IFR transponder code question
Guest
Posts: n/a
IFR transponder code question
Couldn't really find anything specific in AIP ENR 1.6.7, so here it goes for the IFR gurus out there:
You've been assigned a transponder code for the first segment of your IFR flight, and you're landing say in BLT where there is no ATC radio contact on the ground.
The plan is to give your departure report after take-off before getting into IMC.
Would you, when you start up again in BLT for the second sector
a) keep the assigned Squawk code from the first sector
b) set 2000 as per AIP ENR 1.6.7.1.4.b
c) do something else
Cheers for your help!
PB
You've been assigned a transponder code for the first segment of your IFR flight, and you're landing say in BLT where there is no ATC radio contact on the ground.
The plan is to give your departure report after take-off before getting into IMC.
Would you, when you start up again in BLT for the second sector
a) keep the assigned Squawk code from the first sector
b) set 2000 as per AIP ENR 1.6.7.1.4.b
c) do something else
Cheers for your help!
PB
Guest
Posts: n/a
Cheers, Dr, I thought so, as the AIP talks about code assignments for sectors, not flights..
On a recent IFR training flight, I left the code of the first segment on for the second leg out of Class G, and ATC didn't flinch..
I'll revert back to 2000 next time and see what happens, whether they give me back the old code or a different one..
On a recent IFR training flight, I left the code of the first segment on for the second leg out of Class G, and ATC didn't flinch..
I'll revert back to 2000 next time and see what happens, whether they give me back the old code or a different one..
I'm pretty sure I've heard aircraft, when giving their descent call into an airport where it is known there is no radio contact on the ground, being given the code for the next sector by ATC.
eg" XXX no reported IFR traffic, your code for your sector B to C is ....."
not sure if it's a legitimate procedure though
eg" XXX no reported IFR traffic, your code for your sector B to C is ....."
not sure if it's a legitimate procedure though
As the Dr said, squawk 2000.
On a flight from A to B to C, your flight data record (flight plan) is allocated a code 45 mins prior to ETD. If cancellation of your FPL for first leg is more than 45 mins prior to ETD of next leg, it is possible to be given the same code, but unlikely as they are just allocated in order from a bin of codes. Less than 45mins you will definitely get a different code.
On a flight from A to B to C, your flight data record (flight plan) is allocated a code 45 mins prior to ETD. If cancellation of your FPL for first leg is more than 45 mins prior to ETD of next leg, it is possible to be given the same code, but unlikely as they are just allocated in order from a bin of codes. Less than 45mins you will definitely get a different code.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Darraweit Guim, Victoria
Age: 64
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a recent IFR training flight, I left the code of the first segment on for the second leg out of Class G, and ATC didn't flinch..
That code would probably have been reassigned to another flight, and if they were taxying or flying, and their flight plan not yet coupled up to a radar return due to being out of range of radar, and if you were within 8nm of their flight planned track, their label would attach to your aircraft. Not good.
My options when seeing such:
have a good bleat to the pilot about code 2000. minimise the chance of incorrect coupling by getting the aircraft on the right code soonest.I was having a bad day, and had just grumped at a VFR who was telling me a bunch of stuff I did not need to hear, so considered I had hit my grumping quota for the hour. If I get an incorrect coupling in these circumstances I'm required to submit an incident report, what CASA does about it I have no idea.
When in doubt, do what the AIP says
your code for your sector B to C is ....."
not sure if it's a legitimate procedure though
not sure if it's a legitimate procedure though
. I'll do it if the pilot requests it, but would not initiate it. Pissable potfall, erm, possible pitfall is if the pilot submits a DLA message the code will detach from the flight plan, and next time it hits that 45 minute parameter it would probably not get reassigned the same code.
your code for your sector B to C is ....."
not sure if it's a legitimate procedure though
not sure if it's a legitimate procedure though
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dr says code 2000, good enough for me. I often ask for the return code prior to ldg where comms on the ground is marginal. I do this to reduce the workload (IE: dep report plus any special requirments like Med1) after T/off when you enter IMC at night in rough wx as a SP. Sometimes you can expect possible unknown traffic passed on by ATC as well as an airways clearance amended sometimes (so it's diff to what yr expecting) & a code (if not already pre-recieved), of which most has to be repeated.Anything that makes flying safer I'm all for & this tiny thing helps.CW
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
If I get an incorrect coupling in these circumstances I'm required to submit an incident report, what CASA does about it I have no idea.
