Back door transponder equipage?

[jez d]

Am I missing something, or are the CAA effectively mandating compulsory transponder equipage through the introduction of TMZs?

It was my understanding that Transponder Mandatory Zones would only be introduced following consultation with industry. I was surprised to discover therefore that the Authority have recently introduced a TMZ round Whitelee Windfarm without so much as a by-your-leave.

Anyone from AOPA on the case?

Regards, jez

[soay]

Anyone from AOPA on the case?
Hope you're helping fund them! ;)

[xrayalpha]

Jez, been a bit of a discussion already at: http://www.pprune.org/private-flying/386400-glasgow-transponder-mandatory-zone-2.html#post5158346

For your info, BMAA are hopping mad.

The UK's first TMZ introduced with no prior discussion since it "is temporary and needed for an urgent safety case".

Of course, the windfarm - Europe's largest, so it took a few years to build, so didn't spring up overnight - was officially opened a couple of months ago.

And the Lowther radar was brought back on line a month or two ago - presumably after a lot of testing.

So what "urgency"? Where was the sudden surprise?

ps. You don't need a transponder if you are in contact with Glasgow ATC by radio.

The Strathaven rebels - since the small bit of the TMZ outside Glasgow's zone is within 2nm of our main runway - are wondering about adopting 119.1 as our airfield frequency instead of safety.com.

So: Glasgow Approach, for your information, G-xxxx on climbout at Strathaven. Request basic service. G-xxxxx downwind at Strathaven, terminating basic service due to poor reception below circuit height, G-xxxxx back on climbout request Basic.....

It would be fun with three or four aircraft in the circuit! (unfortunately, I rather like the chaps and chapesses at Glasgow)

[off watch]

xrayalpha
"It would be fun with three or four aircraft in the circuit! (unfortunately, I rather like the chaps and chapesses at Glasgow) "

If you called me , I'd say you are in the FIR, so contact Scottish Information on 119.875 ;)

[Radarspod]

No, the Lowther radar is not back on line yet. It won't be on until the TMZ is established (if not already).

There is good reason for this TEMPORARY TMZ and the reasoning for CAA to use the powers they have. I'm sure that ATC gave a very justifiable safety reason for this to go ahead, with the CAA firmly aware of the backlash it would cause.

The "rebels" can dick around with Glasgow ATC if they feel the need, the TMZ isn't going to disappear. Just remember that these people are there to help you, and it wasn't Glasgow ATC that required the TMZ in the first place!

RS

[gasax]

Having read the previous thread Radarspod's comments look like he is trying to curry favour or promotion!

The wind farm has been there for well over a year, the radar situation for not much less - and yet the TMZ goes in now without consultation and supposedly for a short time?

This looks very like the recent upgrade from E to D for a section of the TMA. Misleading information, just made things easier for ATC and to hell with anyone else.

If there was a genuine safety reason for the TMZ it should have been put in place months ago.

[Radarspod]

Having read the previous thread Radarspod's comments look like he is trying to curry favour or promotion!

Neither, but quite often this particular PPRUNE forum is devoid of fact when it comes to these kind of issues.

Thanks for the thought though.

If there was a genuine safety reason for the TMZ it should have been put in place months ago.

The safety issue (I don't claim to know exactly what it is) doesn't come about until the new radar comes back into service. Having a TMZ in place before that would be pointless.

RS

[xrayalpha]

RS,

Your main point: I don't know the safety case.

Neither do other people, and perhaps that ignorance - or being treated like nanny knows best - is what is at the root of some of the discontent.

Your other point about Lowther not coming online until the TMZ is established is fair, except that since it is not online yet, this problem is one that has been forecast. And if it can be forecast a month before it goes online, couldn't it have been forecast a year before it went online?

Of course, that sort of advance planning would have then allowed for consultation through the usual channels. People could have made their case and then - whatever the outcome - all airspace users would have had a chance to have had an input and would have had a chance to explore the safety case.

Instead, we get the UK's first TMZ introduced without consultation and by statutory instrument.

Unfortunately, as happened with the Poll Tax, actions like these can leave long memories. And long memories can then create unjustified fears.

But they are still fears.

And frightened people then make irrational decisions.

Not good aviation practise to encourage such situations.