Feds Want to Equipe Gliders With Transponders and Radios
Larry.. DO you fly gliders?
From these statements it would appear that you do not.
Gliders may or may not have electrical systems, they do not "generate
power", but stored battery power of a limited life span.
Gliders are small, batteries are small, everything needs to be small.
NTSB "recommends", FAA cannot mandate without a comment period and a change
to many CFRs.
Technology is coming for the small transponder, along with ATS-B. Why would
I put a 50# $15K ATS-B system in a $15K glider.
Small transponders now are about $1300 plus antenna and installation. It can
be done.
My issue is not with TCAS equipped aircraft, but with smaller GA aircraft
that do not have TCAS, do not have a Garmin 430 with TIS (or equivalent) and
are not talking to ATC. It does no good to have a transponder, when the
aircraft causing the traffic conflict is not talking to anyone. Just sitting
there FDH and not even paying attention in the traffic pattern.
Last Saturday we had at least 4 transient aircraft attempt to land at the
airport with 15 to 20 knot tail winds, and against the flow of traffic.
They could not even listen up to the radio to figure out the runway in use,
or even look at a wind sock or a huge flag and see the 15knt winds and make
up their own mind about the landing runway.
What makes you think a transponder in a glider would make any difference.
And local ATC can see my non-transponder equipped glider just fine, when I
am high enough for radar coverage.
It's called raw radar skin paint. And yes, I am looking at the requirements
(Not Govt' requirement but electical and space in the aircraft requirements)
and feasibility for installing transponders in our gliders.
B
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 16:01:31 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
wrote in
:
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
. ..
If this is implemented, will it affect powered aircraft without
electrical systems too?
Almost certainly
That's the way I saw it also.
Here are a few pertinent questions:
What are the full implications of installing an electrical system in a
glider?
If implemented, will the requirement for an electrical system kill
low-cost glider training operations?
Would the CAP glider training operations, which typically provide
winch launch and pattern work, be impacted?
What are the full implications of installing an electrical system in a
Champ or Cub? Isn't their performance so marginal already, that they
will become impractical due to increased empty weight and drag, and
power reduction with the addition of an alternator, battery,
communications radio, transponder, antennas, wiring, switches, etc?
Would the work have to be done by an A&P and approved by the FAA for
each aircraft/glider modified?
Will aircraft/glider useful load be affected?
How much does the gliders right-of-way over powered aircraft affect
this issue?
Not at all.
So you don't believe there is any possibility that Part 121 or 135
operator advocate organizations have been lobbying the government to
increase the conspicuity of gliders or to enable their TCAS systems to
warn operators of glider proximity?
What is the possibility of NextGen ATC accommodating non-metallic
aircraft without electrical systems? Without transponders? Without
radio communications?
Any glider pilots who depends on powered aircraft to see them
and to automatically get out of their way has a death wish.
It's difficult to deny that. But it doesn't address the issue of
liability.
Right-of-way rules have two uses:
1) Provides a framework of preplanned manuvers for aircraft to use to
avoid
each other (but only if they both see each other, know the regulations,
and are
inclined to follow them).
Actually, that is true if only one pilot makes visual contact too.
And now the big one: (2) It provides lawers and bureaucrats with a
methodology for assigning blame after an accident.
So Right-of-way regulations provide a basis for aggrieved parties to
seek compensation from regulation violators, and assign responsibility
too.
Is ATC going to take legal and financial responsibility for separation
if gliders are mandated to be so equipped and operated?
No more than they do now.
I would find ATC's responsibility for separating NORDO gliders that
paint no primary target to be nonexistent presently. If this proposal
is enacted, the situation will change.
Is the big-sky-theory a myth?
It always has been a myth.
At the risk of tangential drift, isn't the BST currently employed by
the FAA to separate high-speed military aircraft on VFR low-level
Military Training Routs from civil flights? In light of the mythical
status of the BST, shouldn't that flaw in the NAS be corrected also?
Vaughn
Thank you for your insightful comments.
|