We all have finger trouble, it would be like me putting in a report everytime ATC calls me by the wrong flight number!
But I digress, another vote here for 2000 and under no circumstances use the code from the previous sector...
The plan is to give your departure report after take-off before getting into IMC
1) Squawk 2000 on your transponder
2) Give a "traffic" call on CTAF freq.
3) Give an "all stations" call on area freq.
4) Blast off into the wild grey yonder - maintaining appropriate terrain clearance on climb to LSA or above (you could, for example, enter IMC at 300' AGL in a light twin)
5) Give departure call to Centre
6) Get clearance before entering controlled airspace - which will likely require you to squawk a discreet transponder code
Dr
Last edited by ForkTailedDrKiller; 6th Oct 2008 at 11:49.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
The plan is to give your departure report after take-off before getting into IMC
The plan is to give your departure report after take-off before getting into IMC
Guest
Posts: n/a
Into IMC without ATS communication
Actually, Dr, I just asked several IFR instructors at my school, plus the CFI and an ATO who happened to be floating around, and the absolute consensus was that you must not under any circumstances go into IMC without having traffic information, i.e. an "all stations" call will not do the trick.
The closest I could find in the regs to satisfy my anally retentive self was in the AIP, ENR 1.4 pages 8-9 (currently on those pages, table has no paragraph number, follows point 4.2.8) specifies as radio COM requirements for Class G IFR "Continuous two-way". This would imply you either have to contact them on the ground via HF (or mobile phone), or relay the traffic call through airborne traffic.
Also, ENR 1.1.56.1. Note refers to CAR163A (see and avoid), which is not possible in IMC without traffic information or a fully fledged TCAS, which us lighties don't have of course..
Apart from the fact that going into IMC without ATC information/control would be a scary thing to do and probably best avoided (through a simple phone call to the controller who can give you traffic just before take-off), I'm curious if anyone has found a more direct reflection of this rule in the regs..
The closest I could find in the regs to satisfy my anally retentive self
was in the AIP, ENR 1.4 pages 8-9 (currently on those pages, table has no paragraph number, follows point 4.2.8) specifies as radio COM requirements for Class G IFR "Continuous two-way". This would imply you either have to contact them on the ground via HF (or mobile phone), or relay the traffic call through airborne traffic.Also, ENR 1.1.56.1. Note refers to CAR163A (see and avoid), which is not possible in IMC without traffic information or a fully fledged TCAS, which us lighties don't have of course..
Apart from the fact that going into IMC without ATC information/control would be a scary thing to do and probably best avoided (through a simple phone call to the controller who can give you traffic just before take-off), I'm curious if anyone has found a more direct reflection of this rule in the regs..
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Australia
Age: 51
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey there Plank bender...
Regarding not getting traffic from ATC. I agree that you should try your utmost to talk to ATC to get traffic info, but you do not have to remain on the ground until you are successfull.
Ref: Jepp ATC 6.1 Pg AU717 ( i don't know about the ref for AIP) States: The pilot of an IFR aircraft operating from a non-towered aerodrome must attempt to contact ATS on VHF or HF when taxiing. If the pilot is unable to establish contact, the flight may proceed on a Broadcast basis provided contact is established ASAP after take off, and:
a/ in the case of RPT, CHTR or AWK flight, the pilot is assured of radio contact with his or her operator, or a representative of his/her operator who has immediate access to a telephone, until in contact with ATS; or
b/ for flights other than RPT, a SARTIME for departure has been established with a maximum of 30 minutes from ETD.
NOTE: Pilots are reminded of their obligations to see and avoid other aircraft (CAR163A)
my bolding
I hope that this clarifies for you. I agree fully with the Dr...
P.S.
A Mobile phone is not regarded as constant communication.
Regarding not getting traffic from ATC. I agree that you should try your utmost to talk to ATC to get traffic info, but you do not have to remain on the ground until you are successfull.
Ref: Jepp ATC 6.1 Pg AU717 ( i don't know about the ref for AIP) States: The pilot of an IFR aircraft operating from a non-towered aerodrome must attempt to contact ATS on VHF or HF when taxiing. If the pilot is unable to establish contact, the flight may proceed on a Broadcast basis provided contact is established ASAP after take off, and:
a/ in the case of RPT, CHTR or AWK flight, the pilot is assured of radio contact with his or her operator, or a representative of his/her operator who has immediate access to a telephone, until in contact with ATS; or
b/ for flights other than RPT, a SARTIME for departure has been established with a maximum of 30 minutes from ETD.
NOTE: Pilots are reminded of their obligations to see and avoid other aircraft (CAR163A)
my bolding
I hope that this clarifies for you. I agree fully with the Dr...
P.S.
A Mobile phone is not regarded as constant communication.
I agree fully with the Dr...
Can't remember the last time I was wrong!
Dr
PS: Come to think of it, the only time I have taken off into a 300' cloudbase was YTWB, where I was in contact with ATC on the ground.
Ahhhhhhh........... Oh dear, no its not! I have done it a number of times at YATN - then called CS Appr on climb (in IMC).
Last edited by ForkTailedDrKiller; 7th Oct 2008 at 07:07.
Guest
Posts: n/a
CAR256, "Jepp ATC 6.1 Pg AU717" = "AIP ENR 1.1.56.1.". If that's the most concrete statement in the regs, the note to "see and avoid" could easily be interpreted to the disadvantage of a pilot in case they caused an incident in such a situation, and subsequently find themselves exposed to a legal or other challenge..
I think you could easily argue, however, that continuous communication as per AIP ENR 1.4 Airspace Requirements was maintained if you got traffic via your mobile phone immediately before take-off, did all proper CTAF calls (which anyone doing an approach locally should hear) plus statement of intentions after take-off, and then called ATS for traffic updated once in the air.
I'm not convinced either way as per what the law is, although my ATO & CFI are sort of right by definition at the moment Funny though that all instructors I queries in my school (who are from various backgrounds and include some senior IFR pilots with serious commercial experience under their belts) were unanimous and adamant in their "no way" responses..
Anyone from CASA listening who could give a definite answer? This discussion could be a case of new regs / old habits, wouldn't be the first time..
I think you could easily argue, however, that continuous communication as per AIP ENR 1.4 Airspace Requirements was maintained if you got traffic via your mobile phone immediately before take-off, did all proper CTAF calls (which anyone doing an approach locally should hear) plus statement of intentions after take-off, and then called ATS for traffic updated once in the air.
I'm not convinced either way as per what the law is, although my ATO & CFI are sort of right by definition at the moment
Funny though that all instructors I queries in my school (who are from various backgrounds and include some senior IFR pilots with serious commercial experience under their belts) were unanimous and adamant in their "no way" responses..Anyone from CASA listening who could give a definite answer? This discussion could be a case of new regs / old habits, wouldn't be the first time..
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reference CAR256 refers to is AIP ENR 1.1 56.1.
Im asking from a completely ignorant point of view here as i have no IFR experience but have just done the IREX and so am interested to see what happens in the real world.
In the above situation situation if you couldn't conact centre on the ground and therefore couldn't get traffic information wouldn't you in theory be able to communicate with anyone of concern on the CTAF frequency? If they were low enough to be a concern for you immediately after take off shouldn't they be on the CTAF? I imagine that you would usually be able to contact ATS shortly after take off (circuit height or so) in most places? In which case any conflicting traffic should be on the CTAF?
Again these are posed as QUESTIONS so im merely ASKING
Im asking from a completely ignorant point of view here as i have no IFR experience but have just done the IREX and so am interested to see what happens in the real world.
