At the SSA convention, the discrete glider code was discussed again and
nothing's really changed from what Eric states. Unfortunately, code
assignments are exhausted in some regions and there is no likelihood of
securing a national glider code in any near term. The next time the FAA
asks Congress for billion$ to update the obsolete and failing system (FUD)
again, I suggest you write your representative WRT moving from 8-bit to
16-bit
codes for future expansion, since we're in the 21st century now. Since
there's no prospect of a single discrete code, there's no incentive for
development of a lower cost single code transponder for gliders. Squawk
09AF works for me. Can't imagine the situation getting any better in the
future.

In many cases this might seem to only require reasonable firmware and
software changes and wouldn't necessarily obsolete a lot of older
equipment. Like to hear if this is technically feasible or not.

Or maybe ask the FAA to assign the 'X' pulse to gliders exclusively. The
addition or supression of the X pulse (opposite of what it now does during a
reply) could ident the airframe as a glider to any interrogation. May open
the door for a single code with some software, firmware updates.

See http://www.airsport-corp.com/modec.htm

Frank Whiteley


"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
...
Mark Zivley wrote:

I'm definitely in favor of gliders w/ transponders and see this as
another step towards conserving battery power for when you need it. i.e.
when you are near a high traffic airspace where the chances of crossing
paths with someone with either TCAS or ATC coverage is increased.

What about a discrete transponder code specifically for gliders??????

I understand that there is at least one area which has an agreement to
use (seems like it's 0440 or something similar) a code specifically for
gliders. Why not also work on getting this code agreed to for all of
the U.S. at the same time that they are working on the below mentioned
waiver.

Contacting your director will likely get you the latest information on
this subject, but here's what I was told last year:

-The Reno area does use 0440, and it works for them, because there are
many gliders flying there that do have transponders, and the controllers
are familiar with how a glider operate, so knowing which blip is a
glider is useful.

-The above is not true for most of the USA.

-The specific code, 0440, is used for other things around the country -
not many, but it means other changes would have to be made.

-Some have suggested making gliders easily identifiable by a specific
code might not work in our favor because controllers and others would
know "who" to be annoyed at, justified or not.

-So, the last I heard, doing a special code was likely to be on a
cas-by-case basis.

Keep up the good work!

Mark

Eric Greenwell wrote:

Check out the SSA website for the complete info on this petition, and
consider commenting to the FAA (comments due by March 1, via web site,
mail, fax, "eRulemaking portal"):

SSA Transponder Petition Published
By Dennis Wright
Posted Thursday, February 19, 2004

The SSA petition asks that SSA members be allowed to operate
transponder-equipped gliders with the transponders turned off, when
the glider is being operated more than 40 nautical miles from the
primary airport in Class B airspace and more than 20 nautical miles
from the primary airport in Class C airspace. Currently, Federal
Aviation Regulation 91.215[c] requires that all aircraft equipped with
a transponder and operating in controlled airspace have the
transponder on.

...more on the web site



--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA