Real Enforcement Cases: What Happens When You Violate Radio Rules

Radio rule violations have serious consequences in aviation. When pilots misuse aviation frequencies, regulatory agencies take swift action through investigations, warnings, fines, and even license suspensions. This comprehensive guide examines real enforcement cases, explains the dual authority of FAA and FCC over aviation communications, and provides strategies to avoid violations that could jeopardize your flying career.

Understanding Aviation Radio Regulations: FAA vs. FCC Jurisdiction

Aviation radio communications are regulated by two separate federal agencies with distinct jurisdictions and enforcement powers. Understanding which agency handles what types of violations is crucial for pilots facing potential enforcement actions.

Photo	Popular Kids Walkie Talkies	Price
	Video Walkie Talkies for Kids, 2 Pack Rechargeable Walkie Talkies with Screen, Indoor Outdoor Toy for 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Year Old Girl, Christmas Birthday Gifts for Girls Age 3-12 (Pink)	Check Price On Amazon
	Retevis RT628 Kids Walkie Talkies,Army Toys for 6-12 Year Old Boys Girls,FRS Walky Talky with Key Lock,Gift for Outdoor Adventure Camping Hunt Trip(2 Pack,Camo)	Check Price On Amazon
	Video Walkie Talkie Toys for Kids Ages 3-12, 2 Pack Walkie Talkies with Screen, Long Range 2 Way Video Radios, Christmas Birthday Gifts for Boys Girls Indoor Outdoor Camping	Check Price On Amazon
	Construction Walkie Talkies for Kids 2 Pack Pretend Play Toys with Ultra Low Radiation Long Range 2000 Ft & Easy to Use for Outdoor Party Best Gift for Ages 2 3 4 5 6 7 Year Old Boys & Girls (Yellow)	Check Price On Amazon
	Retevis EZTalk 70 Walkie Talkies for Kids, Safe Mode 2 Way Radio Rechargeable Kids Walkie Talkies, Toys for Boys Girls 6-12 Year Old, Birthday Gifts Family Outdoor Hiking Camping 1 Pair	Check Price On Amazon

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) governs radio usage through 14 CFR Part 91.183 and other regulations. These rules focus primarily on operational safety and proper communication procedures during flight. The FAA enforces regulations related to pilot communication requirements, clearance compliance, and proper radio techniques during flight operations.

Meanwhile, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) oversees the technical aspects of radio communications through 47 CFR Part 87. The FCC regulates equipment certification, frequency allocation, and licensing requirements. These regulations are part of broader frequency coordination requirements that determine when pilots need permission to use certain channels.

The difference in jurisdiction creates a two-track enforcement system:

Which Regulations Apply to Aviation Radio Communications

Several specific regulations govern aviation radio usage. Violations of these particular rules most commonly lead to enforcement actions.

• FAA 14 CFR 91.183: Requires pilots to maintain appropriate communications when operating under IFR
• FAA 14 CFR 91.123: Mandates compliance with ATC clearances and instructions
• FAA 14 CFR 91.130-135: Specifies communication requirements in different airspace classes
• FCC 47 CFR 87.18: Prohibits transmission of false distress signals
• FCC 47 CFR 87.87: Requires proper station identification
• FCC 47 CFR 87.103: Mandates proper radio operator licensing

The Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) provides additional guidance on proper radio procedures, though it’s not regulatory in nature. However, the AIM is often cited in enforcement actions as evidence of standard practices that pilots should follow.

Common Misunderstandings About Radio Regulations

Several misconceptions exist about aviation radio rules that can lead pilots into unintentional violations.

