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
|
|||
|
|||
Glider transponder on?
On August 28th, Hawker biz jet and a glider collided south of Reno,
Nevada at 16,000 feet. Fortunately, everyone survived. The Hawker was IFR and flying a STAR into KRNO. Following is an excerpt from the NTSB's preliminary report (LAX06FA277A): "The glider was equipped with a panel mounted communication radio, global positioning system (GPS) unit, and a transponder; however, the pilot did not turn on the GPS and transponder. The transponder's activation is not required for glider operations (for more details see 14 CFR Part 91.215). According to the glider pilot, he did not turn on the transponder because he was only intending on remaining in the local glider area, and because he wanted to reserve his batteries for radio use. The glider was equipped with two batteries (one main and one spare), however, due to the previous glider flights, the pilot was unsure of the remaining charge in the battery." I'd be interested in opinions about the legal conclusion the NTSB makes in their preliminary report as to whether the glider pilot did, or did not, have to have his transponder turned on: "The transponder's activation is not required for glider operations (for more details see 14 CFR Part 91.215)." My take on 91.215 is that the NTSB is wrong. It was elective to install a transponder in the glider, but because it was installed it had to be on unless it was broken |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Glider transponder on?
"Sam Spade" wrote in message ... On August 28th, Hawker biz jet and a glider collided south of Reno, Nevada at 16,000 feet. Fortunately, everyone survived. The Hawker was IFR and flying a STAR into KRNO. Following is an excerpt from the NTSB's preliminary report (LAX06FA277A): "The glider was equipped with a panel mounted communication radio, global positioning system (GPS) unit, and a transponder; however, the pilot did not turn on the GPS and transponder. The transponder's activation is not required for glider operations (for more details see 14 CFR Part 91.215). According to the glider pilot, he did not turn on the transponder because he was only intending on remaining in the local glider area, and because he wanted to reserve his batteries for radio use. The glider was equipped with two batteries (one main and one spare), however, due to the previous glider flights, the pilot was unsure of the remaining charge in the battery." I'd be interested in opinions about the legal conclusion the NTSB makes in their preliminary report as to whether the glider pilot did, or did not, have to have his transponder turned on: "The transponder's activation is not required for glider operations (for more details see 14 CFR Part 91.215)." My take on 91.215 is that the NTSB is wrong. It was elective to install a transponder in the glider, but because it was installed it had to be on unless it was broken I believe a report on this accident indicated the transponder was not "certified". I don't know what was meant by that, but if it means the transponder wasn't maintained in accordance with FAR 91.413 then the pilot would be in violation if he had turned it on. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Glider transponder on?
I think you are correct.
"Sam Spade" wrote in message ... | On August 28th, Hawker biz jet and a glider collided south of Reno, | Nevada at 16,000 feet. Fortunately, everyone survived. The Hawker was | IFR and flying a STAR into KRNO. Following is an excerpt from the | NTSB's preliminary report (LAX06FA277A): | | "The glider was equipped with a panel mounted communication radio, | global positioning system (GPS) unit, and a transponder; however, the | pilot did not turn on the GPS and transponder. The transponder's | activation is not required for glider operations (for more details see | 14 CFR Part 91.215). According to the glider pilot, he did not turn on | the transponder because he was only intending on remaining in the local | glider area, and because he wanted to reserve his batteries for radio | use. The glider was equipped with two batteries (one main and one | spare), however, due to the previous glider flights, the pilot was | unsure of the remaining charge in the battery." | | I'd be interested in opinions about the legal conclusion the NTSB makes | in their preliminary report as to whether the glider pilot did, or did | not, have to have his transponder turned on: | "The transponder's activation is not required for glider operations (for | more details see 14 CFR Part 91.215)." | | My take on 91.215 is that the NTSB is wrong. It was elective to install | a transponder in the glider, but because it was installed it had to be | on unless it was broken |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Glider transponder on?
According to a person in the area who knows about this...
most of the flights far out last the battery capacity. So they are off for a good portion of the flight. Bill H. Jim Macklin wrote: I think you are correct. "Sam Spade" wrote in message ... | On August 28th, Hawker biz jet and a glider collided south of Reno, | Nevada at 16,000 feet. Fortunately, everyone survived. The Hawker was | IFR and flying a STAR into KRNO. Following is an excerpt from the | NTSB's preliminary report (LAX06FA277A): | | "The glider was equipped with a panel mounted communication radio, | global positioning system (GPS) unit, and a transponder; however, the | pilot did not turn on the GPS and transponder. The transponder's | activation is not required for glider operations (for more details see | 14 CFR Part 91.215). According to the glider pilot, he did not turn on | the transponder because he was only intending on remaining in the local | glider area, and because he wanted to reserve his batteries for radio | use. The glider was equipped with two batteries (one main and one | spare), however, due to the previous glider flights, the pilot was | unsure of the remaining charge in the battery." | | I'd be interested in opinions about the legal conclusion the NTSB makes | in their preliminary report as to whether the glider pilot did, or did | not, have to have his transponder turned on: | "The transponder's activation is not required for glider operations (for | more details see 14 CFR Part 91.215)." | | My take on 91.215 is that the NTSB is wrong. It was elective to install | a transponder in the glider, but because it was installed it had to be | on unless it was broken |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Glider transponder on?
Probably because the glider was not originally certificated with an
engine-driven electrical system. -- |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Glider transponder on?
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Sam Spade" wrote in message ... On August 28th, Hawker biz jet and a glider collided south of Reno, Nevada at 16,000 feet. Fortunately, everyone survived. The Hawker was IFR and flying a STAR into KRNO. Following is an excerpt from the NTSB's preliminary report (LAX06FA277A): "The glider was equipped with a panel mounted communication radio, global positioning system (GPS) unit, and a transponder; however, the pilot did not turn on the GPS and transponder. The transponder's activation is not required for glider operations (for more details see 14 CFR Part 91.215). According to the glider pilot, he did not turn on the transponder because he was only intending on remaining in the local glider area, and because he wanted to reserve his batteries for radio use. The glider was equipped with two batteries (one main and one spare), however, due to the previous glider flights, the pilot was unsure of the remaining charge in the battery." I'd be interested in opinions about the legal conclusion the NTSB makes in their preliminary report as to whether the glider pilot did, or did not, have to have his transponder turned on: "The transponder's activation is not required for glider operations (for more details see 14 CFR Part 91.215)." My take on 91.215 is that the NTSB is wrong. It was elective to install a transponder in the glider, but because it was installed it had to be on unless it was broken I believe a report on this accident indicated the transponder was not "certified". I don't know what was meant by that, but if it means the transponder wasn't maintained in accordance with FAR 91.413 then the pilot would be in violation if he had turned it on. If that were the case, then the transponder would have had to been placarded as inoperative. That is inconsistent with the excerpt from the NTSB preliminary I posted. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Has a glider ever been found using the transponder radar track? | Eric Greenwell | Soaring | 14 | February 3rd 05 02:41 PM |
Bad publicity | David Starer | Soaring | 18 | March 8th 04 03:57 PM |
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons | Curtl33 | General Aviation | 7 | January 9th 04 11:35 PM |
glider transponder | Chris Marren | Soaring | 6 | December 5th 03 10:39 PM |
I wish I'd never got into this... | Kevin Neave | Soaring | 32 | September 19th 03 12:18 PM |