service terminated squawk 1200

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message oups.com...
I'm curious how important it really is to punch in 1200 as soon as the
controller instructs squawk 1200 as you approach for landing at an
uncontrolled field. I've always blown it off and just landed with my
original code. My thinking is 1) Of the things I need to do to
configure for landing, watch for traffic, get the plane slowed down,
etc this is way, way down on my important to-do list 2) What the heck
can ATC care anyway, are they going to reuse that code in the next 2
minutes 3) If something did happen to me, maybe they'd have a better
radar track if I'm still on the old code??

Im just curious from controllers how important is this change in code
before landing.

-Robert, CFI


Squawk standby....

I don't think they care. When coming home with VFR flight following, sometimes
approach control will tell me to squeak 1200 and some times they don't. The only
time the tower tells me to squawk 1200 is if I stay in the pattern.

On 13 Jun 2006 08:35:04 -0700, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:

I'm curious how important it really is to punch in 1200 as soon as the
controller instructs squawk 1200 as you approach for landing at an
uncontrolled field. I've always blown it off and just landed with my
original code. My thinking is 1) Of the things I need to do to
configure for landing, watch for traffic, get the plane slowed down,
etc this is way, way down on my important to-do list 2) What the heck
can ATC care anyway, are they going to reuse that code in the next 2
minutes 3) If something did happen to me, maybe they'd have a better
radar track if I'm still on the old code??

Im just curious from controllers how important is this change in code
before landing.

-Robert, CFI

GeorgeC

Robert M. Gary wrote:
I'm curious how important it really is to punch in 1200 as soon as the
controller instructs squawk 1200 as you approach for landing at an
uncontrolled field. I've always blown it off and just landed with my
original code.

You're violating FAR 91.123(b) by not complying with his instruction.

Brien K. Meehan wrote:

You're violating FAR 91.123(b) by not complying with his instruction.


Unless diverting your attention compromises safety of flight at the
moment, which means the PIC decides what's important.

Since I can hear the replies being typed already, I will add that the
instruction should be complied with at the first opportunity.

When they terminate service and say squawk VFR/1200 the
discrete code they had you using is released. It could be
assigned to another aircraft within the area, that could
cause trouble.
What is important to remember, you just were dumped with
zero traffic advisories and you should be looking outside.
Good pilots can tune their radios/transponders without
looking, just count the clicks.

The issue of squawk code changes is more important on
departures from radar service areas and the caution about no
traffic advisories is still the most important issue.

A reasonable time to make such a code change is 1-2 minutes
IMHO.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Brien K. Meehan" wrote in message
oups.com...
| Robert M. Gary wrote:
| I'm curious how important it really is to punch in 1200
as soon as the
| controller instructs squawk 1200 as you approach for
landing at an
| uncontrolled field. I've always blown it off and just
landed with my
| original code.
|
| You're violating FAR 91.123(b) by not complying with his
instruction.
|

I thought that if you didn't instantly punch in 1200 that ATC could do
something that would cause your plane to crash... Am I wrong? ;-)

Jon Kraus
'79 Mooney 201
4443H @ UMP

Robert M. Gary wrote:

I'm curious how important it really is to punch in 1200 as soon as the
controller instructs squawk 1200 as you approach for landing at an
uncontrolled field. I've always blown it off and just landed with my
original code. My thinking is 1) Of the things I need to do to
configure for landing, watch for traffic, get the plane slowed down,
etc this is way, way down on my important to-do list 2) What the heck
can ATC care anyway, are they going to reuse that code in the next 2
minutes 3) If something did happen to me, maybe they'd have a better
radar track if I'm still on the old code??

Im just curious from controllers how important is this change in code
before landing.

-Robert, CFI

"Jon Kraus" wrote in message
. ..

I thought that if you didn't instantly punch in 1200 that ATC could do
something that would cause your plane to crash... Am I wrong? ;-)


Nope.

I thought that if you didn't instantly punch in 1200 that ATC could do something that would cause your plane to crash... Am I wrong? ;-)

I don't understand. Don't they punch 1200 for you? I mean, they're
=controllers=, right?

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jon Kraus wrote:
I thought that if you didn't instantly punch in 1200 that ATC could do
something that would cause your plane to crash... Am I wrong? ;-)

Not following the instruction allows Stephen M., and the other ATC
folks, to take full control, leaving you riding in a UAV. G

We wrap our avionics in tin foil to protect them from ATC control.