Ground control vs. clearance delivery for VFR

[B A R R Y]

My local Delta base (HFD) will contact nearby BDL TRACON and obtain a
squawk code for VFR flight following or traffic advisories. This
service is "advertised" on the ATIS and is requested from ground
control on initial call up by departures. Ground calls you back with
a code and the proper departure frequency, similar to an IFR
clearance.

Last week, I was at a Charlie airport (PVD) during a very quiet
period. Upon calling ground with the usual VFR information, I also
requested a VFR flight following to my destination. This was the
first time I'd tried this outside of HFD. The controller mumbled
something unintellible, along with "since it's slow", and to stand by.
He honored my request and returned with my code and the current
departure frequency. My flight following commenced automatically as I
was handed off to that area's TRACON from the tower.

Should I have asked for this service via the clearance delivery
frequency as in IFR, or was I asking for a service not normally
available? I can't find the answer in the 2007 Jeppesen FAR-AIM.

In hindsight, I'm guessing I should have been on clearance delivery.

[Kevin Clarke]

B A R R Y wrote:
> My local Delta base (HFD) will contact nearby BDL TRACON and obtain a
> squawk code for VFR flight following ...
>
> In hindsight, I'm guessing I should have been on clearance delivery.
>
>
>
>
I think you are supposed to call the clnc del for that at a charlie.
That has always been my experience at PVD as well. I tried w/ ground
before too and got the aeronautical equivalent of the finger. :-)
Come to think of it, I've had the same experience at BDL also. So yeah,
in my experience, clnc del is the way to go for VFR departure.

KC

[B A R R Y]

On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 13:04:49 GMT, Kevin Clarke >
wrote:

>I think you are supposed to call the clnc del for that at a charlie.
>That has always been my experience at PVD as well. I tried w/ ground
>before too and got the aeronautical equivalent of the finger. :-)
>Come to think of it, I've had the same experience at BDL also. So yeah,
>in my experience, clnc del is the way to go for VFR departure.

Thanks!

Even if I got the "radio finger", he did the extra work to honor my
request. <G>

[Jay B]

Contacting clerance delivery first is also the norm at Tucson, AZ
(Class C).

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ
www.pbase.com/flyingphotog

[Larry Dighera]

On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 12:59:45 GMT, B A R R Y
> wrote in
>:

>My local Delta base (HFD) will contact nearby BDL TRACON and obtain a
>squawk code for VFR flight following or traffic advisories. This
>service is "advertised" on the ATIS and is requested from ground
>control on initial call up by departures. Ground calls you back with
>a code and the proper departure frequency, similar to an IFR
>clearance.
>
>Last week, I was at a Charlie airport (PVD) during a very quiet
>period. Upon calling ground with the usual VFR information, I also
>requested a VFR flight following to my destination. This was the
>first time I'd tried this outside of HFD. The controller mumbled
>something unintellible, along with "since it's slow", and to stand by.
>He honored my request and returned with my code and the current
>departure frequency. My flight following commenced automatically as I
>was handed off to that area's TRACON from the tower.
>
>Should I have asked for this service via the clearance delivery
>frequency as in IFR, or was I asking for a service not normally
>available? I can't find the answer in the 2007 Jeppesen FAR-AIM.
>
>In hindsight, I'm guessing I should have been on clearance delivery.
>
>
>

All VFR flights departing KSNA (a Class C airport) receive radar
advisories/flight following unless they indicate that it is not
desired by appending the word 'local' to the departure name they
request:

When departing Santa Ana/Orange County/John Wayne (KSNA) (Class
Charlie airspace) VFR it is customary to add the word 'LOCAL' to your
departure clearance request with Clearance Delivery to signify that
Radar Advisory Service (Flight Following) is not desired. IE:


"Cherokee 1234A is a PA28A/A at executive hangars east with
Oscar, request Mesa Local departure."


VFR departures and arrivals are published in the John Wayne-Orange
County Airport FIXED-WING CLASS-C VFR PROCEDURES manual by the John
Wayne tower Pilot/Controller Work Group, copies of which may be
obtained from the tower by telephone request.


