New Nationwide Squawk Code

Hi Gang
A lot of misunderstanding in the last 3 posts. Lets start with the
easiest to explain:

1) Altitude limitations for all LSA flying machines used to be 10,000
feet msl for LSA licensed pilots ONLY. If you fly a LSA like I do with
a regular single engine power license then I can fly my LSA without
altitude limitations. That's the primary reason to get a more advanced
ticket than a LSA ticket. This applies to all LSAs including LSA
gliders/motorgliders where you reallydo need a regular glider
license. No one flies a LSA glider solely on a LSA glider ticket. I
hope that explains one confusion.
2) I obtained from the Web a couple of years ago the proposed first
set of modifications and corrections to the LSA regs. In that proposal
was an altitude limit change to read maximum altitude for a LSA
licensed pilot only. The new limitation would be 10,000 feet msl or
2,000 feet agl. I believe that has been approved and is now effective
and will allow you to get over that mountain.

Now I think a couple of you are confusing maximum cruise speeds and
VNE. There is a difference! Maximum continuous cruise speed for any
LSA is 120 knots but at what manufacturer specified power level? Max
power? Probably not. The manufacturer has figured this loop hole out
and will specify that for continuous operation in cruise mode is say
at a specified power level. So the result is most new LSAs have gone
to big powerful engines with placated maximum cruise speeds at a
continuous power levels of say 70% which limits the max cruise speeds
to 120 knots or less. This probably implies that many LSAs will be and
are flown illegally at cruise speeds in excess of 120 knots. What a
huge gaping loop hole!
Except for LSA gliders/motorgliders there are no VNE limits on any
LSA flying machines and in fact most LSAs, mine included, have much
higher placated VNEs than 120 knots. There has never been a VNE limit
dictated by the FAA for any flying machine ever except for a LSA
glider! Why? Surely it is the manufacturer who defines a VNE limit
based on flutter and other considerations. What was the FAA thinking
about? A royal screwup and why didn't the SSA catch it? Go figure. Was
no one minding the store? Occam's razor logic probably applies here -
the simplest explanation is often correct.
Dave

One note of caution. If you fly an LSA powered aircraft above 10K', not
only do you need a private pilot license, but you also need a medical.

Mike Schumann

On 4/4/2010 5:45 PM, kd6veb wrote:
Hi Gang
A lot of misunderstanding in the last 3 posts. Lets start with the
easiest to explain:

1) Altitude limitations for all LSA flying machines used to be 10,000
feet msl for LSA licensed pilots ONLY. If you fly a LSA like I do with
a regular single engine power license then I can fly my LSA without
altitude limitations. That's the primary reason to get a more advanced
ticket than a LSA ticket. This applies to all LSAs including LSA
gliders/motorgliders where you reallydo need a regular glider
license. No one flies a LSA glider solely on a LSA glider ticket. I
hope that explains one confusion.
2) I obtained from the Web a couple of years ago the proposed first
set of modifications and corrections to the LSA regs. In that proposal
was an altitude limit change to read maximum altitude for a LSA
licensed pilot only. The new limitation would be 10,000 feet msl or
2,000 feet agl. I believe that has been approved and is now effective
and will allow you to get over that mountain.

Now I think a couple of you are confusing maximum cruise speeds and
VNE. There is a difference! Maximum continuous cruise speed for any
LSA is 120 knots but at what manufacturer specified power level? Max
power? Probably not. The manufacturer has figured this loop hole out
and will specify that for continuous operation in cruise mode is say
at a specified power level. So the result is most new LSAs have gone
to big powerful engines with placated maximum cruise speeds at a
continuous power levels of say 70% which limits the max cruise speeds
to 120 knots or less. This probably implies that many LSAs will be and
are flown illegally at cruise speeds in excess of 120 knots. What a
huge gaping loop hole!
Except for LSA gliders/motorgliders there are no VNE limits on any
LSA flying machines and in fact most LSAs, mine included, have much
higher placated VNEs than 120 knots. There has never been a VNE limit
dictated by the FAA for any flying machine ever except for a LSA
glider! Why? Surely it is the manufacturer who defines a VNE limit
based on flutter and other considerations. What was the FAA thinking
about? A royal screwup and why didn't the SSA catch it? Go figure. Was
no one minding the store? Occam's razor logic probably applies here -
the simplest explanation is often correct.
Dave


