New Nationwide Squawk Code

Hi Gang and Fred
If I am flying my motor glider say in the San Francisco Bay Area to
San Jose in the self powered mode should I use 1200 or 1201. Think
about it? My Stemme is a glider (axillary powered) by FAA rules and
according to this ruling I should squawk 1201. How would ATC
interpretate this? That I am an unpowered glider surely? No I will use
1200 so that they know I have power.
I wish we had a more active involvement in this decision making -
the SSA does not seem to me capable of doing a good job here. Gliders
are considered below the radar and not worth consideration by most of
the flying community - a pity.
Dave





On Apr 2, 10:42*am, Fred wrote:
SoaringNV is sponsoring a Minden Wave Camp this week. *As part of our
camp we have invited the tower controllers from Reno TRACON to talk to
us about communication with them, something we do for every camp. *We
learned, quite inadvertantly, that a nationwide transponder squawk
code has been assigned to gliders: 1201.

SO, from now on your transponder should be set to squawk 1201 anywhere
in the US (including the Reno airspace, where we have used a different
squawk code by agreement between PASCO and the controllers.)

Please use 1201 squawk code in your glider transponder.

Fred LaSor
SoaringNV
775 790-4314
Minden, NV

Dave asks a good question here. He and I discussed this in the hangar
before he posted it, and I didn't have a good answer then. After
giving it more thought I tend to lean in favor of 1200 because he is
flying in airspace where gliders are not a common experience (into and
out of San Jose's busy airspace) and he can maneuver differently than
I am able to do in a Duo Discus -- which I wouldn't fly into San Jose
or the Bay Area in any case.

But I'd be interested in other thoughts on this question.

Fred LaSor
SoaringNV
Minden, NV

On Apr 3, 8:58*am, Fred wrote:
Dave asks a good question here. He and I discussed this in the hangar
before he posted it, and I didn't have a good answer then. *After
giving it more thought I tend to lean in favor of 1200 because he is
flying in airspace where gliders are not a common experience (into and
out of San Jose's busy airspace) and he can maneuver differently than
I am able to do in a Duo Discus -- which I wouldn't fly into San Jose
or the Bay Area in any case.

But I'd be interested in other thoughts on this question.

Fred LaSor
SoaringNV
Minden, NV

Did I not just read in the FAA rules Code 1201 if not in contact with
ATC, which would mean in many cases that
we stay with 1200 as long as we take off at controlled airports or
similar. Leaving the area we might report switching to
1201??? ......Awaiting a possible question about that code? This
would apply to many motorgliders.

Dieter, Stemme S10V

On Apr 5, 8:32*am, soarski wrote:
On Apr 3, 8:58*am, Fred wrote:

Dave asks a good question here. He and I discussed this in the hangar
before he posted it, and I didn't have a good answer then. *After
giving it more thought I tend to lean in favor of 1200 because he is
flying in airspace where gliders are not a common experience (into and
out of San Jose's busy airspace) and he can maneuver differently than
I am able to do in a Duo Discus -- which I wouldn't fly into San Jose
or the Bay Area in any case.

But I'd be interested in other thoughts on this question.

Fred LaSor
SoaringNV
Minden, NV

Did I not just read in the FAA rules Code 1201 if not in contact with
ATC, which would mean in many cases that
we stay with 1200 as long as we take off at controlled airports or
similar. Leaving the area we might report switching to
1201??? *......Awaiting a possible question about that *code? *This
would apply to many motorgliders.

Dieter, Stemme S10V

This may be confusing the matter more than it needs to be. Putting
aside the question about motorgliders, "in contact with ATC" in this
case implies a facility with/providing radar services, i.e. situations
in which you were on a flight plan or flight following and would be
assigned a discrete squawk code, if you are just taking off say from a
typical Class D airport you are not receiving radar services.

Darryl

This morning, I got the call from our local FSDO about the upcoming
ramp inspection for my Experimental/Exhibition/Racing glider (see
other threads). At the end of our discussion, I asked him if he knew
of the new discrete transponder code for gliders and whether it was
being implemented locally in Arizona. I know this isn't their
department, but thought I might as well ask. In any event, no-one at
the Scottsdale FSDO has heard about it.

Tucson TRACON has previously issued Tucson Soaring Club the discrete
code of 0400 and we will be following up with them to see if we should
keep it or change to 1201.

Mike

On Apr 6, 9:34*am, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Apr 5, 8:32*am, soarski wrote:





On Apr 3, 8:58*am, Fred wrote:

Dave asks a good question here. He and I discussed this in the hangar
before he posted it, and I didn't have a good answer then. *After
giving it more thought I tend to lean in favor of 1200 because he is
flying in airspace where gliders are not a common experience (into and
out of San Jose's busy airspace) and he can maneuver differently than
I am able to do in a Duo Discus -- which I wouldn't fly into San Jose
or the Bay Area in any case.

But I'd be interested in other thoughts on this question.

