| Author |
Messages |
patrick
Sergeant First Class
Gender: Male
Location: Germany
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 50
|
      
 Posted Monday, April 9, 2007 @ 04:59 AM
Hi Guys outside Old Europe !
According to Eurocontrol / EASA Transponder A/C mode is no longer acceptable in Europe for VFR wihtin controlled airspaces ( Deta and Charlie airspaces) and we have a lot of them !!!.
From 1 April 2008 we will all need a MODE S Transponder, which will cost us at least 3000 Euro + the yearly certification fees.
How is the situation outisde Europe ? Do you also need to upgrade with S Mode transponders ?
Patrick
--------------------
Patrick, Speyer - Germany RF5 D-KOPF
|
SteveBeaver
General
Gender: Male
Location: Columbus, Ohio - USA
Registered: Jan 2007
Status: Offline
Posts: 454
|
Posted Monday, April 9, 2007 @ 10:02 AM 
Ouch. In the USA we require a mode C transponder under certain conditions (Class B airspace, above 18,000 ft etc) but it is perfectly possible to operate without a transponder, and many people do.
Steve
|
Bob Grimstead
Captain
Gender: Male
Location: Perth, Western Australia or West Sussex, England
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 2029
|
Posted Monday, April 9, 2007 @ 09:55 PM
Hi Guys,
Yes, I do know about this European requirement, and it is of course utterly ridiculous.
The only reason the Eurocrats want Mode S fitted to all aeroplanes is so that they can trace all aeroplane owners and charge them navigation fees, whether or not they are using controlled airspace.
Britain has decied ALL aeroplanes, inside or outside controlled airspace, must have Mode S transponders, for the same reason. AOPA are fighting this, and trying to allow operation below 6,000 feet without them.
Australia has NO requirement for transponders outside controlled airspace, and no stated future requirement for mode S.
I hear some British company might have a slightly cheaper Mode S transponder available soon, but I do not know the name of this company.
Yours, Bob
|
Donald
Command Sergeant Major
Gender: Male
Location: Scotland
Registered: Jan 2007
Status: Offline
Posts: 489
|
Posted Sunday, April 22, 2007 @ 01:37 PM
Don't start me on this! No wait, too late.
Here in the UK when our dearly beloved CAA first floated their consultation paper on this requirement said they would be working with manufacturers to develop a low cost transponder for us little guys. Last I heard on this was that the 'low-cost' option, while certainly cheaper than the big ticket kit was cheaper by a few hundred pounds! That on an item costing a couple of thousand!
Let me put low cost in perspective. The first electronic device I bought for my RF3 was a Delcom radio. Don't remember what it cost but probably around GBP250. Next was a little Magellan that cost half that, so the device most useful to me as a pilot is actually the least expensive. Next in usefulness is next cheapest and the most utterly useless deadweight will be the most expensive by a mile.
On top of that we'll be faced with recurring maintenance checks and will that come cheap? I don't think so.
I have no idea what the tech specification for such a device might be but how complex need it be? It's just so we show up on airliners' TCAS so they don't run into us at 30,000 ft! Modern technology should give us solid state for low energy drain and with digital frequency control that cannot drift. And how many codes might we need? It's digitally addressed so we shouldn't need to be dial in 4 digits at the whim of ATC, and a single fixed VFR conspicuity code should give us everything we might need. There's also the matter of installing this piece of ballast and it's power supply in an aircraft with little if any spare load carrying capacity, AND there's the matter of designing an acceptable installation. Aaaargh!
Right, calm down, breath deeply, calm... calm..
Rant over, I'm off for a glass.
Donald
|
Bob Grimstead
Captain
Gender: Male
Location: Perth, Western Australia or West Sussex, England
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 2029
|
Posted Sunday, April 22, 2007 @ 11:12 PM
Yes Donald, you're correct on all of this, but there is worse to come.
Having bought this very expensive and totally pointless piece of equipment, and then sorted out a stowage and a power source for it, you will next probably have to pay out even more than than its multi-thousand-pound purchase price to have it installed and certified by a licensed avionics engineer!
It all makes my blood boil, and is the main reason why my British aeroplane sits quietly in my English garage with its wings off, pending a sensible solution to this situation.
Just breathe deeply and consider your blood pressure.
Yours, Bob G
|
patrick
Sergeant First Class
Gender: Male
Location: Germany
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 50
|
Posted Wednesday, May 2, 2007 @ 07:08 AM
I talked last week to the chief instructor of a French aeroclub. His comments to mode S transponder : rance has no ground infrastrucutre yet to read the Mode S "Light mode" therefore the date limit 31- March 2008 will be postponed.
I got information that the antenna installation for Mode S ist quite sensitive and might transmit wrong datas.
For me personnaly the Mode S " Light version" does not any sebnse at all compaired to the presnet Charlie mode. More accurancy in the Height. what does 50 or 100 Feet more accurancy will make for a VFR separation ? Stupid !
But the mode S will transmit your call sign therefore we will be indentified !
Furhtermore it would be then no problem to charge automatically airspace fees for the users of some airpace categoties.
This is already practised in Germany with the high way toll for trucks. Why not for aircrafts !!!!
Patrick Germany
--------------------
Patrick, Speyer - Germany RF5 D-KOPF
|
patrick
Sergeant First Class
Gender: Male
Location: Germany
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 50
|
Posted Thursday, May 3, 2007 @ 04:15 AM
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/transpondermodeS/
--------------------
Patrick, Speyer - Germany RF5 D-KOPF
|
|