--
Mike Schumann

On 4/4/2010 1:18 PM, kd6veb wrote:
Hi Gang and Cindy
To me this is a classic example of lack of communications and follow
up. Who's to blame? Both the gliding community (SAA and Pasco) and the
FAA! Could there have been better communications? Absolutely. But
maybe there is little motivation to communicate.
A story. A couple of years ago I thoroughly researched what I should
do with the SparrowHawk. Should I register it experimental, ELSA or
just fly it under Part 103 with no registration. To make sure I got my
facts straight I contacted the local FSDO and had an FAA agent come
and inspect my SparrowHawk to determine if I would be legal under Part
103 and whether I was doing anything that might constitute a danger or
a liability. Nothing negative was found. At the same time I researched
who were the personnel at the FAA in Oklahoma who composed the rules
and regs around the then new LSA class of aircraft. I located the
authors and posed the question of why for a LSA glider was there a VNE
limitation of 120knots whereas for all other LSAs including balloons
there was not this limit? There was no answer and, of course, there is
no rational answer to that question. I then asked the question in
putting together the LSA rules for gliders had they worked with any
glider group such as the SSA or Pasco. No was the answer. So Cindy we
are now in 2010 and things have not changed. There is still no
meaningful dialog between the SSA and the FAA in the generation of
regs and rules. I stand by my original criticism of the SSA. The SSA
has shown itself to be a poor representative of the gliding community
over the years. As agreed by you there is a contradiction in what code
to use for a motor glider - 1200 or 1201. A little thought and better
communications might have avoided this contradiction and also the LSA
glider VNE spec.
Dave

PS If anyone is interested in my full writeup on the SparrowHawk and
the questions and answers whether to register it or not please email
me. If sufficient of you think it would be of interest I could post it
here on RAS.


Does the SSA have any national goals and strategies in its dealings with
the FAA? What are they? How does the SSA keep its members up to date
on what we are trying to accomplish.

To be effective in lobbying, do we have any regularly scheduled meetings
with top officials at the FAA to discuss our concerns and review the
status of initiatives? Do we invite any key FAA officials to our
meetings or our conventions? If so, do we do so in a timely manner, so
we actually have a chance on getting on their busy schedules?

In case we don't have any clearly defined objectives, here are some good
starting points:

1. Finalize and publicize the implementation of the 1201 squawk code,
including updates to the AIM and all related documentation, updates to
computers, training ATC personnel on what behaviors to expect from 1201
aircraft, etc.....

2. Establish certification standards to permit the commercialization of
MITRE's low cost ADS-B technology.

3. Permit pilots and their crews to use ground based fixed, handheld,
and mobile radios in support of glider operations without requiring FCC
ground station licenses (or obtain a blanket FCC license that covers all
SSA members).

One big issue is the lack of any transparency to the SSA membership of
what is going on. If you look at the governmental affairs homepage
(http://ssa.org/myhome.asp?mbr=8671991229&show=blog), it doesn't look
like there is much happening. Maybe that's not accurate. If there is
stuff going on behind the scenes, it should be made visible to the
membership (meeting schedules, minutes, correspondence, etc....), so
that SSA members who are interested in this area have the chance to
participate in the process.

--
Mike Schumann

Greg Arnold wrote:
On 4/4/2010 11:21 AM, Scott wrote:


Maybe this will help explain the 120 Knot limit. Read through the whole
page and you will see it applies to gliders as well as powered aircraft.
http://www.sportpilot.org/learn/fina..._synopsis.html


"Maximum speed in level flight with maximum continuous power (Vh)—138
mph (120 knots) CAS"

A glider can't maintain 120 knots in level flight, so does this restrict
a glider VNE to 120 knots?

I would guess no, as I'm guessing that some light-sport (powered)
aircraft have a Vne of more than 120 knots.

On Apr 5, 3:49*am, Scott wrote:
Greg Arnold wrote:
On 4/4/2010 11:21 AM, Scott wrote:

Maybe this will help explain the 120 Knot limit. Read through the whole
page and you will see it applies to gliders as well as powered aircraft.

On Apr 5, 6:09*am, JJ Sinclair wrote:
On Apr 5, 3:49*am, Scott wrote:

Greg Arnold wrote:
On 4/4/2010 11:21 AM, Scott wrote:

Maybe this will help explain the 120 Knot limit. Read through the whole
page and you will see it applies to gliders as well as powered aircraft.
http://www.sportpilot.org/learn/fina..._synopsis.html

"Maximum speed in level flight with maximum continuous power (Vh)—138
mph (120 knots) CAS"

A glider can't maintain 120 knots in level flight, so does this restrict
a glider VNE to 120 knots?

I would guess no, as I'm guessing that some light-sport (powered)
aircraft have a Vne of more than 120 knots.