That document contains the following information:


Requesting Class-C Departure Instructions From Clearance
Delivery - 121.85


Contact Clearance Delivery _prior_ to taxi. Include your
position on the airport in addition to the following
information as appropriate.


_Surface area service only:_ include type aircraft and
direction of flight or route name. _Example:_ JOHN WAYNE
CLEARANCE, CESSNA 12345, C172 (DIRECTION OF FLIGHT OR,
MESA/NEWPORT/ORANGE) LOCAL.


_Note:_ The term "LOCAL" advises the controller that surface
area service only is requested, Radar service will be
terminated at the boundary of the Class-C surface area.
*Remain outside Class-C airspace thereafter.* This should not
be confused with a local area flight in which the pilot
desires flight following with Socal Approach. In that case,
advise the clearance delivery controller of your specific
request as indicates below.


_For radar service/flight-following beyond the surface area:_
include destination of intentions and departure route name
(optional_:


_Example:_ JOHN WAYNE CLEARANCE, BARON 54321, BE58
DESTINATION (FAN NUYS/SOUTHWEST PRACTICE AREA/SENIC FLIGHT
SOUTHEAST ALONG SHORELINE/ETC.) REQUEST MESA/NEWPORT DEPARTURE
(OPTIONAL)


_Note 1:_ The pilot may request the desired route by name
(Newport, Mesa, etc.) if known. Of primary concern to the
tower is the destination/intentions. The controller will
assign the most appropriate initial heading, and forward the
destination/intentions to Socal Approach.


_Note 2: _ Avoid the use of the term 'LOCAL' which indicates
surface area service only, as described above.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"B A R R Y" > wrote in message
...
>
> My local Delta base (HFD) will contact nearby BDL TRACON and obtain a
> squawk code for VFR flight following or traffic advisories. This
> service is "advertised" on the ATIS and is requested from ground
> control on initial call up by departures. Ground calls you back with
> a code and the proper departure frequency, similar to an IFR
> clearance.
>
> Last week, I was at a Charlie airport (PVD) during a very quiet
> period. Upon calling ground with the usual VFR information, I also
> requested a VFR flight following to my destination. This was the
> first time I'd tried this outside of HFD. The controller mumbled
> something unintellible, along with "since it's slow", and to stand by.
> He honored my request and returned with my code and the current
> departure frequency. My flight following commenced automatically as I
> was handed off to that area's TRACON from the tower.
>
> Should I have asked for this service via the clearance delivery
> frequency as in IFR, or was I asking for a service not normally
> available? I can't find the answer in the 2007 Jeppesen FAR-AIM.
>
> In hindsight, I'm guessing I should have been on clearance delivery.
>

Since it was slow, the same person was probably working ground control and
clearance delivery, so it wouldn't matter which you called.

The service you requested doesn't exist on a national basis.

[Andrew Sarangan]

On Jun 16, 8:59 am, B A R R Y > wrote:
> My local Delta base (HFD) will contact nearby BDL TRACON and obtain a
> squawk code for VFR flight following or traffic advisories. This
> service is "advertised" on the ATIS and is requested from ground
> control on initial call up by departures. Ground calls you back with
> a code and the proper departure frequency, similar to an IFR
> clearance.
>
> Last week, I was at a Charlie airport (PVD) during a very quiet
> period. Upon calling ground with the usual VFR information, I also
> requested a VFR flight following to my destination. This was the
> first time I'd tried this outside of HFD. The controller mumbled
> something unintellible, along with "since it's slow", and to stand by.
> He honored my request and returned with my code and the current
> departure frequency. My flight following commenced automatically as I
> was handed off to that area's TRACON from the tower.
>
> Should I have asked for this service via the clearance delivery
> frequency as in IFR, or was I asking for a service not normally
> available? I can't find the answer in the 2007 Jeppesen FAR-AIM.
>
> In hindsight, I'm guessing I should have been on clearance delivery.

