(USA) NTSB issues recommendations to the FAA and the SSA regarding transponder use in gliders

Mike Schumann wrote:


...we should try to get all aircraft equipped with transponders.

This is not sufficient, even if practical.



...negotiate an agreement to require transponders in all gliders in exchange
for increased ATC separation of IFR traffic from glider targets and VFR
access to higher altitudes. This is an argument we can win, that doesn't
make us all look like a bunch of whiners.

How much separation do you want?

How likely are you to get _any_ more separation in a system which is
already overburdened and has every expectation of becoming more so in
terms of personnel, equipment, and airspace? The response of the US.gov
to requests for more separation for gliders will be to restrict gliders
and no one else. We already have wave windows. A raising of the national
floor of Class A airspace is not in the cards.



Jack

There have been many excellent and thoughtful comments from many on
this important subject. Does anyone know if the SSA is working this
issue with the FAA? If so, do we have information on what "position"
and/or approach that they will be taking on this subject?

I would also hope that the SSA is coordinating their efforts with
AOPA, EAA and other interested organizations....
Thanks - Renny




On Apr 3, 9:12 pm, "Mike Schumann"
wrote:
I don't know what the rules or current procedures are. I suspect that
virtually 100% of pilots flying IFR, and certainly 100% of the passengers on
commercial jets, expect ATC to vector IFR traffic around, and provide
separation from, every aircraft that has an identifiable location and
altitude (i.e. Mode C transponder equipped), regardless if that aircraft is
also flying IFR or VFR.

If this is not what the current rules say, or what is current procedure is,
then that needs to be changed as a 1st step. As a second step, we should
try to get all aircraft equipped with transponders. The argument should not
be on whether that is worthwhile doing, etc., but rather how we can make it
affordable so that it is not unduly burdensome to do so.

Once we get the price down under $1K, which I firmly believe is possible in
the not too distant future with ADS-B, the price argument will no longer
fly. Can you imagine the uproar if there was an airliner collision with a
non-transponder equipped glider with thousands of dollars worth of flight
recorders and other goodies, and the justification for not having a
transponder was the lack of willingness to spend another $1K? That would
put a quick end to our sport.

A more productive track than trying to stop a transponder mandate, is to
negotiate an agreement to require transponders in all gliders in exchange
for increased ATC separation of IFR traffic from glider targets and VFR
access to higher altitudes. This is an argument we can win, that doesn't
make us all look like a bunch of whiners.

Mike Schumann

"J a c k" wrote in .. .



Mike Schumann wrote:

Having a transponder is not a panacea, in that it will not protect you
from a 172 or other VFR traffic that doesn't happen to see you, either
due to a lack of attention, or due to the inherent difficulty of seeing
other traffic. However, it should protect you from IFR traffic that is
under ATC control.

"Should"?

ATC _may_ give traffic information involving VFR traffic if they have
time. In other circumstances "protection" would come from the fact that
the IFR traffic _may_ have TCAS.

Mandating transponders is only a partial solution. Until every aircraft
also has a collision avoidance system of some type TCAS, PCAS, etc., the
regulatory push for more, and more expensive, equipment will never stop.
And in fact it will not stop until we have positive control of all
aircraft at all times in all places. We do not want to go there.

If the traffic that worries you is likely to have a transponder, then
spend a few hundred bucks and get a PCAS unit so you know where that
traffic is. And whether you add such equipment or not, learn how to scan
visually. It isn't something that comes naturally, even though you think
you are doing a great job. When you operate with a PCAS for a short time,
you will find out how much traffic you've been missing. As always, we
don't know what we don't know.

Jack

--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

Mike Schumann wrote:

Once we get the price down under $1K, which I firmly believe is possible in
the not too distant future with ADS-B, the price argument will no longer
fly.

If transponders were only $1000 instead of $3000+, we would not be
having this conversation. Almost every glider pilot would have one.

If you really believe that a $1000 ADS-B will happen "soon", then you
can relax and wait for it to show up in Aircraft Spruces catalog. I
guarantee they will fly off the shelves so fast you'll hear sonic booms
as tens of thousands aircraft owners rudely push their way to the front
of the line to buy one.

In fact, you don't have to wait for it to hit $1000. If it was available
at the same price as a transponder, a lot of glider pilots that are
thinking about transponders would do it right now. At $2000, there would
be flood of orders. There wouldn't be any left to sell for $1000.

I listened to the MITRE presentation for the low cost ADS-B, but I think
it's years before it can get past the regulatory hurdles that produced
the current Garmin unit that is the size of a shoebox, weighs six
pounds, takes over 1.5 amps, and sells for $7000.

But I sure hope you are right. I'd gladly toss out my transponder and
put an ADS-B in it's place, even at $2000.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

Mike Schumann wrote:

Once we get the price down under $1K, which I firmly believe is possible in
the not too distant future with ADS-B, the price argument will no longer
fly.

There is another way to mitigate the cost of transponders that can be
done right now, without waiting for what may be the "too distant
future": the FAA sells them to glider pilots and other currently exempt
aircraft for, say, $1000. That's what New Zealand did 10-15 years ago,
and it was apparently a very successful plan.

Perhaps someone familiar with that plan can explain it in detail.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

You hit the nail on the head. The main obstacle to a $1,000 ADS-B
transceiver is not technical, it's all the regulatory stuff. My personal
belief is that if instead of fighting mandatory transponders, we partner
with the NTSB to cut through the current certification / regulatory BS, we
could actually be successful, and everyone would be happy and a LOT safer.
The current approach that the SSA and AOPA, etc. seem to be taking to try to
hold off mandatory deployment makes us all look bad, particularly when we
have a major fatal accident, which is guaranteed to happen eventually in the
current airspace environment.

Mike Schumann

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
news:aTiJj.4376$fq2.3352@trndny03...
Mike Schumann wrote:

Once we get the price down under $1K, which I firmly believe is possible
in the not too distant future with ADS-B, the price argument will no
longer fly.

If transponders were only $1000 instead of $3000+, we would not be having
this conversation. Almost every glider pilot would have one.

If you really believe that a $1000 ADS-B will happen "soon", then you can
relax and wait for it to show up in Aircraft Spruces catalog. I guarantee
they will fly off the shelves so fast you'll hear sonic booms as tens of
thousands aircraft owners rudely push their way to the front of the line
to buy one.

In fact, you don't have to wait for it to hit $1000. If it was available
at the same price as a transponder, a lot of glider pilots that are
thinking about transponders would do it right now. At $2000, there would
be flood of orders. There wouldn't be any left to sell for $1000.

I listened to the MITRE presentation for the low cost ADS-B, but I think
it's years before it can get past the regulatory hurdles that produced the
current Garmin unit that is the size of a shoebox, weighs six pounds,
takes over 1.5 amps, and sells for $7000.

But I sure hope you are right. I'd gladly toss out my transponder and put
an ADS-B in it's place, even at $2000.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article NZiJj.14286$gS1.4095@trndny07, Eric Greenwell wrote:

There is another way to mitigate the cost of transponders that can be
done right now, without waiting for what may be the "too distant
future": the FAA sells them to glider pilots and other currently exempt
aircraft for, say, $1000. That's what New Zealand did 10-15 years ago,
and it was apparently a very successful plan.

Perhaps someone familiar with that plan can explain it in detail.

Well, the bulk buy of transponders happenned just as I was getting
back into gliding so I wasn't heavily involved, but it went something
like this:

CAA organised a good price for suitable transponders. I guess there
would have been over 100 going into gliders. They provided drip feed
payment too, I think.

CAA made a bunch of promises/claims about how it would benefit gliders.
Some of these things happenned, some didn't.

It was very successful from the point of view of the Airways Corp who
run the ATC. They have lots of transponder mandatory airspace.

Mixed blessing for gliders. If you're in controlled airspace ATC talk to
you less because they know where you are. Reduced your workload considerably.
But there's a lot more controlled airspace now.

After the initial batch, we're on our own. We just had a transponder
installed in a new club glider. It cost NZ $5000. It requires extra
battery power. It takes up valuable panel space.

Some places you can't fly without a transponder. Some places you can
easily get along without one.

It hasn't made any difference to the rate of collisions between gliders
and airliners in NZ. We've never had one.

--
Philip Plane _____
|
---------------( )---------------
Glider pilots have no visible means of support

On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 09:15:28 +1300, Philip Plane wrote:

It hasn't made any difference to the rate of collisions between gliders
and airliners in NZ. We've never had one.

I heard that the NZ transponder requirement had nothing to do
with a collision or near miss, but everything to do with the desire
of some Aussy GA pilots to fly into airports with full CTA rules. This
somehow became applicable to all GA aircraft, forcing them to fit
transponders. Because of ANO harmonisation this also applied to NZ's GA
fleet. Somehow gliding got caught up in it too, hence the transponders in
NZ gliders.

Is this a fair summary?

The irony is that within a month of of the rule coming into effect there
was a near miss inside the Sydney CTA between a transponder-equipped GA
plane and an airliner. I believe this was the first such incident on
Australia.


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

I heard a much higher price on this unit... more like $1500. Of course,
cheap or not, it has to be approved. Are the chances real???


"Mike Schumann" wrote in message
.. .
MITRE is currently testing an ADS-B UAT transmitter that is the size of a
pack of cigarettes, runs for 14 hours and 4 internal AA batteries, and has
a parts cost of ~$150. With this kind of technology, there is no reason
that any aircraft, balloon, hang glider, or parachutist should be flying
around without one. Hopefully we'll see this commercialized within the
next year or so.

Mike Schumann

"Ron Gleason" wrote in message
...
On Apr 2, 7:25 am, "Mike Schumann"
wrote:
Voluntary compliance is great. However, there are always people who
don't
get it and create situations that give the rest of us a black eye or
worse.

I don't think that it is unreasonable to require that all aircraft
(gliders,
balloons, etc.) who fly above 10K or near major airports are transponder
equipped. I would hope that rather than forcing everyone to install
Mode C
(an antiquated technology), that we could get the FAA to accelerate the
deployment of ADS-B ground stations in strategic areas, and let gliders
and
balloons meet the transponder requirements with low cost ADS-B
transceivers,
which will hopefully be available within the next year or so. A side
benefit of this, is that the power draw for ADS-B UAT transceivers
should be
a lot lower than Mode C.

Mike Schumann

I think this idea is bad and wrong. Not all aircraft that flies above
10K can feasibly fly with a transponder. Where can store the
transponder when flying my hang glider or paraglider? The technology
is not there to cover all aircraft.

Ron Gleason
DG303 N303MR




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Anyone seen what the price of jet fuel is? Airlines are going TU all
over, and the US is now officially (by everyone's account except W's) in
a recession. Hi perf. piston aircraft won't have fuel in six months.
Why not just do some foot dragging until the entire civil aviation
system collapses, and we'll be arguing winch sites and airspace
separation with the hang and paragliders?

Cynically Yours,
Shawn

There are obviously some challenges in getting this commercialized. The
biggest challenge is to get the FAA to accept the notion that there should
be a VFR only version of ADS-B that is designed to be cost effective, and
does not provide the accuracy and reliability levels needed for parallel
instrument approaches in Class B airspace.

My gut instinct (I don't have any experience dealing with the FAA) is that
we can get the FAA to provide a mechanism so that this type of device can be
sold commercially at a ~$1K price point. Politically, it would help a lot
of the SSA, AOPA, and the EAA took the position that universal deployment
would be acceptable, if equipment was available to the GA community at this
price point.

Mike Schumann

"user" wrote in message
. ..
I heard a much higher price on this unit... more like $1500. Of course,
cheap or not, it has to be approved. Are the chances real???


"Mike Schumann" wrote in message
.. .
MITRE is currently testing an ADS-B UAT transmitter that is the size of a
pack of cigarettes, runs for 14 hours and 4 internal AA batteries, and
has a parts cost of ~$150. With this kind of technology, there is no
reason that any aircraft, balloon, hang glider, or parachutist should be
flying around without one. Hopefully we'll see this commercialized
within the next year or so.

Mike Schumann

"Ron Gleason" wrote in message
...
On Apr 2, 7:25 am, "Mike Schumann"
wrote:
Voluntary compliance is great. However, there are always people who
don't
get it and create situations that give the rest of us a black eye or
worse.

I don't think that it is unreasonable to require that all aircraft
(gliders,
balloons, etc.) who fly above 10K or near major airports are
transponder
equipped. I would hope that rather than forcing everyone to install
Mode C
(an antiquated technology), that we could get the FAA to accelerate the
deployment of ADS-B ground stations in strategic areas, and let gliders
and
balloons meet the transponder requirements with low cost ADS-B
transceivers,
which will hopefully be available within the next year or so. A side
benefit of this, is that the power draw for ADS-B UAT transceivers
should be
a lot lower than Mode C.

Mike Schumann

I think this idea is bad and wrong. Not all aircraft that flies above
10K can feasibly fly with a transponder. Where can store the
transponder when flying my hang glider or paraglider? The technology
is not there to cover all aircraft.

Ron Gleason
DG303 N303MR




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com






--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com