Ok, now I'm confused.................do I start squawking 1201
everywhere or not? Been squalking 1200 in the Sacramento Valley and
0440 around Reno.
JJ * * Genesis-2

JJ

As Eric and Cindy have already stated I think it is best to do exactly
what you do today until it is confirmed that the appropriate ATC
facilities are actually set up to handle this. In the areas you are
referring to PASCO is going to clarify this with those facilities, so
stay tuned.

Darryl

On Apr 3, 8:58*am, Fred wrote:
Dave asks a good question here. He and I discussed this in the hangar
before he posted it, and I didn't have a good answer then. *After
giving it more thought I tend to lean in favor of 1200 because he is
flying in airspace where gliders are not a common experience (into and
out of San Jose's busy airspace) and he can maneuver differently than
I am able to do in a Duo Discus -- which I wouldn't fly into San Jose
or the Bay Area in any case.

But I'd be interested in other thoughts on this question.

Fred LaSor
SoaringNV
Minden, NV

Did I not just read in the FAA rules Code 1201 if not in contact with
ATC, which would mean in many cases that
we stay with 1200 as long as we take off at controlled airports or
similar. Leaving the area we might report switching to
1201??? ......Awaiting a possible question about that code? This
would apply to many motorgliders.

Dieter, Stemme S10V

Frank Whiteley wrote:
On Apr 2, 11:42*am, Fred wrote:
SoaringNV is sponsoring a Minden Wave Camp this week. *As part of our
camp we have invited the tower controllers from Reno TRACON to talk to
us about communication with them, something we do for every camp. *We
learned, quite inadvertantly, that a nationwide transponder squawk
code has been assigned to gliders: 1201.

SO, from now on your transponder should be set to squawk 1201 anywhere
in the US (including the Reno airspace, where we have used a different
squawk code by agreement between PASCO and the controllers.)

Please use 1201 squawk code in your glider transponder.

Fred LaSor
SoaringNV
775 790-4314
Minden, NV

Referenced here

http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m...110.66D%20.pdf

Wait-a-minute!

But isn't the quoted document an FAA internal order to its ATO service
units? The section labeled "Audience" no where indicates this is a
regulatory requirement to gliders having transponders. If there is a
regulatory document where this is made clear, that would be helpful and
more convincing.

In fact the following order, dated February 11, 2010, doesn't list 1201 or
any special treatment of gliders with transponders:

http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publi...C/atc0502.html

While gliders with transponders in the Reno Nevada area may now be required
to use 1201, I can find no official publication by the FAA to support the
assertion that VFR glider pilots in the rest of the nation are now required
(or even allowed or advised) to use 1201 on an installed transponder.

In fact while searching I found that 1201 was recently used as one of the
beacon codes in the TFR of the 2010 Winter Olympics.

(Unless the FAA is now relying on Web viral postings and blogs as its new
means of publishing regulations? Very hip of them!)

I'm not sure that squawk code 1201 will ever be required for "VFR
gliders out of contact with ATC", the way 1200 is for aircraft flying
VFR and not in radio contact with ATC. But 1201 is now officially
reserved for gliders in that condition, and thus ATC facilities are
alerted that 1201 has a specific meaning.

Your point of who is responsible to start US gliders using 1201 is a
good one, though. In previous posts on this thread it was stated that
this should be decided locally, and it seems that remains the best way
forward for now. I agree it would be nice for clearer advice from the
FAA.

-John

On Apr 5, 10:58 pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
Wait-a-minute!

But isn't the quoted document an FAA internal order to its ATO service
units? The section labeled "Audience" no where indicates this is a
regulatory requirement to gliders having transponders. If there is a
regulatory document where this is made clear, that would be helpful and
more convincing.

In fact the following order, dated February 11, 2010, doesn't list 1201 or
any special treatment of gliders with transponders:

http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publi...C/atc0502.html

While gliders with transponders in the Reno Nevada area may now be required
to use 1201, I can find no official publication by the FAA to support the
assertion that VFR glider pilots in the rest of the nation are now required
(or even allowed or advised) to use 1201 on an installed transponder.

In fact while searching I found that 1201 was recently used as one of the
beacon codes in the TFR of the 2010 Winter Olympics.

(Unless the FAA is now relying on Web viral postings and blogs as its new
means of publishing regulations? Very hip of them!)

Ah, confusion rains supreme. Squawk this.......no squawk
that........don't squawk anything? What we have here is the makings of
a good cluster-fuxx. The unskilled led by the untrained, green troops
led by yellow leaders.......wait a minute, have I been recalled to
active duty? That must be it........New orders men.........Continue to
disregard the new squawking procedure until such time as Hq gets an
extraction tool to remove head from butt.
:) JJ