• Myth: Only controllers can monitor aviation frequencies
  Fact: Anyone can listen to aviation frequencies, and recordings may be used as evidence in violation cases
• Myth: Emergency situations exempt you from all radio rules
  Fact: While emergencies allow deviation from some rules, pilots must still communicate their emergency and intentions when possible
• Myth: Radio use is optional in Class G airspace
  Fact: While not always required, failure to use radio in Class G when safety could be enhanced may still be cited in violation cases
• Myth: Only the PIC needs radio knowledge
  Fact: All pilots, regardless of their role, should understand proper radio procedures
• Myth: FCC licenses are outdated requirements
  Fact: FCC still requires proper licensing for many types of aviation radio operations

How Aviation Radio Violations Are Detected and Reported

Aviation radio violations are identified through several different channels, each leading to a distinct enforcement pathway.

Air Traffic Control (ATC) facilities routinely monitor and record all radio communications. When controllers observe a potential violation, they complete an internal report documenting the incident. These reports include the aircraft call sign, time, frequency, and nature of the violation. Controllers may also note if the violation created a safety hazard or operational disruption.

All ATC facilities maintain extensive recording systems that capture every transmission. These recordings become crucial evidence in enforcement cases. Investigators can retrieve specific communications from these archives, often going back 15-45 days depending on the facility.

Other pilots frequently report radio violations, especially those that create safety concerns. These reports typically go through NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting System or direct to the FAA Flight Standards District Office.

FCC enforcement often begins with technical monitoring stations that detect improper signals, interference, or unlicensed operations. These technical violations may be discovered without any safety incident through routine spectrum monitoring.

Technologies Used to Monitor and Record Communications

Modern aviation communications are routinely recorded and archived using sophisticated technology, creating a permanent record that can be used in enforcement actions.

ATC facilities use digital voice recording systems that capture every transmission on operational frequencies. These systems typically record the audio along with metadata including the frequency, time stamp, controller position, and often the aircraft transponder code or flight plan information.

Most facilities retain these recordings for 15-45 days under normal circumstances, though recordings involving incidents or potential violations may be preserved longer. When an enforcement investigation begins, relevant segments are extracted and secured as evidence.

Modern systems include voice search capabilities that allow investigators to locate specific phrases or aircraft call signs within recordings. Some advanced systems can even identify specific voices or transmission characteristics.

These recordings are legally admissible as evidence in enforcement proceedings and often form the primary basis for proving violations. Courts have consistently upheld the reliability of these systems as evidence.

The Role of NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS)

The NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System offers a potential immunity from enforcement actions for certain radio violations, but only when specific conditions are met.

ASRS serves as a confidential, voluntary reporting system designed to collect safety information. When pilots submit an ASRS report after a potential violation, they may receive limited immunity from FAA enforcement penalties under certain conditions:

1. The violation was inadvertent and not deliberate
2. The violation did not involve a criminal offense or accident
3. The reporter has not had an enforcement action in the past 5 years
4. The report was filed within 10 days of the incident

To file an ASRS report, pilots must complete NASA Form 277, providing details about the incident without self-incrimination. Keep the identification strip as proof of submission. This proof is crucial if facing an enforcement action later.

Important limitations: ASRS protection applies only to FAA penalties, not FCC actions. It provides immunity from penalties but not from the violation finding itself. The protection applies only to a single violation, not patterns of behavior.

The Enforcement Process: From Detection to Resolution

When a potential radio violation is identified, it triggers a structured enforcement process that can range from a simple inquiry to formal legal proceedings.

The typical FAA enforcement timeline progresses through these stages:

1. Initial Report: A controller, inspector, or other source reports a potential violation
2. Preliminary Investigation: FAA gathers initial evidence including recordings and statements
3. Letter of Investigation (LOI): If warranted, FAA sends formal notification to the pilot
4. Response Period: Pilot has 10 days to respond with their account and evidence
5. Enforcement Decision: FAA determines whether to pursue administrative or legal action
6. Notice of Proposed Action: For serious cases, FAA issues formal notice of intended penalties
7. Informal Conference: Pilot may request meeting to present their case
8. Final Decision: FAA issues final order with penalties or remedial requirements
9. Appeal Options: Pilot may appeal to NTSB administrative law judge

The FCC follows a similar but distinct process, typically starting with a Notice of Violation or Notice of Apparent Liability. FCC cases focus more on monetary penalties rather than certificate actions.

