![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Darryl Ramm wrote:
Oh doh, thank you Mr. Governor. OK there is a basis to the claim, but definitely not because of differences "pinging". 0440 is just two pulses (binary 4 twice). And 1200 (binary 1 and 2) also has two pulses, and there are always two framing pulses, and maybe an ident pulse. So 1200 and 0440 should be no different in terms of radiated power. And usually every second interrogation/response is going to be an altitude code. So I guess they could pick a worse code and have several more pulses (would have to look at the map of available codes to see how bad it could be, luckily 7xxx is taken :-)) I'd be curious to see actual differences in power consumption measurements. Uh, no Mr. Boffin, tis not quite that simple. It's been a while since I looked at this stuff, but I believe the actual transponder code is encoded using a modified Gray code (as is the altitude code), so the actual duty cycle is not quite that obvious. Second, the fashion in which the transponder code and the altitude code are transmitted differ significantly, as the transponder code portion of the transmission dates back to WW II IFF, and the Mode C stuff came much later. I doubt the NTSB would have brought it up, unless there was something to it. Personally, I'm not interested enough to try to figure it out... Marc |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Marc Ramsey wrote:
Uh, no Mr. Boffin, tis not quite that simple. It's been a while since I looked at this stuff, but I believe the actual transponder code is encoded using a modified Gray code (as is the altitude code), so the actual duty cycle is not quite that obvious. Second, the fashion in which the transponder code and the altitude code are transmitted differ significantly, as the transponder code portion of the transmission dates back to WW II IFF, and the Mode C stuff came much later. I doubt the NTSB would have brought it up, unless there was something to it. Personally, I'm not interested enough to try to figure it out... I'll take it back, Mode A and Mode C are transmitted the same way, and while altitude is Gray encoded, the squawk code is straight binary. So, I have no idea what the NTSB was talking about. Marc |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It seemed odd to me. The whole idea had the the aura of a April Fool's Joke post.
If it is a joke, it's not fair dating it 3/31 instead of 4/1 Sarah Marc Ramsey wrote: I'll take it back, Mode A and Mode C are transmitted the same way, and while altitude is Gray encoded, the squawk code is straight binary. So, I have no idea what the NTSB was talking about. Marc |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
go to NTSB.GOV | [email protected] | Piloting | 0 | August 15th 05 08:34 PM |
FAA-NTSB | [email protected] | Piloting | 4 | January 25th 05 01:34 PM |
NTSB | EDR | Piloting | 22 | July 2nd 04 03:03 AM |
Is the the EX-NTSB Guy? | Gig Giacona | Piloting | 2 | January 16th 04 04:01 PM |
NTSB 830.5 & 830.15? | Mike Noel | Owning | 2 | July 8th 03 05:51 AM |