Clearence delivery is not just for IFR. See AIM 4-3-14. If they are
not busy, they might combine CD and Ground, but the controllers decide
that, not the pilot. Sometimes I have had one controller operate
approach, tower, ground and clearance. Separate frequencies, but it
was the same person.

[Roy Smith]

In article >,
B A R R Y > wrote:

> My local Delta base (HFD) will contact nearby BDL TRACON and obtain a
> squawk code for VFR flight following or traffic advisories. This
> service is "advertised" on the ATIS and is requested from ground
> control on initial call up by departures. Ground calls you back with
> a code and the proper departure frequency, similar to an IFR
> clearance.
>
> Last week, I was at a Charlie airport (PVD) during a very quiet
> period. Upon calling ground with the usual VFR information, I also
> requested a VFR flight following to my destination. This was the
> first time I'd tried this outside of HFD. The controller mumbled
> something unintellible, along with "since it's slow", and to stand by.
> He honored my request and returned with my code and the current
> departure frequency. My flight following commenced automatically as I
> was handed off to that area's TRACON from the tower.
>
> Should I have asked for this service via the clearance delivery
> frequency as in IFR, or was I asking for a service not normally
> available? I can't find the answer in the 2007 Jeppesen FAR-AIM.
>
> In hindsight, I'm guessing I should have been on clearance delivery.

The general rule is that anything that involves generating a flight strip
(IFR clearance or VFR flight following) should go through CD. Only if an
airport has no published CD freq (or if the ATIS says you should) that you
should ask the ground controller for this.

[Mxsmanic]

Roy Smith writes:

> The general rule is that anything that involves generating a flight strip
> (IFR clearance or VFR flight following) should go through CD. Only if an
> airport has no published CD freq (or if the ATIS says you should) that you
> should ask the ground controller for this.

Does a VFR departure through Class B or C generate a flight strip?

[B A R R Y]

What I've aggregated from this is:

Start on CD, where my request will be honored, or I'll be told it's
automatic or not available due to local procedure.

I appreciate all the great responses!

Barry

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Roy Smith writes:
>
>> The general rule is that anything that involves generating a flight
>> strip (IFR clearance or VFR flight following) should go through CD.
>> Only if an airport has no published CD freq (or if the ATIS says you
>> should) that you should ask the ground controller for this.
>
> Does a VFR departure through Class B or C generate a flight strip?
>

Your fjukktardedness is boundless.

In any case, it doesn't matter. You will never fly.

Not VFR, not ifr. Not through class B, not through class C. Not on a
plane, nor on a train, not here nor there or anywhere


Bertie

[kontiki]

B A R R Y wrote:
>
> Should I have asked for this service via the clearance delivery
> frequency as in IFR, or was I asking for a service not normally
> available? I can't find the answer in the 2007 Jeppesen FAR-AIM.
>
> In hindsight, I'm guessing I should have been on clearance delivery.
>
I always listen to ATIS before doing anything. Every airport I
have ever been to will instruct you to either call clearance
delivery or ground for all departures.

[B A R R Y]

On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 16:58:02 GMT, kontiki >
wrote:

>
>I always listen to ATIS before doing anything. Every airport I
>have ever been to will instruct you to either call clearance
>delivery or ground for all departures.

There was obviously no such instruction in this case.

For ha-ha's, I just called the PVD ATIS @ (401)737-3215 (ain't
unlimited LD great? <G>) and got information Echo. No mention of
calling ground or CD initially, unless you want delay information
going to Newark.

I've heard ATIS broadcasts at Delta fields that remind pilots to
contact ground on xxx.x (vs. calling the tower to taxi), but I've
never heard an instruction to contact clearance delivery first. Can
you remember where you've heard it?

I also always get ATIS information before an initial call up from
parking. I didn't think calling without it was an option. I don't
even move on a non-towered field without the ASOS/AWOS. <G>

[Gordy]

Barry,

Regarding who we should request flight following or traffic advisories
from...

