transponder inspection

[Matt]

Looking over my 152's logs, it appears the transponder has not been
inspected since the altitude encoder was installed, about 10 years ago. Is
it legal (not necessarily smart) to pull the circuit breaker, placard the
transponder as inoperative, and continue to fly until I get it inspected at
the next annual? I would be staying clear of class B and C.

FYI, the mode C is working fine.

Thanks for all comments.

Matt

[Jon Kraus]

We had our transponder require some work and the A & P added a placard
as "transponder inop" until we got it back. As long as you stay clear of
B & C you should be OK.

I'm curious as to why you wouldn't just have the inspection done? I
don't think it is that expensive to do. We ended up buying a
remanufactured unit for about $400. So the battery in yours has lasted
10 years or is it dead?

Jon Kraus
'79 Mooney 201
4443H @ TYQ

Matt wrote:
> Looking over my 152's logs, it appears the transponder has not been
> inspected since the altitude encoder was installed, about 10 years ago. Is
> it legal (not necessarily smart) to pull the circuit breaker, placard the
> transponder as inoperative, and continue to fly until I get it inspected at
> the next annual? I would be staying clear of class B and C.
>
> FYI, the mode C is working fine.
>
> Thanks for all comments.
>
> Matt
>
>

[J. Severyn]

Why not be legal and smart and just get it checked. If it is operating
within specs it takes about 10 minutes and can normally be done right at
your aircraft using portable equipment by a certified shop. The last check
of the transponder and altitude encoder on my bird cost $95 by the shop at
KLVK. There is nothing that says the transponder/encoder and pitot static
check must happen during the annual inspection.

John Severyn
"Matt" > wrote in message
...
> Looking over my 152's logs, it appears the transponder has not been
> inspected since the altitude encoder was installed, about 10 years ago.
> Is it legal (not necessarily smart) to pull the circuit breaker, placard
> the transponder as inoperative, and continue to fly until I get it
> inspected at the next annual? I would be staying clear of class B and C.
>
> FYI, the mode C is working fine.
>
> Thanks for all comments.
>
> Matt
>

[Dave Butler]

Matt wrote:
> Looking over my 152's logs, it appears the transponder has not been
> inspected since the altitude encoder was installed, about 10 years ago. Is
> it legal (not necessarily smart) to pull the circuit breaker, placard the
> transponder as inoperative, and continue to fly until I get it inspected at
> the next annual? I would be staying clear of class B and C.
>
> FYI, the mode C is working fine.

Sec. 91.413

ATC transponder tests and inspections.

(a) No persons may use an ATC transponder that is specified in 91.215(a),
121.345(c), or Sec. 135.143(c) of this chapter unless, within the preceding 24
calendar months, the ATC transponder has been tested and inspected and found to
comply with appendix F of part 43 of this chapter; and ... <snip>

Sec. 91.215

ATC transponder and altitude reporting equipment and use.

....
(c) Transponder-on operation. While in the airspace as specified in paragraph
(b) of this section or in all controlled airspace, each person operating an
aircraft equipped with an operable ATC transponder maintained in accordance with
Sec. 91.413 of this part shall operate the transponder, including Mode C
equipment if installed, and shall reply on the appropriate code or as assigned
by ATC. ...

As I read it, since your transponder is not maintained in accordance with Sec.
91.413, you need not operate the transponder, and indeed may not. You just can't
go anywhere a transponder is required.

All that aside: just get it inspected. You can get the inspection done for the
cost of an hour of flying.

Dave

[Matt]

> I'm curious as to why you wouldn't just have the inspection done?

The plane is VFR right now. I was thinking of installing a digital
transponder and upgrading the rest of the panel to IFR at the same time
(next annual).

Matt

[Rip]

Battery?

Rip

Jon Kraus wrote:

> We had our transponder require some work and the A & P added a placard
> as "transponder inop" until we got it back. As long as you stay clear of
> B & C you should be OK.
>
> I'm curious as to why you wouldn't just have the inspection done? I
> don't think it is that expensive to do. We ended up buying a
> remanufactured unit for about $400. So the battery in yours has lasted
> 10 years or is it dead?
>
> Jon Kraus
> '79 Mooney 201
> 4443H @ TYQ
>
> Matt wrote:
>
>> Looking over my 152's logs, it appears the transponder has not been
>> inspected since the altitude encoder was installed, about 10 years
>> ago. Is it legal (not necessarily smart) to pull the circuit breaker,
>> placard the transponder as inoperative, and continue to fly until I
>> get it inspected at the next annual? I would be staying clear of
>> class B and C.
>>
>> FYI, the mode C is working fine.
>>
>> Thanks for all comments.
>>
>> Matt
>>
>

[Jon Kraus]

Yea, there is a battery in the trasponder that requires replacement
every 2 years whether it needs it or not. It is used to power the unit
in the event of a crash and no power from the ship is getting to it.
The new models use regular "D" cells while older ones (like mine)
require a proprietary battery for about $40.

Jon Kraus
'79 Mooney 201
4443H @ TYQ


Rip wrote:

> Battery?
>
> Rip
>
> Jon Kraus wrote:
>
>> We had our transponder require some work and the A & P added a placard
>> as "transponder inop" until we got it back. As long as you stay clear
>> of B & C you should be OK.
>>
>> I'm curious as to why you wouldn't just have the inspection done? I
>> don't think it is that expensive to do. We ended up buying a
>> remanufactured unit for about $400. So the battery in yours has lasted
>> 10 years or is it dead?
>>
>> Jon Kraus
>> '79 Mooney 201
>> 4443H @ TYQ
>>
>> Matt wrote:
>>
>>> Looking over my 152's logs, it appears the transponder has not been
>>> inspected since the altitude encoder was installed, about 10 years
>>> ago. Is it legal (not necessarily smart) to pull the circuit
>>> breaker, placard the transponder as inoperative, and continue to fly
>>> until I get it inspected at the next annual? I would be staying
>>> clear of class B and C.
>>>
>>> FYI, the mode C is working fine.
>>>
>>> Thanks for all comments.
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>

[Matt]

I think you are referring to the ELT battery right? That needs to be
replaced every 2 years.


"Jon Kraus" > wrote:
> Yea, there is a battery in the trasponder that requires replacement every
> 2 years whether it needs it or not. It is used to power the unit in the
> event of a crash and no power from the ship is getting to it. The new
> models use regular "D" cells while older ones (like mine) require a
> proprietary battery for about $40.

[[email protected]]

no such thing as a battery in a transponder

Matt wrote:
> I think you are referring to the ELT battery right? That needs to be
> replaced every 2 years.
>
>
> "Jon Kraus" > wrote:
>
>>Yea, there is a battery in the trasponder that requires replacement every
>>2 years whether it needs it or not. It is used to power the unit in the
>>event of a crash and no power from the ship is getting to it. The new
>>models use regular "D" cells while older ones (like mine) require a
>>proprietary battery for about $40.
>
>
>

[Jon Kraus]

You're correct it is the ELT not the transponder... duhhh...

Matt wrote:

> I think you are referring to the ELT battery right? That needs to be
> replaced every 2 years.
>
>
> "Jon Kraus" > wrote:
>
>>Yea, there is a battery in the trasponder that requires replacement every
>>2 years whether it needs it or not. It is used to power the unit in the
>>event of a crash and no power from the ship is getting to it. The new
>>models use regular "D" cells while older ones (like mine) require a
>>proprietary battery for about $40.
>
>
>

[Matt]

"Dave Butler" > wrote:
> As I read it, since your transponder is not maintained in accordance with
> Sec. 91.413, you need not operate the transponder, and indeed may not. You
> just can't go anywhere a transponder is required.

Yes, that was my reading of the FAR which prompted my question.