SSR, RAS, ATSOCAS et al

[OCEAN WUN ZERO]

There might be an airport about to introduce SSR in the near future (yes this is the 21st century) that operates ATSOCAS.
Questions come to mind that I am sure you all have answers for ,if not THE answers.

If you have only been allocated 8 discreet squawks by spectrum thingy at DAP it is therefore almost impossible to allocate every FIS crosser, or local a discreet squawk as others do. So the plan is to have 2 conspicuity codes one for locals, arrivals and departures and another for transits.
As we all know conspicuity must be treated as unvalidated and unverified and as it is not discreet cannot be deemed identified.
The 2 conspicuities are of course however “known traffic” when you can assure yourself that you really do know the intentions.

Without going round the houses on RAS and participating traffic again as that is covered in a local instruction;-

Q1 Can the conspicuity be asked to squawk ident if no inference of radar service is implied to assist in discharging our responsibilities with the PAX, Jet, RAS traffic that this FIS is going to be in conflict with? and an agreed level cap be applied.

Q2 Is it practical, safe, legal, a good idea to change the potential FIS confliction to a discreet code( if you have any left), ensure that no service is implied and then when it is no longer a confliction change it back to the conspicuity.

Q3 How does the LCE team help the troops to ensure that the new data on the displays does not tempt them into taking FRISING to the next level of using modes A and C to expedite the Jet RAS traffic by keeping the pesky FIS’s out the way??? and reducing the willingness to not seek to achieve 5 nm etc.

:hmm:

[Spitoon]

I'm struggling a bit to get my head round your questions but before that As we all know conspicuity must be treated as unvalidated and unverified and as it is not discreet cannot be deemed identified.
I don't see any reason why a target that is on a conspicuity code cannot be considered identified - as long as you have it properly identified. Take, for example, an aircraft given to you in a radar handover - you have the ident but don't want to use your limited supply of #s so put it on a conspicuity code. It's still indentified. Taking this one step futher, there's no reason not to apply positive radar control/separation to two targets that you have identified even though they're on conspicuity codes and other units would have to avoid them by a wider margin. It's not an ideal situation but if the CAA won't give you the code blocks you need to put your traffic on discrete codes, what can you do???? (I'm assuming that you will still have PSR and are controlling the primary targets.)
Q1 Can the conspicuity be asked to squawk ident if no inference of radar service is implied to assist in discharging our responsibilities with the PAX, Jet, RAS traffic that this FIS is going to be in conflict with? and an agreed level cap be applied.
The good book (Section 1, chapter 5, para 4.1 c)) say's you cannot identfy a target with the SPI function if it's on a conspicuity code - whether you offer it a radar service or not is irrelevant. Of course, there's nowt to stop you identifying it with a turn (subject to all the usual cautions) if that will help you to provide a better service to other traffic that you're handling).
Q2 Is it practical, safe, legal, a good idea to change the potential FIS confliction to a discreet code( if you have any left), ensure that no service is implied and then when it is no longer a confliction change it back to the conspicuity.
Practical? It's a matter of time usually. If you know you've got a conflict coming up and identing an aircraft on a FIS will help sorting out the big picture then I would probably do it - otherwise I don't get any benefit for the effort. The bit about ensuring that the pilot understands that he/she is not now getting a radar service might take up some of that valuable time too!
Safe? Don't see why not.
legal? Can't think of any rules that say no.
Good idea? If it helps with the big picture and the work involved is not disproportionate, why not?
Q3 How does the LCE team help the troops to ensure that the new data on the displays does not tempt them into taking FRISING to the next level of using modes A and C to expedite the Jet RAS traffic by keeping the pesky FIS’s out the way??? and reducing the willingness to not seek to achieve 5 nm etc.
Easy one. Good knowledge and understanding of the rules - and professionalism all round.

[2 sheds]

A slight correction to the above post. Referring to use of the ident feature for identification, the Good Book says that "Aircraft displaying the conspicuity code are not to be identified by this method" (my italics). One would infer that this only refers to aircraft squawking A7000 - for obvious reasons.

2 s

[leuven]

OWZ
The 2 conspicuities are of course however “known traffic” when you can assure yourself that you really do know the intentions.

Known, but not identified = unknown

OWZ I would say
Q1- No

Spitoon --Of course, there's nowt to stop you identifying it with a turn (subject to all the usual cautions)

I refer my honourable gentleman to Mats Pt 1
Section 1 Chapter 5 Page 6
4.1 Controllers should use Mode A to identify aircraft whenever suitable equipment is available. One of the following methods is to be employed
etc etc

OWZ
Q2 Mats pt1 sect 1 ch 5 page 1

The act of identifying an aircraft does not imply that a service is being given.:=

Q3 I concur with Spitoon :D

How sad is this :{ just had a look at the AIP some examples of SSR allocations outside CAS
GP 7+1
BE 6+2
NR 7
MH 15
TE 24
CN 14
NH 14
(Not checked too much for accuracy)
Does vary why not ask for more if you feel you can justify the need?

[Spitoon]

Referring to use of the ident feature for identification, the Good Book says that "Aircraft displaying the conspicuity code are not to be identified by this method" (my italics). One would infer that this only refers to aircraft squawking A7000 - for obvious reasons.2 s make a good point. I have always treated the other designated conspicuity codes in the same way as A7000 and would offer in defence AIP ENR 1.6.2 para 2.2.1 which says 'When operating at and above FL 100 pilots shall select Mode A code 7000 and Mode C except:
(a) ...
(b) when circumstances require the use of one of the Special Purpose Mode A codes or one of the other specific Mode A conspicuity codes assigned in accordance with the UK SSR Code Assignment Plan as detailed in the table at ENR 1-6-2-4 to ENR 1-6-2-8
(c)....'
which seems to lump all the conspicuity use codes together (although, admittedly, it's not talking about identing traffic). And I guess being able to quote that makes me as sad as leuven! On the whole, though, I'd be disinclined to ident any target wearing a conspicuity code with any of the SSR methods - but as 2 s points out, I think there's plenty of room for interpretation if you want use SPI on one of your local conspicuity codes.

leuven, I think, is suggesting that MATS Pt 1 is saying that if you have SSR then you must use it to ident traffic rather than PSR methods. I hadn't thought about it like that before but it does seem to be what the good book says! Personally, I'll use whatever techniques suit the situation .

Having gone through the introduction of SSR at a unit I worked at - although some years ago - I think you'll find that you quickly discover ways of working within the rules that make life easier for you.

[chevvron]

Keep your IFR arrivals/departures on their airways squawks, that save some.

[Chilli Monster]

Just in time to enjoy the following

http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=14&pagetype=65&appid=7&newstype=n&mode=detail&nid=1602

[2 sheds]

AND...did you see that they refer in it to "Air Traffic Control Services Outside Controlled Airspace (ATSOCAS)".

W*****s!



Hi Chilli - you behaving yerself?"