IO540
If there is no traffic around then it doesn't help, but often there is traffic around, and he needs a positive ID on you and not just an unmarked blip which could be anybody who suddenly climbed up into the radar coverage from down below.
No I don't.
I do not need to identify VFR traffic in Class D. I do not separate IFR from VFR in Class D - I only need to pass traffic information. (Have a read of the Class D airspace rules). A position report from a VFR aircraft, say at a known VRP usually suffices. Quite sensibly the VRPs and inbound/outbound VFR routes are kept away from the IFR final approach and climbout (have a look at the AIP for Glasgow and you will see it operates perfectly well). There are times when it can be handy to put on a squawk I agree (eg. traffic patrol or low-level police helicopter operating near the final approach), but the last thing I really would want to do is over control VFR aircraft...
Now I can't speak for the ex-RAF non-ATCO control freaks in the CAA who don't even appreciate the civil ATC task, who don't fly, who have not passed any licence, or have never studied or applied the ANO or Rules of the Air.... yet feel qualified to tell us all what we should be doing ....
Captainflash
In my opinion if you don't have a transponder . . .you should not be in Class D.
Why?
Rustle
Should we wait for a Cerritos in the UK before we do anything?
Scaremongering sensationalism.
There have been several mid-airs Rustle. The majority have been collisions between military/military, military/GA and glider/glider. None, to my knowledge, have been in a radar environment where one aircraft was under radar control, RAS or RIS from ATC. (Do you know what these terms are by the way?) Unless you mandate the fitting of TCAS or CWS (Collision Warning System), these previous mid-airs would still have happened.
The issue of mid-airs is actually a red herring - the REAL thing that would improve safety would be fitting CWS to military, and perhaps THEN, I concede, some form of transpomnder would be a REAL benefit. But that is not being proposed.
mm_flynn - Within controlled airspace there are serious loss of separation instances associated with misunderstood clearances and busted altitudes. Almost everyone is Mode C/S equipped and this coupled with TCAS helps save the day. NATS hopes that downlinking autopilot data will help catch these problems earlier (a benefit of Mode S enhanced)
Which is a good reason to install it/mandate it in commercial aircraft in TMA environments. But the Mode S which will be installed in gliders, microlights etc..etc.. will not be coupled to an autopilot, so ATC will be the none the wiser about what levels you are going to. Just a small point, that Mode S is not the be all end all.
TCAS does also cause problems. I have lost count of the number of TCAS resolution advisories caused by rapid climb/descent rates in a TMA environment ....
=paperwork=30 minutes less for my dinner ...
Do a Google search for "Dallas Bump" and see what comes up