4-1-17 5. (b) The AIM refers to "radar traffic information" and not flight
following or traffic advisories in this section.
Being an anal CFI and AGI, I went through this a few years back and thought
that the sensible thing to do was ask clearance delivery for the service. I
called the local Class C tower supervisor and asked him what was correct. He
said to ask clearance delivery. I showed him the reference in the AIM
instructing pilots to notify ground control. His response, notify clearance
delivery.
I go to a different Class C and ask clearance delivery for flight following.
Their response, you have it automatically. Many facilities seem to have
their own local procedures. As long as it does not affect safety, no big
deal. The bottom line, do not let ATC intimidate you. If you are not sure of
something, ask for clarification. If the controller is having a bad day
because you are trying to do things by the book, he will get over it.
Controllers are our friends.

GDY

[Hamish Reid]

In article >,
Roy Smith > wrote:

> In article >,
> B A R R Y > wrote:
>
> > My local Delta base (HFD) will contact nearby BDL TRACON and obtain a
> > squawk code for VFR flight following or traffic advisories. This
> > service is "advertised" on the ATIS and is requested from ground
> > control on initial call up by departures. Ground calls you back with
> > a code and the proper departure frequency, similar to an IFR
> > clearance.
> >
> > Last week, I was at a Charlie airport (PVD) during a very quiet
> > period. Upon calling ground with the usual VFR information, I also
> > requested a VFR flight following to my destination. This was the
> > first time I'd tried this outside of HFD. The controller mumbled
> > something unintellible, along with "since it's slow", and to stand by.
> > He honored my request and returned with my code and the current
> > departure frequency. My flight following commenced automatically as I
> > was handed off to that area's TRACON from the tower.
> >
> > Should I have asked for this service via the clearance delivery
> > frequency as in IFR, or was I asking for a service not normally
> > available? I can't find the answer in the 2007 Jeppesen FAR-AIM.
> >
> > In hindsight, I'm guessing I should have been on clearance delivery.
>
> The general rule is that anything that involves generating a flight strip
> (IFR clearance or VFR flight following) should go through CD. Only if an
> airport has no published CD freq (or if the ATIS says you should) that you
> should ask the ground controller for this.

It's a good general rule, but it's broken in places, like (one of my)
home bases, Oakland (KOAK), which is a busy Class C under SFO's Class B,
and where you typically bypass clearance for ground if it's a VFR
departure. You just call ground with what's effectively a combined
clearance and ground taxi call, and any special requests (like a class B
clearance). Unfortunately even though there's a separate (and often very
busy) clearance frequency, the call-ground-first thing isn't typically
mentioned in the relevant ATIS, so not everyone knows, but calling
clearance is harmless -- you'll just be told to switch to ground, if you
can get a word in edgeways between Southwest calls for IFR clearances
from the south field.

At Monterey (KMRY) just down the coast, you call clearance first, unless
it specifically says not to on ATIS. At my other home base, Hayward
(KHWD), which is a busy class D under Oakland's class C (under ...), you
call ground for VFR flight following, but clearance for IFR clearances
(which are usually given on ground frequency while taxiing, but never
mind...). This isn't usually mentioned on ATIS anywhere either.

I've learned to simply call clearance if it's listed and ask them who to
call if I'm at a place I don't know; otherwise I call ground and ask
them. But then I'm guessing my way-out-of-town Australian accent
probably helps smooth things over in ways not always available to
everyone :-).

Hamish

[B A R R Y]

On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 14:42:54 -0400, "Gordy"
> wrote:

>Controllers are our friends.

I totally agree! I simply strive to make my spam can presence as
inobtrusive and professional as possible, and the folks here are
always a great help.

I'm lucky to be home based in a very GA friendly area. I feel the
BDL TRACON, along with the Windsor Locks FSDO, are extremely easy to
deal with, always willing to help us help them. Having grown up here,
I find NY, BOS, and PVD just as easy to deal with, as I don't find
people who are "direct and to the point" rude. <G>

I'd just like to do the right thing.

