Talk:Aircraft emergency frequency

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Merge[edit]

I don't know what to move where, but this article appears to refer to the same thing as International Air Distress article. --Dual Freq 00:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

International Air Distress applies only to the civil frequency, wheres Aircraft emergency frequency is a name that can be used for both. Therefore, I merged into the latter. -- AirOdyssey 23:30, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons for picking 121.5[edit]

I suspect picking a frequency in the middle of the band improved performance because the antennas and other tuned elements would be operating at their center frequency. -- RoySmith (talk) 11:59, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Mistake in Third Paragraph[edit]

Hi, the third paragraph lists the stations that commonly monitor 406.0 MHz. Is it really meant to refer to this frequency (which is only mentioned later in the article) or is it supposed to say 121.5 MHz? 85.233.44.140 (talk) 15:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are right, I cant see why a local tower would listen to the beacon frequency rather than the voice channel. MilborneOne (talk) 21:17, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ive had a bit of a tweak as the whole article was a bit of a mess. MilborneOne (talk) 21:32, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]