Feds Want to Equipe Gliders With Transponders and Radios

On Thu, 1 May 2008 15:09:03 -0500, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote in
:


"Gig 601Xl Builder" wrote in message
om...

How TSA sees things is also not a problem to ATC.

It is if the TSA has more stroke than the FAA and the TSA does.


How so?


If TSA and FAA are both under DOT, DOT will dictate policy I would
guess.

On May 1, 9:41 am, Michael Ash wrote:
So just remove the exemption at and above 10,000 MSL.

This is precisely what is being proposed. I don't understand why anything
else is even being discussed.

A 3,000' tow at my club will go just a hair over 10K.

-Tom

"5Z" wrote in message
...
On May 1, 9:41 am, Michael Ash wrote:
So just remove the exemption at and above 10,000 MSL.

This is precisely what is being proposed. I don't understand why anything
else is even being discussed.

A 3,000' tow at my club will go just a hair over 10K.

-Tom

Yep, we do little soaring below 10,000' - big rocks tend to get in the way.

Bill D

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

If TSA and FAA are both under DOT, DOT will dictate policy I would guess.


TSA is in DHS, DHS does not dictate ATC policy.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Gig 601Xl Builder" wrote in message
m...
How TSA sees things is also not a problem to ATC.
It is if the TSA has more stroke than the FAA and the TSA does.


How so?




Are you asking about stoke or if it is a problem to ATC?

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Thu, 1 May 2008 15:09:03 -0500, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote in
:

"Gig 601Xl Builder" wrote in message
m...
How TSA sees things is also not a problem to ATC.
It is if the TSA has more stroke than the FAA and the TSA does.

How so?


If TSA and FAA are both under DOT, DOT will dictate policy I would
guess.

TSA is DHS not DOT.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
If TSA and FAA are both under DOT, DOT will dictate policy I would guess.


TSA is in DHS, DHS does not dictate ATC policy.



No the POTUS does and he probably listens to DHS more than DOT.

"Gig 601Xl Builder" wrote in message
m...

Are you asking about stoke or if it is a problem to ATC?


I'm asking how TSA's view of things is a problem to ATC.

"Gig 601Xl Builder" wrote in message
m...

TSA is in DHS, DHS does not dictate ATC policy.

No the POTUS does and he probably listens to DHS more than DOT.


What ATC policies have been dictated by the POTUS? Why would the POTUS rely
on DHS for ATC policy over DOT? Would he rely on DOT over DHS on security
matters?

Don't they also intend to require a mode C transponder inside class B "veils"?

A reading of
Remove the glider exemptions from the Federal Aviation Regulations
that pertain to transponder requirements and use.

would seem to imply that. There are a lot of people ( like me ) operating underneath class Bs


Sarah


Michael Ash wrote:
In rec.aviation.soaring Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
I agree. But rescinding the glider exemption from FARs requiring
transponder use won't address that issue with powered aircraft that
lack an electrical system either. It looks like the FAA's response to
this NTSB recommendation is destined to be a compromise at best.
Hopefully it won't result in all gliders and aircraft without
electrical systems being grounded until they have transponders
installed and signed off.
So just remove the exemption at and above 10,000 MSL.

This is precisely what is being proposed. I don't understand why anything
else is even being discussed.

Note that requiring all gliders flying above 10,000MSL to be
transponder-equipped would still result in a large amount of either
expense or restrictions on flying for a large proportion of the
glider-flying population.