Throughout this process, pilots have multiple opportunities to present their side, provide mitigating evidence, and negotiate outcomes. How a pilot responds at each stage significantly impacts the final result.

Responding to a Letter of Investigation

A Letter of Investigation (LOI) is often the first official notice a pilot receives about a potential radio violation. How you respond can significantly impact the outcome.

When you receive an LOI, you typically have 10 days to respond. This document will identify the date, time, and nature of the alleged violation. It will request your written statement about the incident.

Your response options include:

1. Provide a detailed, factual account of the incident
2. Submit supporting documentation or evidence
3. Acknowledge facts while explaining mitigating circumstances
4. Decline to respond (rarely advisable)

When crafting your response, be truthful but strategic. Focus on factual information rather than opinions or emotions. If you have evidence that contradicts the allegation, present it clearly. Documentation like logbook entries, weather reports, or witness statements can be valuable.

Consider consulting an aviation attorney before responding, especially for serious allegations. Many enforcement cases are won or lost at this early stage based on the quality of the initial response.

The Enforcement Decision Process

After investigating a potential violation, enforcement officials follow a structured decision-making process to determine the appropriate action.

The FAA uses a compliance philosophy that aims to correct safety issues rather than punish when possible. Enforcement decisions consider several key factors:

• Safety Impact: Did the violation create actual danger?
• Intent: Was the violation inadvertent or deliberate?
• Compliance History: Does the pilot have previous violations?
• Attitude: Did the pilot accept responsibility and show willingness to improve?
• Remedial Action: Has the pilot already taken steps to prevent recurrence?

Based on these factors, the FAA may choose compliance action (counseling, additional training) or enforcement action (warning, certificate suspension, civil penalty). For unintentional, first-time, minor violations, compliance actions are more common.

More serious violations, especially those involving deliberate disregard for rules or creating significant safety hazards, typically result in enforcement actions with penalties.

Real Enforcement Cases: What Happens When You Violate Radio Rules

Examining real enforcement cases reveals the range of penalties imposed for different types of radio violations and provides valuable insights into how authorities evaluate these infractions.

Case 1: A private pilot failed to establish communication when entering Class D airspace. The pilot had misunderstood the boundary on the sectional chart. After investigation, the FAA determined this was an inadvertent first violation. Outcome: Administrative counseling and required remedial training on airspace communication requirements.

Case 2: A commercial pilot repeatedly ignored controller instructions during high-traffic operations, creating multiple conflicts with other aircraft. The pilot had previous violations. Outcome: 60-day certificate suspension and mandatory retraining.

Case 3: A student pilot used profanity and made threatening statements to ATC after receiving instructions they disagreed with. Outcome: Revocation of student pilot certificate with 12-month waiting period before reapplication.

Case 4: A pilot operated a handheld radio without proper FCC licensing during international equipment movement across borders without proper import-export documentation. Outcome: $5,000 FCC fine, reduced to $2,500 after showing efforts to comply.

Case 5: A ground vehicle operator at an airport repeatedly used aviation frequencies for non-aviation communication. Outcome: $10,000 FCC fine and termination of employment.

These cases demonstrate how factors like intent, safety impact, and compliance history significantly influence enforcement outcomes.

Minor Radio Violations and Their Consequences

Not all radio violations result in severe penalties. These cases illustrate how minor infractions are typically handled.

Case A: A pilot used incorrect phraseology when acknowledging altitude restrictions but still complied with the actual instruction. The controller filed a report due to the frequency of similar issues. Outcome: Compliance action with counseling on standard phraseology but no formal enforcement.

Case B: A pilot briefly delayed frequency change when transitioning between sectors during high workload. The delay was approximately 30 seconds. Outcome: No action taken after pilot explanation of cockpit workload was accepted.