Fred LaSor
SoaringNV
Minden, NV

Did I not just read in the FAA rules Code 1201 if not in contact with
ATC, which would mean in many cases that
we stay with 1200 as long as we take off at controlled airports or
similar. Leaving the area we might report switching to
1201??? *......Awaiting a possible question about that *code? *This
would apply to many motorgliders.

Dieter, Stemme S10V

This may be confusing the matter more than it needs to be. Putting
aside the question about motorgliders, "in contact with ATC" in this
case implies a facility with/providing radar services, i.e. situations
in which you were on a flight plan or flight following and would be
assigned a discrete squawk code, if you are just taking off say from a
typical Class D airport you are not receiving radar services

Darryl- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Not quite so....Initially when I flew my S10 out of my airport, I did
not turn on my Transponder since I did not have to and do not have the
batteries for it. One day testing it, the tower found out that I had
one and pleaded to at least have it on while under power, since we
have an incredible amount of jet traffic here. They are very
appreciative about it. I am never on a flightplan or am asigned my own
code, just 1200! Tower controlers hardly look outside anymore, they
depend on their screens. Happily will point out traffic etc. I do not
see a big deal about all this. Remember Gliders do not need a TXponder
yet. So If one is used in a glider, you have a choice now, 1200 or
1201. If you use the later, it will help who ever is looking at you.
Wait till all of us have to use Mode S....Then ATC will know who you
are no matter what you are squaking including your phone #. Some
wheels turn slower than others, nothing to get exited about.
Most likely by the end of summer, leaving the local airspace, tower
might say as I climb thru 15000... You may squak 1201 now. If I am
behind Capitol Peak he wont see me anymore anyway, but some "fast
Heavy" arriving from the west
will or may not, depending what stage of the game my transponder and
my batteries are in.
BTW Tower and approach control is ATC also

soarski

Dave:

It irks me a bit that you would sling rocks at SSA on this topic.

We wouldn't have this option of a nationwide, glider TXP code if it
weren't
for SSA asking for it.

If you want to fault us for not knowing when FAA finally enacted this
(eight years after the request began, and through several followup
inquiries,
and them enacting it in a publication where we didn't quite expect),
then
perhaps that makes you feel better.

And like many things legislative for gliders, all soaring pilots will
benefit from this whether or not they happen to be SSA members.
If folks find value from our efforts, maybe they will please renew
their
memberships in SSA.
I appreciate that someone(anyone) shared the information that this did
hit the street, as I don't spend every dark night trolling through
new federal publications . . . .

IMMEDIATELY - SSA provided informational guidance to members
through a news item on their web page. And the same guidance was
sent out to SSA Directors to share into the local levels.

I think it is appropriate that you use 1200 when you are 'acting' like
a powered piece of air traffic. When you transition to a soaring
activity and are more distant from downtown, you might like to
switch to a 1201 code use to enhance our 'visibility' as a
sailplane operation in the entire aviation/ATC community with your
very capable machine.

That would be an additional service to soaring.
(Now I'm headed back out to fly some wave lift.)

Sincerely,
Cindy B
Region 12 SSA Director



On Apr 2, 8:59*pm, kd6veb wrote:
Hi Gang and Fred
* If I am flying my motor glider say in the San Francisco Bay Area to
San Jose in the self powered mode should I use 1200 or 1201. Think
about it? My Stemme is a glider (axillary powered) by FAA rules and
according to this ruling I should squawk 1201. How would ATC
interpretate this? That I am an unpowered glider surely? No I will use
1200 so that they know I have power.
* I wish we had a more active involvement in this decision making -
the SSA does not seem to me capable of doing a good job here. Gliders
are considered below the radar and not worth consideration by most of
the flying community - a pity.
Dave

I think Cindy and the other unpaid volunteers are doing a great job.

However, why is the SSA relying upon unpaid volunteers for this type of
work? Can't the SSA hire a professional with contacts at the FAA to
deal with the FAA? Maybe pay AOPA to use one of their people part time?

The SSA has no problem paying employees to fulfill tee shirt orders, but
no money to pay someone to deal with the FAA?



On 4/3/2010 12:30 PM, CindyB wrote:

Dave:

It irks me a bit that you would sling rocks at SSA on this topic.

We wouldn't have this option of a nationwide, glider TXP code if it
weren't
for SSA asking for it.

If you want to fault us for not knowing when FAA finally enacted this
(eight years after the request began, and through several followup
inquiries,
and them enacting it in a publication where we didn't quite expect),
then
perhaps that makes you feel better.

And like many things legislative for gliders, all soaring pilots will
benefit from this whether or not they happen to be SSA members.
If folks find value from our efforts, maybe they will please renew
their
memberships in SSA.
I appreciate that someone(anyone) shared the information that this did
hit the street, as I don't spend every dark night trolling through
new federal publications . . . .

IMMEDIATELY - SSA provided informational guidance to members
through a news item on their web page. And the same guidance was
sent out to SSA Directors to share into the local levels.

