Squawk Ident no more!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Location: swanwick
Age: 45
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Squawk Ident no more!
So, sneakily dropped in to the depths of an update regarding class E, the CAA has forbidden the use of ident for conspicuity and special purpose codes.... seems ludicrous to me. Pipeline helis, police helis etc, going to cause alot of extra work for no reasonable justification? Any thoughts?
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, sneakily dropped in to the depths of an update regarding class E, the CAA has forbidden the use of ident for conspicuity and special purpose codes.... seems ludicrous to me. Pipeline helis, police helis etc, going to cause alot of extra work for no reasonable justification? Any thoughts?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Location: swanwick
Age: 45
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sometimes Royal Helis are not handed over because of overlapping coverage etc...so TQF1R who requests transit and traffic service is identified how? By changing their squawk? (In contradiction to the 493 that says it is to be retained for the duration of their flight) or by somehow managing an ident over a VRP, or getting them to dial up the local VOR/DME? or giving them a turn for ident? Or do I say 'Remain outside, BS'
So, sneakily dropped in to the depths of an update regarding class E, the CAA has forbidden the use of ident for conspicuity and special purpose codes.... seems ludicrous to me. Pipeline helis, police helis etc, going to cause alot of extra work for no reasonable justification? Any thoughts?
For at least a year, I was aware that ident was not to be used on anything squawking 7000.
Last edited by Il Duce; 17th Feb 2020 at 16:53.
So, sneakily dropped in to the depths of an update regarding class E, the CAA has forbidden the use of ident for conspicuity and special purpose codes.... seems ludicrous to me. Pipeline helis, police helis etc, going to cause alot of extra work for no reasonable justification? Any thoughts?
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Age: 42
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATC are entitled to assume the codes for pipeline helis and police have already been validated and their altitude readout verified by the unit they were working previously; I would assume they want controllers to assign a discrete code to aircraft previously using a conspicuity code to show other units the aircraft is actually talking to an ATC unit rather than just listening out.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sometimes Royal Helis are not handed over because of overlapping coverage etc...so TQF1R who requests transit and traffic service is identified how? By changing their squawk? (In contradiction to the 493 that says it is to be retained for the duration of their flight) or by somehow managing an ident over a VRP, or getting them to dial up the local VOR/DME? or giving them a turn for ident? Or do I say 'Remain outside, BS'
Have you contacted CAA for clarification using the email address on the SI? Might be worth doing so if you’re worried about it.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Location: swanwick
Age: 45
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No. The SI was in relation to class E but buried in it was the news that IDENT is now prohibited on all conspicuity and special purpose codes (nothing to do with class E)