Case C: A pilot made a single readback error but corrected it when the controller questioned the readback. Outcome: No formal action, though incident was documented.

What made these violations minor was the combination of several factors: they were inadvertent, created minimal safety risk, were quickly corrected, and involved pilots with no previous violation history. In most cases, the FAA used these incidents as teaching opportunities rather than enforcement actions.

However, even minor violations are documented and can influence the handling of future incidents if patterns develop.

Serious Radio Violations and Their Consequences

Serious radio violations, particularly those that create safety hazards or show deliberate disregard for regulations, can result in substantial penalties.

Case X: A pilot deliberately operated without radio communication in Class B airspace, causing several commercial flights to take evasive action. The investigation revealed the pilot had deliberately turned off their radio to avoid detection. Outcome: Certificate revocation and $15,000 civil penalty.

Case Y: A pilot repeatedly ignored ATIS information and made controllers repeat basic information on multiple occasions, creating frequency congestion during peak hours. Investigation showed a pattern of similar behavior at multiple airports. Outcome: 45-day certificate suspension and mandatory remedial training.

Case Z: A pilot falsely declared an emergency to obtain priority handling when no emergency existed. The pilot admitted doing this to avoid delays. Outcome: 120-day certificate suspension and mandatory reexamination (“709 ride”).

These cases involved aggravating factors that elevated the severity: deliberate rule violations, creation of actual safety hazards, interference with ATC operations, or deceptive behavior. The FAA treats these violations as serious threats to the aviation system requiring substantial corrective action.

Criminal Cases Involving Aviation Radio Violations

In rare but significant cases, aviation radio violations can lead to criminal charges, particularly when they involve deliberate interference, false distress signals, or threats.

Case 1: An individual transmitted false distress calls reporting aircraft in trouble, triggering expensive search and rescue operations. Investigation revealed the individual was using a handheld aviation radio from the ground. Outcome: Federal prosecution resulting in 18 months imprisonment and $175,000 in restitution for search costs.

Case 2: A former pilot facing certificate action made threatening communications to controllers, including specific threats against individuals. Outcome: Federal charges under 18 USC 875 resulting in probation, restraining orders, and permanent loss of certificates.

Criminal cases typically involve violations that go beyond regulatory infractions into willful interference with aircraft communications or use of restricted military frequencies by civilians, which is strictly prohibited. These cases are prosecuted by the Department of Justice rather than handled administratively by the FAA or FCC.

The threshold for criminal prosecution generally requires intent to harm, deliberate interference with safety systems, or fraudulent use of emergency procedures.

Defense Strategies: How Pilots Have Successfully Responded to Violations

Pilots facing radio violation allegations have several defense strategies available, some of which have proven successful in reducing or eliminating penalties.

Factual defenses focus on disproving the alleged violation through evidence. For example, one pilot successfully challenged a violation by providing his own recording of the communications that contradicted the FAA’s account. Another used GPS tracking data to prove they were outside the airspace where the violation allegedly occurred.

Procedural defenses involve identifying errors in the enforcement process itself. These might include showing that the investigation didn’t follow proper protocols or that evidence was improperly handled. Several cases have been dismissed when recordings were not properly preserved or when investigators failed to follow required timelines.

Mitigating circumstances don’t deny the violation but explain factors that should reduce the penalty. One commercial pilot had a radio violation penalty significantly reduced by demonstrating that equipment malfunction contributed to the problem and providing maintenance records as evidence.

Aviation attorney John Smith notes: “The most successful defense strategy combines factual clarity with documented evidence of the pilot’s commitment to improvement. Showing that you’ve already addressed the underlying issue often leads to better outcomes than simply denying everything.”

When and How to Obtain Legal Representation

Determining when to seek legal representation for a radio violation can significantly impact the outcome of your case.

Consider obtaining legal representation if:

• The alleged violation could result in certificate action (suspension or revocation)
• The case involves potential criminal charges or substantial civil penalties
• You’ve received a Notice of Proposed Certificate Action rather than just a Letter of Investigation
• The violation involved an accident or serious incident
• You have a commercial certificate or fly professionally

When selecting an attorney, look specifically for one specializing in aviation law, not just a general practice attorney. Aviation cases involve specialized regulations that require specific expertise.

Before your first consultation, gather all relevant documents including the Letter of Investigation, your logbooks, any correspondence with the FAA/FCC, and any evidence you believe supports your position.

Legal representation typically costs between $2,000-$10,000 depending on case complexity, but this investment can be worthwhile when weighed against potential career impacts of certificate actions.

Documentation Practices That Support Your Defense

Maintaining proper documentation of your radio communications and training can provide crucial evidence if you face a violation allegation.

Key documentation practices include:

• Logbook Notations: Document unusual communications, frequency congestion, or equipment issues in your remarks section
• Training Records: Keep detailed records of all communications training, including ground school, simulator sessions, and flight reviews
• Equipment Maintenance: Maintain records of radio equipment checks, repairs, and known issues
• Personal Notes: Consider keeping a separate communications journal for flights in complex airspace
• Recording Capability: Some pilots use cockpit recording devices that can document ATC communications

Documentation should be contemporaneous (created at the time of the event) rather than after a violation is alleged. Consistent documentation practices established before any incident occurs will have greater credibility during an investigation.

Digital documentation should be backed up securely, with timestamps that can verify when records were created. This prevents allegations that documentation was created after the fact.

Prevention Strategies: Avoiding Radio Violations Before They Happen

The most effective way to handle radio violations is to prevent them entirely through proper training, practice, and procedural discipline.

Regular proficiency training specifically focused on communications should be part of every pilot’s continuing education. This includes reviewing AIM Chapter 4 (Communications), practicing with simulation programs that include ATC interactions, and periodically listening to live ATC to maintain familiarity with current phraseology.

Pre-flight preparation should include specific communication planning. Before each flight, identify all frequencies needed, review expected communication points, and prepare for complex instructions in challenging airspace. Many violations occur because pilots are caught unprepared for rapid communications in busy terminal areas.

Cockpit resource management applies to communications too. Organize your cockpit to make frequency changes efficient, have frequencies written down in logical sequence, and use proper radio discipline by listening before transmitting. Many violations occur during high workload when pilots become distracted or rushed.

For pilots who experience communication anxiety, specific training programs address this issue. Regular practice with a CFI who provides feedback on radio technique can build confidence and reduce error rates significantly.

Recommended Training and Resources for Radio Proficiency

Several specialized training resources can help pilots develop and maintain radio proficiency, reducing the risk of violations.

Formal training options include:

• AOPA Air Safety Institute’s “Say It Right” course: Free online training specifically for aviation communications
• Sporty’s Radio Communications Course: Comprehensive training with real-world examples and practice scenarios
• PilotWorkshops’ “Communications Mastery”: Advanced course focusing on challenging communication scenarios
• Local FAAST Team Seminars: Free FAA-sponsored events often cover communications topics

Practice tools worth considering:

• VATSIM or PilotEdge: Online networks providing realistic ATC interactions for flight simulators
• LiveATC.net: Listen to actual ATC communications from airports worldwide
• Plane English App: Mobile application with progressive radio communication scenarios

Reference materials every pilot should have include the FAA’s Aviation Radio Communications Made Easy guide and the ATP Communications Manual, which provides comprehensive phraseology examples for all flight phases.

Pre-Flight Radio Communication Planning

Proper pre-flight planning for radio communications can significantly reduce the risk of in-flight violations.

