Feds Want to Equipe Gliders With Transponders and Radios

On Sun, 04 May 2008 08:47:53 -0400, Bob Noel
wrote in
:

In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:

What is being lost? Primary radar is making a comeback after 2001, not
going away.

I would enjoy reading supporting documentation for that assertion.


As this message thread refers to painting glider primary targets, it
would seem that post ADS-B, the FAA primary radars will be
decommissioned with the exception of those around the peripheral of
the US, hence my statement above.

I doubt that the primary radars in the US will be decommissioned

Although that is inconsistent with the FAA information cited in the
link I posted, we can only hope that your intuition is accurate It
would be a grave mistake in my lay opinion. I believe decommissioning
radars was only mentioned by the FAA as a hastily considered attempt
to overcome the financial disincentive of implementing ADS-B; while
we're speculating, it was probably initially suggested by the
contractor(s) who is(are) lobbying for NextGen.


The air defense systems in the west (WADS) and the one in Rome, NY (NEADS)
have added the capability to take in feeds from domestic radars, including the
FAA enroute radars. This all occured post-9/11. (HI and AK systems also have
been upgraded). Search for Battle Control System Fixed.


How do the upgrades you mention imply that primary radars, located
other than around the periphery of the US, may be spared
decommissioning?

Since before 1996, the FAA has been looking to get rid of primary radars.
9/11 was yet another excuse to try to get someone else to pay for the maintenance
and upgrades for NAS radars.


Without primary radars there is no way, other than intercepts, of
knowing the true position of a flight. To intentionally lose that
empirical capability seems shortsighted. But then my opinion is only
based on incomplete knowledge of the system. Perhaps there are
alternate sources for such information (doubtful). For some reason
(possibly because contractors believe that if they don't mention it,
no one will notice) the loss of empirical flight location is not
addressed in the proposed ADS-B implementation.


http://www.fcw.com/print/12_23/news/94989-1.html
Radar is an outdated technology, the FAA says. Moving to ADS-B will
let the agency eventually decommission some of the current ground
radars. According to an FAA report, radar is imperfect and sometimes
has trouble distinguishing airplanes from flocks of birds or patches
of rain.

As antiquated as RADAR is, I don't think we can rely on the "bad guys" using
cooperative surv technology like transponders or ADS-B out.

Precisely.

Why is it that you and I are able to recognize that, and the FAA
cannot? What are we overlooking?

"Alan" wrote in message
...
In article "Morgans"
writes:

"Eric Greenwell" wrote
This corresponds with the Powersonic chart, so at -10C (15F), you have a
30%
loss of capacity. For winter flying, and spring or fall flying in places
where
you can climb to, say, 10,000' agl, it's an important factor. Especially
so,
when you know your encoder will likely be using it's heater, adding
50-150
milliamps to your current drain.

Put a insulated cover around the battery, and the heat of discharge will
keep
it warm and the capacity up, unless it is seriously freakin' cold.

With a resistance of a few milliohms, a 1 amp discharge will only give a
few milliwatts of heat. I really doubt the battery will keep itself warm.
(After all warming the battery would consume energy from its stored
capacity.)

Alan

The greater problem might be a need to remove the problem during charging,
when a lot more heat is likely to be generated.

Peter

(After all warming the battery would consume energy from its stored capacity.)

Sure, but a warm battery can deliver more power than a really cold battery.

Tony V.

Bob Noel wrote:

The air defense systems in the west (WADS) and the one in Rome, NY
(NEADS) have added the capability to take in feeds from domestic radars,
including the FAA enroute radars. This all occured post-9/11.


Initially, it was the other way round. Many of the present FAA enroute
radars are former ADC radars. The FAA expanded their enroute radar coverage
in the late fifties and early sixties by acquiring feeds on USAF radar.

On Sun, 04 May 2008 09:37:13 -0400, Peter Dohm wrote:


The greater problem might be a need to remove the problem during charging,
when a lot more heat is likely to be generated.

I use an automatic charger with bulk charge and float modes.
This unit is designed for 12v batteries in the 6-15Ah capacity range.
It outputs 14.7v at 1.5 amps in bulk mode. My batteries never even get
warm to the touch when on charge.

I'd suggest that if your batteries get hot on charge then there are only
three possibilities:

- you're using a fixed-rate charger with far too high a rate for
the battery.
- you're overcharging with a fixed-rate changer.
- your automatic charger is faulty.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. |
org | Zappa fan & glider pilot

In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:

The air defense systems in the west (WADS) and the one in Rome, NY (NEADS)
have added the capability to take in feeds from domestic radars, including
the
FAA enroute radars. This all occured post-9/11. (HI and AK systems also
have
been upgraded). Search for Battle Control System Fixed.


How do the upgrades you mention imply that primary radars, located
other than around the periphery of the US, may be spared
decommissioning?

There would be little value in adding the ability to use the 200+ FAA primary
radars if they were going away soon. (ok, some of that 200+ number might be
beacon radar only)


As antiquated as RADAR is, I don't think we can rely on the "bad guys" using
cooperative surv technology like transponders or ADS-B out.

Precisely.

Why is it that you and I are able to recognize that, and the FAA
cannot? What are we overlooking?

The FAA beancounters know that the FAA's responsibility does not include
tracking and identifying bad guys. The b'crats are only thinking about
their budget and ways to get other agencies to pay for things.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

"Bob Noel" wrote

I doubt that the primary radars in the US will be decommissioned

Since before 1996, the FAA has been looking to get rid of primary radars.
9/11 was yet another excuse to try to get someone else to pay for the
maintenance
and upgrades for NAS radars.

Is there a way that all of the TV station doppler weather radars could be made
to see airplanes, at the same time as looking at the weather?

I know they operate on different wavelengths, but could addition
transmitter/receivers be installed and used to supplement FAA radars?

Seems a shame to have all of those weather radars around, that could be helping
out tracking, or supplementing tracking aircraft.

I know there are probably a dozen reasons for this to not work, but could anyone
give a shot explaining what they are?
--
Jim in NC

http://www.aopa.org/training/article...80508data.html