View Single Post
  #4  
Old April 28th 08, 07:44 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.soaring
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,953
Default Feds Want to Equipe Gliders With Transponders and Radios

On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 23:24:48 -0700 (PDT), sisu1a
wrote in
:

[radar corner reflector suggestion snipped]


That sounds like a very simple, inexpensive and effective solution to
the issue. Best of all, the pilot can't turn it off. :-)


Unfortunately too simple. The problem is NOT ATC's equipment having
trouble painting a glider. The problem is the threshold of sensitivity
on their radars is set far too high to display us since they
intentionally filter out things as slow as a glider, particularly if
it's thermalling. We are simply filtered out as clutter (according to
the rep Reno sent to address PASCO last winter).


Perhaps it would be possible to modify ATC procedures or display
software to overcome that issue. That would certainly be preferable
to requiring electrical systems be installed in all gliders.

That said, I'm sure we don't all read the same on radar, but gliders
are not the stealth aircraft they are being made out to be. I believe
cockpit alone has a rather large signature,


What is there in the glider cockpit of a typical glass ship that
reflects radar energy? I suppose the instruments are metal, and some
of the control linkage and gear are metallic, but I would expect the
corner reflector to provide a much stronger return.

unless of course you paid the extra $1,000,000 for the one molecule
thick layer of electrically deposited gold on your canopy. There's
more to a stealth aircraft then it being made of fiberglass, or even
carbon...

Paul


I would think carbon-fiber composite would be nearly as reflective to
radar energy as aluminum.

The issue in equipping gliders with transponders, the way I see it, is
the high power consumption required by transponders. Here's a typical
glider transponder: http://www.airplanegear.com/becker.htm
It seems to draw 175W to 250W. That's not insignificant, and way more
than the comm radio consumes. Then there's the weight and antenna
that reduce performance, not to mention the cost of the equipment,
installation, and maintenance.