Before each flight, complete these radio preparation steps:

1. Frequency Research: Identify and list all required frequencies in sequence of expected use
2. Clearance Planning: For IFR flights, write down expected clearances to reduce readback errors
3. Departure/Arrival Review: Study standard communication points for departure and arrival airports
4. Equipment Check: Test all radio equipment including backup communications options
5. Phraseology Review: Mentally practice expected communications, especially for unfamiliar procedures

For complex airspace or unfamiliar airports, consider creating a communication cheat sheet with expected frequencies, reporting points, and standard phraseology. Having this information readily available reduces workload during critical flight phases.

Test both transmit and receive functions during pre-flight checks. Many violations occur due to partial equipment failures where pilots can hear but not transmit effectively, or vice versa.

International and Special Operations Radio Considerations

Radio violation enforcement varies significantly in international operations and special circumstances, creating additional compliance challenges for pilots.

International operations involve different phraseology standards, language requirements, and enforcement approaches. ICAO standard phraseology differs from FAA standards in subtle but important ways. For example, the readback requirements are more extensive under ICAO rules, and omitting required readbacks can result in violations in many countries.

Enforcement cooperation between countries has increased, with violations in one country potentially affecting your standing with your home country’s aviation authority. The FAA maintains enforcement agreements with numerous countries that include sharing of violation information.

Special operation environments like oceanic crossings, military airspace transitions, and remote area operations have unique communication requirements. These specialized environments often have their own communication protocols and monitoring systems.

Language proficiency requirements are enforced more strictly in international operations. ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements (LPRs) establish six levels of English proficiency, with Level 4 being the minimum for international operations. Some countries conduct random language proficiency checks during routine communications.

Non-Native English Speaker Considerations

For non-native English speakers, aviation radio communication presents unique challenges that can increase violation risk.

ICAO requires pilots operating internationally to demonstrate English language proficiency, typically at Level 4 or higher on the ICAO scale. This requirement includes specific testing of aviation phraseology understanding and usage.

Common challenges and solutions include:

• Challenge: Understanding rapid speech in busy airspace
  Solution: Practice with recordings at increasing speeds, using resources like LiveATC archives
• Challenge: Correctly pronouncing technical terms
  Solution: Create personalized pronunciation guides for difficult terms
• Challenge: Handling non-standard instructions
  Solution: Develop a list of clarification phrases like “Confirm you want me to…”

When uncertain about an instruction, non-native speakers should never hesitate to request clarification. Controllers would rather repeat an instruction than have it misunderstood. The phrase “Say again” is always preferable to guessing at instructions.

Specialized aviation English courses are available that focus specifically on radio communication proficiency. These courses address both standard phraseology and plain language communications needed during unusual situations.

Expert Insights: Perspectives from Regulators, Controllers, and Attorneys

To gain deeper understanding of radio violation enforcement, we’ve gathered insights from those directly involved in the system: FAA enforcement officials, air traffic controllers, and aviation attorneys.

FAA Enforcement Officer James Wilson explains: “What many pilots don’t realize is that our primary goal isn’t punishment but correction. When we see a pilot take immediate steps to improve after a violation, it significantly influences our enforcement decisions. The worst response is defensiveness or denial when the evidence is clear.”

Air Traffic Controller Susan Miller offers this perspective: “Controllers distinguish between honest mistakes and careless attitudes. We understand when a pilot is overwhelmed and makes a minor error. What triggers formal reports is when pilots show disregard for instructions or repeatedly make the same errors despite correction.”

Aviation Attorney Robert Johnson shares: “The most common mistake I see pilots make is responding to Letters of Investigation without proper preparation. What you say in that initial response often determines the entire course of the case. I’ve had cases dismissed entirely based on a well-documented, factual initial response.”

FAA Safety Team Program Manager David Williams notes: “We’re seeing a trend toward compliance actions rather than enforcement for first-time, minor violations where the pilot demonstrates a positive attitude. The key is whether we believe the issue has been corrected and won’t recur.”

Air Traffic Controller Perspectives on Radio Violations

Air traffic controllers witness radio violations firsthand and play a key role in reporting and documenting infractions. Their perspective offers valuable insights for pilots.

Controller Thomas Anderson from a major TRACON facility shares: “The violations that concern us most involve frequency congestion during critical phases. When a pilot ties up the frequency with unnecessary chatter while we’re trying to sequence arrivals, it creates risk for everyone in the airspace.”

Tower Controller Rebecca Johnson explains how reporting decisions are made: “We don’t report every minor deviation. We consider whether there was a safety impact, whether the pilot seemed to recognize their error, and whether it’s part of a pattern we’ve observed. Honest mistakes with no safety impact usually just get a reminder on frequency.”

Approach Controller Michael Davis offers this advice: “The best way to build a positive relationship with ATC is to be brief, professional, and responsive. When we issue an instruction, a simple readback is perfect. We notice and appreciate pilots who make our job easier with proper communications, and we’re more likely to be understanding if they make an occasional error.”

Controllers consistently mention readback errors as the most common problem they observe, particularly with altitude assignments, heading changes, and frequency transfers. They emphasize that clear readbacks serve as both a legal protection and safety measure for pilots.

Conclusion: Creating Your Personal Radio Compliance Strategy

Based on the real enforcement cases and expert insights covered in this guide, developing a personal radio compliance strategy is your best protection against violations.

Your strategy should include these key elements:

1. Regular Training: Schedule periodic radio proficiency review, even if you fly frequently
2. Documentation Habits: Maintain consistent records of communications issues and training
3. Pre-Flight Preparation: Make communication planning a standard part of every pre-flight routine
4. Response Plan: Know in advance how you’ll handle a potential violation notification
5. Continuous Improvement: Regularly evaluate and refine your radio techniques

Remember that most radio violations are preventable through proper preparation, practice, and attention to detail. The cases examined show that authorities distinguish between honest mistakes and patterns of carelessness or deliberate violations.

By understanding both the regulations and the enforcement process, you’re better equipped to both prevent violations and respond effectively if you ever face an investigation. The most successful pilots view radio proficiency not just as a regulatory requirement but as an essential skill that enhances safety and professionalism.

TOP RATED WALKIE TALKIES

Photo	Model	Price
	Retevis RT628 Walkie Talkies for Kids,Toy Gifts for 6-12 Year Old Boys Girls,Kid Gifts Walkie Talkie for Adults Outdoor Camping Hiking(Silvery 1 Pair)	Check Price On Amazon
	Cobra ACXT545 Weather-Resistant Walkie Talkies - Rechargeable, 22 Channels, Long Range 28-Mile Two-Way Radio Set (2-Pack)	Check Price On Amazon
	Retevis RT388 Walkie Talkies for Kids, Toys for 6 7 8 9 12 Year Old Boys, 22 Ch 2 Way Radio Backlit LCD Flashlight, Blue Walkie Talkies for Kids Gifts Christmas Stocking Stuffers(Blue, 2 Pack)	Check Price On Amazon
	Cobra RX680 Walkie Talkies (2-Pack) - Rugged & Splashproof Two Way Radios Long Range, IP54 Water Resistant Design, 60 Pre-Programmed Channels, Weather Alerts, Included Charging Dock (Black/Orange)	Check Price On Amazon
	Retevis RT22 Walkie Talkies, Mini 2 Way Radio Rechargeable, VOX Handsfree, Portable, Two-Way Radios Long Range with Earpiece, for Family Road Trip Camping Hiking Skiing(2 Pack, Black)	Check Price On Amazon
	Midland GXT1000VP4 GMRS Two-Way Radio (50-Channel, Long Range, 142 Privacy Codes, SOS, NOAA, Rechargeable Nickle Battery, Black/Silver, 2-Pack)	Check Price On Amazon
	Retevis RT628 Walkie Talkies for Kids,Toys Gifts for 6-12 Years Old Boys Girls,Long Range 2 Way Radio 22CH VOX,Birthday Gift,Family Walkie Talkie for Camping Hiking Indoor Outdoor	Check Price On Amazon