Transponder Carriage - Concessions Against?

[RTB RFN]

With almost every rule it appears we have a system of providing a concession against compliance.

In the present (and future variants of) NAS is the carriage of a transponder, with serviceable Mode A and B, required for flight in airspace classes A, C and E and/or are there concessions available against carriage ie put up a good case and we'll think about it - YES.

If concessions are still available who can provide this: CASA, AA, RAAF and which position in each body has the delegation? Can this be delegated to a subordinate and further delegated and which subordinate/s would that be?

What information/mitigators are provided to other airspace users who may be affected by non-carriage or non-serviceability of Mode A or C?

Does everyone involved know what the system of concessions is and where information on it is provided?

Handing over.

[tobzalp]

Controllers may provide a clearance for an aircraft without a serviceable transponder for those portions of flight subject to a clearance

....straight from the NAS training package for controllers. Nice and clear as mud. Clearance says to me that this would only apply for VFR in C as VFR do not require clearace in E and are not permitted in A. This was sold however as a fix to all problems as it is on the same slide as...

ALL aircraft (including VFR aircraft not capable of powering) require a transponder when operating in Class E airspace within 40NM of a Class D tower

education at its best.

[RTB RFN]

Yep - so what or where is the heirarchy of legal compliance and responsibility - why have the NOTAM saying they must be carried - does this NOTAM have precedence over the NAS training package for controllers?

TOBZALP thanks for the reply but if you approve non-carriage where do you stand if you do not tell the world of the fact and an accident occurs between that aircraft and one with TCAS that was DEPENDING upon TCAS in non-RADAR E to do most of the separating from VFR.

[tobzalp]

RTB RFN from my understanding controllers can only approve it in C class. I am unsure as to how you would get it approved otherwise.

We did have a PJE acft in my neck of the woods who had a faulty mode C for ages and eventually got the hint that that was wrong and phoned up the Brisbane centre for an exemption. He got it. This was in the days pre 27 nov when E was A085 to F125 only so it seemed like not such a big deal at the time but now with all of the concerns to do with Airproxs and TCAS RAs, I think it would be a brave OPS Manager who approved such a thing.

[Spodman]

Advice I got from the NAS Enquiries line was "I can't possibly be expected to give an opinion on that."

Advice from the ASA Implementation Team said the NOTAM doesn't affect the exemptions, just iterates the rule.

MATS is pretty clear on what the considerations for ATC are, and they are all to do with the feasibility of providing a clearance. Whether its a good idea to fly in E or not is a matter for the pilot.

I can't see how it could be justified AT ALL, unless we really believe in "see and avoid", in which case we don't need the transponder AT ALL.