Transponder - Switch to ALT not just ON
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With some of the crappy old transponders around in your average VFR 'ageing aircraft', it probably does not make much difference what they are switched to. ATCers sit there with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of state of the art kit trying to talkto poorly maintained clapped out 1970's electronic junk. Sorry, I dont believe most pilots dont know the difference between A and C. BTW on a recent trip to a GAAP tower, they had a sceeen with RADAR on it, but although qualified, for some reason, they don't use it for ATC purposes. Why not? Would it be a major enhancement to GAAP safety if they could?
Last edited by Wheeler; 31st Oct 2006 at 16:53.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Straya
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wheeler,
It's not a specified to radar standard - refresh rate etc. It's just an awareness tool - but a useful one. Radar standards do not apply at GAAPS either. Also have these now at a lot of the non-radar towers, e.g. MC / RK etc.
It's not a specified to radar standard - refresh rate etc. It's just an awareness tool - but a useful one. Radar standards do not apply at GAAPS either. Also have these now at a lot of the non-radar towers, e.g. MC / RK etc.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks ****su - but with all that dough they are spending on TAAATs or whatever it is, why dont they put a proper radar screen in? Surely, in some situations it would have to be better than peering down those binoculars for miles and miles.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Straya
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes - sounds like common sense doesn't it?
But I think it is cost vs. real need for it.
I think it is pretty well regarded for what it is designed for - although I don't have to use it so couldn't comment with any experience of it.
Radar Towers have a radar screen, e.g. BN, CG, CB etc.
But I think it is cost vs. real need for it.
I think it is pretty well regarded for what it is designed for - although I don't have to use it so couldn't comment with any experience of it.
Radar Towers have a radar screen, e.g. BN, CG, CB etc.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The land down-under
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Radar displays for GAAP Towers
Wheeler,
****su is spot on re: the cost thing. The display you saw is a home grown PC based application that takes a feed from the whizz bang TAAATS thing. However to reduce costs the data is distributed via IP and therefore end to end transmission times can not be guaranteed. To provide radar services you have to meet minimum update rates and time from reception at the radar head to delivery to the console. The gear actually meets these most of the time but it can't guaranteed. (The only exception is YMEN)
The reality is the cost to upgrade to provide the service won't be borne under the user pays stuff. Airlines won't subsidise it and GA can't afford it. It's a bummer because it's staggeringly useful. Even in its current limited version towers that have it will tell you they hate to be without it. In procedural towers they can cut requests for pilot reports down dramatically. They look at the screen to see you pass a point used for separation and then ask to confirm to make it legal. There are some moves to allow towers to use the screen for some limited services to cut out some of the pilot reports (where the system delays would only make it safer rather than infringe the standard).
As for peering down the binos, from my limited tower experience it makes a huge difference knowing where to look to be able to see aircraft. I kept confusing the flysh!t on the windows for R22 at 3 miles!
So for the time being we're stuck with...
DNC
****su is spot on re: the cost thing. The display you saw is a home grown PC based application that takes a feed from the whizz bang TAAATS thing. However to reduce costs the data is distributed via IP and therefore end to end transmission times can not be guaranteed. To provide radar services you have to meet minimum update rates and time from reception at the radar head to delivery to the console. The gear actually meets these most of the time but it can't guaranteed. (The only exception is YMEN)
The reality is the cost to upgrade to provide the service won't be borne under the user pays stuff. Airlines won't subsidise it and GA can't afford it. It's a bummer because it's staggeringly useful. Even in its current limited version towers that have it will tell you they hate to be without it. In procedural towers they can cut requests for pilot reports down dramatically. They look at the screen to see you pass a point used for separation and then ask to confirm to make it legal. There are some moves to allow towers to use the screen for some limited services to cut out some of the pilot reports (where the system delays would only make it safer rather than infringe the standard).
As for peering down the binos, from my limited tower experience it makes a huge difference knowing where to look to be able to see aircraft. I kept confusing the flysh!t on the windows for R22 at 3 miles!
So for the time being we're stuck with...
DNC
Last edited by Dick N. Cider; 3rd Nov 2006 at 18:30.
Wheeler,
Great spray, pity about the facts.
Probably before your time, but Transponders were not in general use in GA in the '70's - anywhere.
Do you include all the Metro's, 727,747-200/300 etc in the list we should get rid of ??
In fact, general use of transponders with mode C only came into use in airlines in US in the late '60's, and it was quite some time later before they became required equipment for airlines generally.
There never were many "early model" GA transponders in Australia, by the time fitting one became a practical necessity for many GA aircraft, designs had moved on.
Perhaps you should also have a look at the CASA requirements for calibration, and if the aeroplane you are flying has a "doubtful" transponder, suggest to the owner or operator that a new "digital" transponder is often cheaper than overhauling a "cavity" type.
Tootle pip !!
Great spray, pity about the facts.
Probably before your time, but Transponders were not in general use in GA in the '70's - anywhere.
Do you include all the Metro's, 727,747-200/300 etc in the list we should get rid of ??
In fact, general use of transponders with mode C only came into use in airlines in US in the late '60's, and it was quite some time later before they became required equipment for airlines generally.
There never were many "early model" GA transponders in Australia, by the time fitting one became a practical necessity for many GA aircraft, designs had moved on.
Perhaps you should also have a look at the CASA requirements for calibration, and if the aeroplane you are flying has a "doubtful" transponder, suggest to the owner or operator that a new "digital" transponder is often cheaper than overhauling a "cavity" type.
Tootle pip !!
