline MathFox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 262
  • The Flying Fox
Re: Is it Allowed?
« Reply #1 on: March 04, 2009, 06:21:32 AM »
IANAL, but I guess it would be legal to make recordings on flights within (over) the USA, outside the "no electronics allowed" window around take-off and landing. I would recommend that you mention it to a flight attendant before you start recording. Recording during international flights would depend on the laws of the lands you're flying over.

Offline dave

  • Site Founder
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
    • LiveATC.net
Re: Is it Allowed?
« Reply #2 on: March 04, 2009, 08:27:52 AM »
Not quite sure the country laws apply.  Wonder if we have a lawyer here...who has jurisdiction at high altitude over a body of governed land?  I would tend to think some kind of international law applies there.

Offline MathFox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 262
  • The Flying Fox
Re: Is it Allowed?
« Reply #3 on: March 04, 2009, 08:46:37 AM »
One issue is what laws apply, another issue is how those laws will be enforced. If you have permission from the crew and the laws of country of departure and arrival allow the making of recordings, you'll most likely be fine.


Offline tyketto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1138
Re: Is it Allowed?
« Reply #4 on: March 04, 2009, 12:34:13 PM »
This has come up before on other forums.

IIRC, it's like the smoking thing. No smoking on any US Carrier, no matter where the carrier flies to, and if the laws of that land allowe it or not. That can be applied to ATC recordings on a particular flight. f it is legal in the US to record and/or rebroadcast ATC comms on a US carrier, but is illegal to do so in another country, the laws of where the carrier is based applies. This is what enables UAL to operate Ch. 9 everywhere they fly.

Perfect example. The British Telephony Act of 1949 states that while you can record air traffic communications for your personal use, you can not rebroadcast any communications that were not meant for you or directed to you to hear. ATC comms go to the pilots on the UAL flight, but UAL isn't bound by UK law, becaue UAL's base of operations is not in the UK. It could also be said that since you are on the flight, communications are meant for/directed to you because, well, you are on that flight.

See how that goes, or is it clear as mud pie? :)

BL.

Offline delta092b

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
Re: Is it Allowed?
« Reply #5 on: March 04, 2009, 05:21:11 PM »
For international flight I always thought that the law of the carriers home country is what applies. I know on BA that they always state "smoking is prohibited at all times and is punishable under UK law"

Don't quote me be I seem to recall of incidents where say someone travelled from the UK to the US and was arrested upon arrival because of an air rage incident. In the end they were arrested upon arrival back in the UK and charged under the UK law. In fact I think this happened to come celebrity??

Going off topic a bit here anyway. My guess is that if you ask any crew about recording anything they are going to say "no". IMO anyway.

Offline bcrosby

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 333
    • Fly With Blake
Re: Is it Allowed?
« Reply #6 on: March 04, 2009, 06:16:56 PM »
I also think that the laws of the country the carrier is registered in applies.

I cant find anything to back that up though.

Offline mhawke

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
Re: Is it Allowed?
« Reply #7 on: March 04, 2009, 08:23:02 PM »
My brief understanding of International Laws and Treaty around aircraft (based on sitting in a plane for hours because of not having an entry visa for a country)...

The aircraft is a moving part of the country it is flagged in (much like a ship at sea).  Once the door is open at the arrival country, it is part of that country.  Once the door closes for its departure, it again becomes part of its flagged country.

That understanding is based on getting on a plane (after departing country via immigration and having entry visa cancelled at same) only to have plane not be able to depart after the doors were closed.  We could not leave the plane because we did not have a valid entry visa for the country.  Only citizens of the country were allowed to deplane.

I am open to corrections if I am wrong and someone knows better then I...

Offline LauraB

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Is it Allowed?
« Reply #8 on: March 04, 2009, 08:52:46 PM »
Thank you, everyone, for your replies.

My guess is that if you ask any crew about recording anything they are going to say "no". IMO anyway.

This would be my guess, too. I understand that everyone is very cautious these days, and you can't blame them. But it's not secret communication--it can't be--and I would only want it for personal use. I guess part of my concern is that the average person would likely not understand how interesting such a recording might be to people like us  :lol: and might assume I was up to no good.

Offline cessna157

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 708
    • facebook
Re: Is it Allowed?
« Reply #9 on: March 04, 2009, 09:39:23 PM »
As a flight crew member, I wouldn't care if someone was recording the radio transmissions.  It doesn't make a difference whether you're on the ground or in the air, it is still all public airways.

The problem that you might run in to is airlines have banned the use of any type of radio device on aircraft.  The electronics restrictions wouldn't necessarily apply, but the radio restrictions would.  Check the air carrier's inflight magazine for the details of it.

Offline phil-s

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
Re: Is it Allowed?
« Reply #10 on: March 05, 2009, 12:02:30 AM »
Great question! Great posts. Reminded me of all sorts of in-flight alcolholic beverage info I've gotten from flight attendants, much of it contradictory, and some of it outright unbelievable/  Like, how we're not allowed to be served alcohol upfront until after we take off. It's state law. That's strange, was it not also state law last week? So I Googled and was appalled at some of what I found. If any of you can make any sense of what laws really do apply to passenger aircraft (or any others) I'm all ears:
----
http://blogs.usatoday.com/sky/2007/01/new_mexico_alco.html
(this one appears to be from 2007 - no followup that I could find)
----
Here's an excerpt from written ALPA testimnony to Congress in 1997. Most of it deals with airline response to ridiculous behavior by passengers but the comment about jurisdictional issues is relevant. (The writing could also have been a lot clearer!):

Internationally, the Tokyo Convention, formally known as the Convention on Offenses and Certain Other Acts Committed On Board Aircraft, which was signed in 1963 and now has 162 state signatories worldwide, establishes a number of legal remedies for passenger interference.

However, as expressed by ICAO last year, the Tokyo Convention has a shortcoming: "Since aircraft in flight are legally regarded as part of the territory of the state of registration of the aircraft, the state where the aircraft lands will treat offenses committed on board during the flight as committed on foreign territory (unless it is the state of registration of the aircraft). In most cases of minor offenses and ‘less serious’ crimes, it will, therefore, not have the jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute. The Tokyo Convention of 1963 obliges contracting states to establish their jurisdiction over offenses and crimes only when committed on board aircraft of their own nationality. There is no obligation in the Convention to establish jurisdiction with respect to offenses and crimes committed on board foreign aircraft. Furthermore, the Tokyo Convention does not establish such jurisdiction itself. It therefore leaves a jurisdictional gap in this respect."

This so-called jurisdictional gap does not pose a problem in the U.S. because, thankfully, our Justice Department prosecutes inbound offenders regardless of the nationality of the aircraft. In other countries, however, this situation does not exist which creates an opportunity for crimes to be committed aboard aircraft with no punitive action taken against the perpetrator.

===

Here's the best one yet - dated 2009. Texas apprently thinks it has the right (and ability!) to collect fees from all airlines that fly over over the Great State of Texas in return for being allowed to carry (not even serve) alcoholic beverages. Right, so let's say an Avianca flight to JFK gets diverted by bad weather and mechanical and ends up landing in TEXAS, where (let's assume) Avianca does not now do business and so doesn;t pay the annual booze tax. Texas thinks it's going to collect the $4k or whatever? Have a look:

www.tabc.state.tx.us/Forms/Lic/L-102A.doc

---

In summary, the OP raises some great issues. And ,as I said, if anyone thinks they understand how this part of the Universe actually operates, I'd love to hear about it.

Best wishes,

Phil   

-------------------------