Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Non-Airline Forums > Private Flying
Reload this Page >

Mode S & Flight Plans

Wikiposts
Search
Private Flying LAA/BMAA/BGA/BPA The sheer pleasure of flight.

Mode S & Flight Plans

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 19th Apr 2007, 06:44
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mode S & Flight Plans

Hi all - I don't know if this has been discussed before, but does anyone know whether you still enter "C" after the forward slash for sec 10 (equipment) on FLP Form CA48 or does it become "S" (or something else) if you are squawking Mode S??
3FallinFlyer is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2007, 07:14
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
no you enter /S mode S has A/C and alt as standard.
S-Works is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2007, 07:33
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
European ATC don't seem to look at the equipment list in the flight plan; they assume you carry the legal requirement for the airspace you are flying in (which varies from country to country).

I read somewhere that filing a flight plan above FL245 or whatever but not declaring 8.33kHz channel spacing does reject the flight plan, however.

I have been filing S/C since day 1 and never had it questioned.
IO540 is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2007, 08:07
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Don't know if you saw the input about this on the FLYER thread on the same subject, but that might change soon IO.
rustle is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2007, 10:33
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks for your replies - I also have entered S/C since day 1 but figured that this may now be rejected for airways - so its S/S from now on then (including VFR I suppose)
3FallinFlyer is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2007, 10:59
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Do you have a URL, rustle? It takes hours to find a post on the flyer.co.uk forum...

Anyway, as I said I don't think CFMU will reject a flight plan for anything on the equipment list other than 8.33.

Whether ATC will give you a different routing according to your declared equipment list is a separate Q. In Europe, this doesn't currently happen, either. Anyway, what are ATC to do if somebody does not declare BRNAV equipment and asks for a climb through FL095? Refuse it??
IO540 is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2007, 11:37
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by IO540
Do you have a URL, rustle? It takes hours to find a post on the flyer.co.uk forum
Here it is

Shall I make you a nice cup of tea whilst you read it, too?
rustle is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2007, 12:58
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just a splash of milk and one sugar please.
Fuji Abound is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2007, 14:02
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As usual, there is zero real information in that flyer thread that is relevant to this discussion. By "real" I mean coming from people who know what they are talking about. Apart from Bookworm's post on the 8.33 issue; he is invariably right and that must be where I read it originally.

Sure, Mode S will be mandatory for many areas in due course and everybody knows this, but this thread is about the degree to which Mode S equipment declarations in flight plans matter.
IO540 is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2007, 15:02
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by IO540
As usual, there is zero real information in that flyer thread that is relevant to this discussion. By "real" I mean coming from people who know what they are talking about. Apart from Bookworm's post on the 8.33 issue; he is invariably right and that must be where I read it originally.
Several of those posters "know what they're talking about" - I know this for a fact: Whether that knowledge coincides with what people want to read I don't know.
rustle is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2007, 15:14
  #11 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Whether ATC will give you a different routing according to your declared equipment list is a separate Q. In Europe, this doesn't currently happen, either. Anyway, what are ATC to do if somebody does not declare BRNAV equipment and asks for a climb through FL095? Refuse it??
What I am unsure about is if a FP would be rejected on the basis that it was filed in airways with section 10 entered as S/C. Otherwise, at what point will you be stopped (if indeed you are stopped) from filing and flying an airways route with a Mode A/C only transponder (or would the FP be approved and clearance declined once ATC become aware that you are not squawking S)

Not that it matters to me as I forked out for Mode S anyway
3FallinFlyer is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2007, 21:21
  #12 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
PPRuNe Radar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
At present, the UK NATS internal flight data processing system only looks in FPLs for 8.33 and RVSM equippage, and then only when relevant to the airspace where it is required. Everything else is left to the pilot to ensure the equippage requirements are being met.

Not to say that Mode S 'warnings' might not become a requirement within the NATS kit in the future but it is not looked for at the moment.
PPRuNe Radar is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2007, 01:52
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: up North
Posts: 661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Anyone know how many Mode S radars are currently operational out of the 23 planned? The last Raytheon newsletter suggests six are completed but that doesn't mean operational.
jabberwok is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.