I think it is appropriate that you use 1200 when you are 'acting' like
a powered piece of air traffic. When you transition to a soaring
activity and are more distant from downtown, you might like to
switch to a 1201 code use to enhance our 'visibility' as a
sailplane operation in the entire aviation/ATC community with your
very capable machine.

That would be an additional service to soaring.
(Now I'm headed back out to fly some wave lift.)

Sincerely,
Cindy B
Region 12 SSA Director



On Apr 2, 8:59 pm, wrote:
Hi Gang and Fred
If I am flying my motor glider say in the San Francisco Bay Area to
San Jose in the self powered mode should I use 1200 or 1201. Think
about it? My Stemme is a glider (axillary powered) by FAA rules and
according to this ruling I should squawk 1201. How would ATC
interpretate this? That I am an unpowered glider surely? No I will use
1200 so that they know I have power.
I wish we had a more active involvement in this decision making -
the SSA does not seem to me capable of doing a good job here. Gliders
are considered below the radar and not worth consideration by most of
the flying community - a pity.
Dave

This is a classic example of why we should have a formal relationship
with AOPA, so that we can leverage their expertise in governmental
relations and other areas, where we will never have the kind of
resources that they do. In addition, having our headquarters in the
middle of nowhere can't help matters.

Mike Schumann


On 4/3/2010 3:45 PM, Greg Arnold wrote:
I think Cindy and the other unpaid volunteers are doing a great job.

However, why is the SSA relying upon unpaid volunteers for this type of
work? Can't the SSA hire a professional with contacts at the FAA to deal
with the FAA? Maybe pay AOPA to use one of their people part time?

The SSA has no problem paying employees to fulfill tee shirt orders, but
no money to pay someone to deal with the FAA?



On 4/3/2010 12:30 PM, CindyB wrote:

Dave:

It irks me a bit that you would sling rocks at SSA on this topic.

We wouldn't have this option of a nationwide, glider TXP code if it
weren't
for SSA asking for it.

If you want to fault us for not knowing when FAA finally enacted this
(eight years after the request began, and through several followup
inquiries,
and them enacting it in a publication where we didn't quite expect),
then
perhaps that makes you feel better.

And like many things legislative for gliders, all soaring pilots will
benefit from this whether or not they happen to be SSA members.
If folks find value from our efforts, maybe they will please renew
their
memberships in SSA.
I appreciate that someone(anyone) shared the information that this did
hit the street, as I don't spend every dark night trolling through
new federal publications . . . .

IMMEDIATELY - SSA provided informational guidance to members
through a news item on their web page. And the same guidance was
sent out to SSA Directors to share into the local levels.

I think it is appropriate that you use 1200 when you are 'acting' like
a powered piece of air traffic. When you transition to a soaring
activity and are more distant from downtown, you might like to
switch to a 1201 code use to enhance our 'visibility' as a
sailplane operation in the entire aviation/ATC community with your
very capable machine.

That would be an additional service to soaring.
(Now I'm headed back out to fly some wave lift.)

Sincerely,
Cindy B
Region 12 SSA Director



On Apr 2, 8:59 pm, wrote:
Hi Gang and Fred
If I am flying my motor glider say in the San Francisco Bay Area to
San Jose in the self powered mode should I use 1200 or 1201. Think
about it? My Stemme is a glider (axillary powered) by FAA rules and
according to this ruling I should squawk 1201. How would ATC
interpretate this? That I am an unpowered glider surely? No I will use
1200 so that they know I have power.
I wish we had a more active involvement in this decision making -
the SSA does not seem to me capable of doing a good job here. Gliders
are considered below the radar and not worth consideration by most of
the flying community - a pity.
Dave






--
Mike Schumann

Mike Schumann wrote:
This is a classic example of why we should have a formal relationship
with AOPA, so that we can leverage their expertise in governmental
relations and other areas, where we will never have the kind of
resources that they do. In addition, having our headquarters in the
middle of nowhere can't help matters.

Mike Schumann
Do we know that AOPA was aware of these code allocations? I'm an AOPA
member, and I'm not aware of any notification of the AOPA members. A
search of their site for " National Beacon Code Allocation Plan" finds
results only in the AIM:Chapter 4, but that section doesn't mention
1201; searching for JO 7110.66D found no result. A Google search for JO
7110.66D finds it only on the FAA site.

"having our headquarters in the middle of nowhere can't help matters"

But it WILL hurt to move it to a different location, so, as long as it
doesn't hurt, no problem. This was a matter that could be handled by
telephone, letter, email or the web, but somehow, despite sustained
contact over many years by several SSA people, the SSA people were not
notified of the eventual "allocation". And, apparently, neither have all
the ATC people been informed of the situation and how to handle it.
Oddly, the people that did know about it, and will interact with it the
most - Reno ATC - didn't bother to contact anyone either, while gliders
continued to fly around using 0440!

I say "Thanks to the SSA folks", and shame on someone in the FAA for
their oversight.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (netto to net to email me)

- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz