On Dec 15, 7:46*am, Andy wrote:
On Dec 14, 9:59*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:

Personally I wish they were mandatory in areas around Reno (I don't
want to lose access to those areas because *non-transponder equipped
glider is involved in a collision with a passenger jet). We were very
lucky the ASG-29 and Hawker collision involved no fatalities.

But the ASG-29 was transponder equipped was it not?

If transponder use becomes mandatory it still does not mean they will
all be turned on, all be squawking mode C, and all reporting the
correct altitude.

I'm quite sensitive to this at the moment as my airplane has developed
a problem that causes the mode C report to sometimes be thousands of
feet in error until the transponder or encoder warm up.

I take my Zaon MRX with me any time I fly including in other people's
aircraft. *Once you own one of these you won't want to leave home
without it.

Still don't have a transponder in the glider so I guess I'll stay away
from Reno.

Andy

Well your transponder is a safety item so get it fixed. Worse case
replace the encoder, they are not that expensive.

I think everybody who flies with an MRX is greatly impressed with
them. However if you do not have a transponder you really are not
participating in the ATC system. So to the original question,
(especially for Reno) get a transponder first, MRX second if you can't
afford both.

By mandatory I mean mandatory to be turned on and used. The ASG-29 had
the transponder turned off, for what can at best can be described as a
confused set of reasons. Procedures for contacting approach determine
pretty quickly if the transponder is working or not and squawking the
correct altitude. Most new transponders will also display the pressure
altitude so working out if the encoder is working or not is bit of a
non-issue. So what other excuse is left... worries about powering
transponders seem a little strained given modern encoder and
transponder power power consumption, and alternative battery and solar
panel options, especially given the risks involved to the sport (it's
the risk to passenger carrying jets the impact on out sport that I
care about, not the individual glider pilot).

Crossing extremely high traffic corridors near place like Reno, has
nothing to do with flying around the boondocks so who cares if you
have a transponder at many glider sites. If we have another mid-air,
especially with passenger fatalities, I suspect we'll have lots more
restrictions than just requiring transponders in high-traffic areas.

Darryl