[Andrew Gideon]

On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 14:42:54 -0400, Gordy wrote:

> The bottom line, do not let ATC intimidate you. If you are
> not sure of something, ask for clarification. If the controller is having
> a bad day because you are trying to do things by the book, he will get
> over it. Controllers are our friends.

I erred in contacting Cape Approach (while airborne) for a clearance
recently. The controller - correctly - directed me to the CD frequency.
I should have known better.

He was reasonably friendly about it, explaining that he didn't have time
to read a clearance. That was far more than I needed; just the reminder
to contact CD would have been enough.

It's absolutely true that - with a few exceptions - ATC really is
there to help. It's a shame that some pilots never get as comfortable
dealing with ATC as they could be.

I'll even get flight following for maneuver practice in our local practice
area. Why doesn't everyone; it's just an extra pair of eyes and there's
no extra charge (at least for now {8^) ?

- Andrew

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Andrew Gideon" > wrote in message
...
>
> I erred in contacting Cape Approach (while airborne) for a clearance
> recently. The controller - correctly - directed me to the CD frequency.
> I should have known better.
>
> He was reasonably friendly about it, explaining that he didn't have time
> to read a clearance. That was far more than I needed; just the reminder
> to contact CD would have been enough.
>

Where's the error? If you're airborne and requesting a previously filed
popup CD is not the proper frequency to call.

[B A R R Y]

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 11:36:02 -0400, Andrew Gideon >
wrote:
>
>I'll even get flight following for maneuver practice in our local practice
>area. Why doesn't everyone; it's just an extra pair of eyes and there's
>no extra charge (at least for now {8^) ?

I always wondered that myself. An extra bonus is the occasional
humor heard on the radio. <G>

FWIW, I was back a PVD last week, and clearance delivery was happy to
hook me up with a FF on the ground. Once they gave me an IFR-style
VFR departure clearance, I just needed to tell ground that I had
picked up a VFR departure clearance, as they questioned why I wasn't
squawking 1200 on initial call-up. For those who don't go there,
Providence is one of those airports that requests transponders "on"
while taxiing, vs. switching it on just prior to departure.

[Newps]

B A R R Y wrote:
For those who don't go there,
> Providence is one of those airports that requests transponders "on"
> while taxiing, vs. switching it on just prior to departure.


There's never a reason to have the transponder on any other setting than
ALT, unless otherwise directed by ATC.

[B A R R Y]

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:12:04 -0600, Newps > wrote:

>
>There's never a reason to have the transponder on any other setting than
>ALT, unless otherwise directed by ATC.

I know. <G> It is on ALT when normally responding, ON is usually
for bad mode C responses. My miscommunication!

I was referring to transpoding vs. not transponding while taxiing.
Some of the Charlie and Bravo space I visit has equipment that reads
transponder codes on the ground. PVD ground knew the minute I
mentioned my parked cargo ramp location that I was not squawking 1200.

[Newps]

B A R R Y wrote:

> On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:12:04 -0600, Newps > wrote:
>
>
>>There's never a reason to have the transponder on any other setting than
>>ALT, unless otherwise directed by ATC.
>
>
> I know. <G> It is on ALT when normally responding, ON is usually
> for bad mode C responses. My miscommunication!
>
> I was referring to transpoding vs. not transponding while taxiing.
> Some of the Charlie and Bravo space I visit has equipment that reads
> transponder codes on the ground. PVD ground knew the minute I
> mentioned my parked cargo ramp location that I was not squawking 1200.


All ATC facilities have the ability to see transponders at any altitude.
All ATC facilities also have software to inhibit the display of
replies so the radar display doesn't get cluttered up on the airport.
You took my response to be only while flying. I meant it all inclusive.
There's never a reason to have your transponder on any other setting
than ALT, unless otherwise directed by ATC.

[Don Poitras]

Newps > wrote:

> All ATC facilities have the ability to see transponders at any altitude.
> All ATC facilities also have software to inhibit the display of
> replies so the radar display doesn't get cluttered up on the airport.
> You took my response to be only while flying. I meant it all inclusive.
> There's never a reason to have your transponder on any other setting
> than ALT, unless otherwise directed by ATC.

How about to avoid the ****y tone in their request to turn it off 10
seconds after landing?

--
Don Poitras

[Dan Luke[_2_]]

"Don Poitras" wrote:

it all inclusive.
>> There's never a reason to have your transponder on any other setting
>> than ALT, unless otherwise directed by ATC.
>
> How about to avoid the ****y tone in their request to turn it off 10
> seconds after landing?


Never heard that, and I never turn mine off ALT.


Where'd you get bitched at?

--
Dan
T-182T at BFM

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Newps wrote:
>
> All ATC facilities have the ability to see transponders at any altitude.
> All ATC facilities also have software to inhibit the display of replies
> so the radar display doesn't get cluttered up on the airport.

I did not know that. Thanks!

[Newps]

Don Poitras wrote:

> Newps > wrote:
>
>
>>All ATC facilities have the ability to see transponders at any altitude.
>> All ATC facilities also have software to inhibit the display of
>>replies so the radar display doesn't get cluttered up on the airport.
>>You took my response to be only while flying. I meant it all inclusive.
>> There's never a reason to have your transponder on any other setting
>>than ALT, unless otherwise directed by ATC.
>
>
> How about to avoid the ****y tone in their request to turn it off 10
> seconds after landing?


Why would ATC tell you to turn it off shortly after landing? There's no
reason for that. Tell him to properly set up his ARTS software.

[Mike Isaksen]

"Dan Luke" wrote ...
> Never heard that, and I never turn mine off ALT.

Hi Dan,
Now that you got one of them there "fancy pants" airplanes <G>, does it turn
the ALT on and off for you automatically?

[Dennis Johnson]

Newps,

I've always found your postings here helpful and a valuable perspective on
the air traffic control system. I'm not disputing the wisdom of your
suggestion to have the transponder in the "ALT" position whenever it's on,
including while on the ground, but the AIM says,

4-1-19 a.3. ...transponders should be adjusted to the "on" or normal
operating position as late as practicable prior to takeoff and to "off" or
"standby" as soon as practicable after completing landing roll...

I know the AIM is not regulatory, but I often find comfort in following its
suggestions in the hope that it represents genuinely good advice. Do you
think that this passage from the AIM represents outdated policy that is no
longer relevant?

Thanks,
Dennis

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Dennis Johnson wrote:
> Newps,
>
> I've always found your postings here helpful and a valuable
> perspective on the air traffic control system. I'm not disputing the
> wisdom of your suggestion to have the transponder in the "ALT"
> position whenever it's on, including while on the ground, but the AIM
> says,
> 4-1-19 a.3. ...transponders should be adjusted to the "on" or normal
> operating position as late as practicable prior to takeoff and to
> "off" or "standby" as soon as practicable after completing landing
> roll...
> I know the AIM is not regulatory, but I often find comfort in
> following its suggestions in the hope that it represents genuinely
> good advice. Do you think that this passage from the AIM represents
> outdated policy that is no longer relevant?
>
> Thanks,
> Dennis

The AIM statement and having the Xponder set to ALT when it is on are not
counter to one another.

[Newps]

Dennis Johnson wrote:
> Newps,
>
> I've always found your postings here helpful and a valuable perspective on
> the air traffic control system. I'm not disputing the wisdom of your
> suggestion to have the transponder in the "ALT" position whenever it's on,
> including while on the ground, but the AIM says,
>
> 4-1-19 a.3. ...transponders should be adjusted to the "on" or normal
> operating position as late as practicable prior to takeoff and to "off" or
> "standby" as soon as practicable after completing landing roll...
>
> I know the AIM is not regulatory, but I often find comfort in following its
> suggestions in the hope that it represents genuinely good advice. Do you
> think that this passage from the AIM represents outdated policy that is no
> longer relevant?

Yes. I know that to be the case.

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

Newps > writes:

> > I know the AIM is not regulatory, but I often find comfort in
> > following its suggestions in the hope that it represents genuinely
> > good advice. Do you think that this passage from the AIM represents
> > outdated policy that is no longer relevant?
>
> Yes. I know that to be the case.

While that may be reassuring to *some*, others have had contradictory
personal experience.

For example, I have heard from a friend who worked as a safety rep for
a major airline at a major airport. Commercial airlines have had
their TCAS system yell to go around on short final when other planes
were taxiing or holding short but with their transponders on. So the
basic guidance to turn transponders on only on runways or when
airborne was reaffirmed. (Yes, some planes filter based upon radar
altimeters. That does not work at every airport, and not all
TCAS-type systems have RAs anyway.)

- FChE

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Frank Ch. Eigler" > wrote in message
...
>
> For example, I have heard from a friend who worked as a safety rep for
> a major airline at a major airport. Commercial airlines have had
> their TCAS system yell to go around on short final when other planes
> were taxiing or holding short but with their transponders on.
>

And, oddly enough, the yelling was listened to.

[Don Poitras]

Dan Luke > wrote:

> "Don Poitras" wrote:

> it all inclusive.
> >> There's never a reason to have your transponder on any other setting
> >> than ALT, unless otherwise directed by ATC.
> >
> > How about to avoid the ****y tone in their request to turn it off 10
> > seconds after landing?


> Never heard that, and I never turn mine off ALT.


> Where'd you get bitched at?

RDU - Raleigh, NC

> --
> Dan
> T-182T at BFM



--
Don Poitras

[Dan Luke[_2_]]

"Mike Isaksen" wrote:

> "Dan Luke" wrote ...
>> Never heard that, and I never turn mine off ALT.
>
> Hi Dan,
> Now that you got one of them there "fancy pants" airplanes <G>, does it turn
> the ALT on and off for you automatically?

Uh-oh.

Now that you mention it, I believe it does.

--
Dan
T-182T at BFM

[Andrew Gideon]

On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:41:57 -0500, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

> The AIM statement and having the Xponder set to ALT when it is on are not
> counter to one another.

Hmm. I've always assumed that older transponders needed a warm up period.
Otherwise, why does STANDBY exist?

- Andrew

[[email protected]]

Andrew Gideon > wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:41:57 -0500, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

> > The AIM statement and having the Xponder set to ALT when it is on are not
> > counter to one another.

> Hmm. I've always assumed that older transponders needed a warm up period.
> Otherwise, why does STANDBY exist?

They did.

Back in the tube days the transponder took a while to warm up and
most places didn't want everyone on the ground squaking 1200 and
cluttering up their screens.

So you turned it to standby so it would be warm by the time you were
ready to take off.

These days the only tube left is the pencil tube and that's fading
into history as transponders go totally solid state.

Plus nowdays as others have mentioned ground traffic is monitored.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Andrew Gideon wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:41:57 -0500, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>
>> The AIM statement and having the Xponder set to ALT when it is on
>> are not counter to one another.
>
> Hmm. I've always assumed that older transponders needed a warm up
> period. Otherwise, why does STANDBY exist?
>
> - Andrew

They did but the new ones that don't still have the STANDBY position.

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/alt-image-lg.do?pID=124&img=productImageLarge

[Andrew Gideon]

On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:14:52 -0500, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

> They did but the new ones that don't still have the STANDBY position.

Why? Just inertia? Avoiding the need for "transition training" <laugh>?

- Andrew

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Andrew Gideon wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:14:52 -0500, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>
>> They did but the new ones that don't still have the STANDBY position.
>
> Why? Just inertia? Avoiding the need for "transition training"
> <laugh>?
>
> - Andrew

I have yet to be told by any official source that I shouldn't have the
Xponder on Stby when I'm on the ground.

[Scott[_5_]]

On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:32:45 -0400, in rec.aviation.piloting, Andrew Gideon
> wrote:

>On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:14:52 -0500, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>
>> They did but the new ones that don't still have the STANDBY position.
>
>Why? Just inertia? Avoiding the need for "transition training" <laugh>?

Never underestimate inertia. But my guess is that it brings the digital
display alive so that you can preset your squawk before going live.