In the above situation situation if you couldn't conact centre on the ground and therefore couldn't get traffic information wouldn't you in theory be able to communicate with anyone of concern on the CTAF frequency? If they were low enough to be a concern for you immediately after take off shouldn't they be on the CTAF? I imagine that you would usually be able to contact ATS shortly after take off (circuit height or so) in most places? In which case any conflicting traffic should be on the CTAF?
Again these are posed as QUESTIONS so im merely ASKING
Guest
Posts: n/a
Gettin' there, you're right, in most instances you would be able to get anyone who's near you on the CTAF. And if you can hail someone, he'd probably be able to relay a call to ATS for you, so there wouldn't be an issue.
HOWEVER, it only needs one guy who's flying an approach and who thinks he's monitoring CTAF but has dialled up the wrong frequency or has some other malfunction, or is simply too preoccupied with flying the approach (which is all too easy for low time IFR pilots), thus missing your call, and you could fly straight into him as you go into cloud.
The likely scenario we're talking about here is a low cloud cover at a CTAF with no ATS comms on the ground. You wouldn't really want to go up there and visually circle under a low cloud base near terrain (e.g. YBLT), not knowing who may be popping out of cloud just in front or above you
HOWEVER, it only needs one guy who's flying an approach and who thinks he's monitoring CTAF but has dialled up the wrong frequency or has some other malfunction, or is simply too preoccupied with flying the approach (which is all too easy for low time IFR pilots), thus missing your call, and you could fly straight into him as you go into cloud.
The likely scenario we're talking about here is a low cloud cover at a CTAF with no ATS comms on the ground. You wouldn't really want to go up there and visually circle under a low cloud base near terrain (e.g. YBLT), not knowing who may be popping out of cloud just in front or above you
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see your point PLANKBLENDER
Doesn't sound like the best idea but at least from waht i can pick up reading the regs not wrong.
What really gets me is how there can be two COMPLETELY OPPOSITE opinions from people who i assume have plenty of IFR experince.
Seems to be the case with a lot of questions posed on here that two people can be 100% convinced that they are right but both have differing opinions. It particularly seems to be the case with IFR stuff. There was a thread on here not long ago about alternate requirements due to updated WX forecasts en route (cant be bothered finding and posting the link, sorry) and again there was more than two opions on what was right.
Shouldnt there only be ONE right answer when it comes to the regs?
Seems that there are alot of "grey" areas or at least diferent interpretations when it comes to flying under the IFR.
Seems a bit scary that there are all these guys blasting around in the soup doing different things.
Not so much a comment but an observation/question?
Doesn't sound like the best idea but at least from waht i can pick up reading the regs not wrong.
What really gets me is how there can be two COMPLETELY OPPOSITE opinions from people who i assume have plenty of IFR experince.
Seems to be the case with a lot of questions posed on here that two people can be 100% convinced that they are right but both have differing opinions. It particularly seems to be the case with IFR stuff. There was a thread on here not long ago about alternate requirements due to updated WX forecasts en route (cant be bothered finding and posting the link, sorry) and again there was more than two opions on what was right.
Shouldnt there only be ONE right answer when it comes to the regs?
Seems that there are alot of "grey" areas or at least diferent interpretations when it comes to flying under the IFR.
Seems a bit scary that there are all these guys blasting around in the soup doing different things.
Not so much a comment but an observation/question?
HOWEVER, it only needs one guy who's flying an approach and who thinks he's monitoring CTAF but has dialled up the wrong frequency or has some other malfunction, or is simply too preoccupied with flying the approach (which is all too easy for low time IFR pilots), thus missing your call, and you could fly straight into him as you go into cloud. 
Dr
Guest
Posts: n/a
So explain to me how you are so much better off after Centre tells you about 'Old Mate' who has switched to CTAF - but has dialed the wrong freq.
At least I know about him and can take action, rather than having to quickly bend down and kiss my a$s goodbye, wondering what hit me two minutes after taking what turns out to me my final du#p
