(USA) NTSB issues recommendations to the FAA and the SSA regarding transponder use in gliders

If you read the NPRM for ADS-B, you'll remember that you cannot even get
above 10K MSL without ADS-B regardless of the aircraft, glider, balloon,
lawn chair... makes no matter.

So Transponders now, and ADS-B later.

BT


"Greg Arnold" wrote in message
...
I see they want to require transponders in all gliders, with the
transponders always on.

On Mar 31, 8:10 pm, "BT" wrote:
If you read the NPRM for ADS-B, you'll remember that you cannot even get
above 10K MSL without ADS-B regardless of the aircraft, glider, balloon,
lawn chair... makes no matter.

So Transponders now, and ADS-B later.

BT

"Greg Arnold" wrote in message

...

I see they want to require transponders in all gliders, with the
transponders always on.

Assuming transponders become mandatory in gliders, what concerns me
most is that we may find that folks may not be willing to install
transponders in their ships. This might be especially true in older
gliders that may have a value of anywhere from $5K to perhaps $ 15 or
20K. I can see folks selling their gliders (perhaps to overseas
buyers) and giving up on the sport. We are having enough trouble
growing the sport and I'm afraid this could really hurt soaring in the
US.

Some clubs, operating on the edge, might fold as they may have to
install transponders in every 1-26 and 2-33. They may be unwilling to
comply, and as a result, disband. I am a realist and I do understand
the concerns of the NTSB, but this potential new requirement, though
not unexpected, could really have an adverse effect on soaring
operations in the US.........

I know of at least a couple soaring operations that would not only
have the expense of buying and installing transponders, but batteries,
electrical harnesses, and chargers as well.

Not one of the gliders I ever trained in had batteries, or a place to
put one!

2NO

Good report. I think transponders will be necessary, and a good
thing. Remember, it just makes them required above 10,000' or in the
Class B 30 mile veil, not everywhere - just like everybody else! I
would guess that most (not all, unfortunately) training flights would
be outside the airspace where xponders would be needed.

The cost issue? We pay almost 2K$ for parachutes, glider computers
are over 2K$, etc. It just follows the trend of the sport - it isn't
cheap flying anymore (unless you stay below 10k ft). If you want to
run with the big dogs, etc..

Batteries? I would think the new technology (Nimh, etc) would allow
an Xponder to be powered all day. A non-issue, IMHO.

I just got my PCAS, so I can see the other VFR traffic (that isn't
talking to ATC but has to have a transponder), and a transponder is
next (when I figure out where to stick it in my panel).

Or, as MasterCard would put it:

Transponder and installation: $3000

Fancy battery to power said transponder: $100

Watching the Southwest 737 jinking out of your way as you core a 12
knot thermal just outside Phoenix's Class B airspace: Priceless!

Kirk
66

On Apr 1, 6:48 am, wrote:
Good report. I think transponders will be necessary, and a good
thing. Remember, it just makes them required above 10,000' or in the
Class B 30 mile veil, not everywhere - just like everybody else! I
would guess that most (not all, unfortunately) training flights would
be outside the airspace where xponders would be needed.

The cost issue? We pay almost 2K$ for parachutes, glider computers
are over 2K$, etc. It just follows the trend of the sport - it isn't
cheap flying anymore (unless you stay below 10k ft). If you want to
run with the big dogs, etc..

Batteries? I would think the new technology (Nimh, etc) would allow
an Xponder to be powered all day. A non-issue, IMHO.

I just got my PCAS, so I can see the other VFR traffic (that isn't
talking to ATC but has to have a transponder), and a transponder is
next (when I figure out where to stick it in my panel).

Or, as MasterCard would put it:

Transponder and installation: $3000

Fancy battery to power said transponder: $100

Watching the Southwest 737 jinking out of your way as you core a 12
knot thermal just outside Phoenix's Class B airspace: Priceless!

Kirk
66

I also don't see the problem with this. We knew it was coming, like
what else could the NTSB possibly do? They politically just can't not
take action, leave things how they are and hope that airliner
collision does not happen. I thought the letters were well written and
appropriate and I support the FAA removing the transponder exemption.

So a local N. Califonia/Nevada rant: I've seen/heard transponders work
at Reno with traffic being diverted and I've had a close call with a
GA aircraft that also convinced me that for where I fly the
combination of a transponder first and a PCAS second are useful tools.
And in our area it is not just Reno, I also fly south of the San
Francisco Bay Area and we have heavy traffic going overhead into San
Jose who are oblivious to gliders being in the area, an issue on wave
days when we get up to their altitudes. Many of the popular XC routes
also cross several VORs and there is lots of GA traffic in the area at
all altitudes flying radials into those VORs (the ones with student
pilots in them with a IFR visor on worry me most). PCAS and Tansponder
helps with these.

The Sacramento Delta area near Travis AFB is another problem area,
where gliders fly close to or occasionally cross the Sacramento delta.
Travis AFB is the busiest military airlift operation in the USA, it
does operate on weekends at times (unlike the sectional implies) and
heavy/fast military aircraft operate outside of the marked danger zone
and there are lots of transiting GA traffic *and* Travis approach who
provide ATC services for civilian traffic in the area (a much larger
area than the Travis alert area on the sectional) are completely blind
to all non-transponder equipped aircraft to their south east because
of radar reflections from electric power windmills on the ground. I
have found Travis approach to be very easy to work with and happy to
have gliders with transponders on flight following, and they seem to
get we are gliders (they will also take position reports from non-
transponder equipped gliders). The requirement above 10,000 feet or
the 30nm veil won't require gliders in this area to have transponders
but hopefully most folk in the area are already aware of the issues.

Flying last weekend many of the gliders had transponders and Zaon MRX
(seems Santa has been kind to some pilots) and it is great to hear the
enhanced awareness on the radio as people check off who else is close
to them. Yes they all are just tools and your mileage may vary, and
again the biggest thing is not destroying the sport overnight by
taking out an airliner.

Darryl

On Apr 1, 9:33 am, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Apr 1, 6:48 am, wrote:



Good report. I think transponders will be necessary, and a good
thing. Remember, it just makes them required above 10,000' or in the
Class B 30 mile veil, not everywhere - just like everybody else! I
would guess that most (not all, unfortunately) training flights would
be outside the airspace where xponders would be needed.

The cost issue? We pay almost 2K$ for parachutes, glider computers
are over 2K$, etc. It just follows the trend of the sport - it isn't
cheap flying anymore (unless you stay below 10k ft). If you want to
run with the big dogs, etc..

Batteries? I would think the new technology (Nimh, etc) would allow
an Xponder to be powered all day. A non-issue, IMHO.

I just got my PCAS, so I can see the other VFR traffic (that isn't
talking to ATC but has to have a transponder), and a transponder is
next (when I figure out where to stick it in my panel).

Or, as MasterCard would put it:

Transponder and installation: $3000

Fancy battery to power said transponder: $100

Watching the Southwest 737 jinking out of your way as you core a 12
knot thermal just outside Phoenix's Class B airspace: Priceless!

Kirk
66

I also don't see the problem with this. We knew it was coming, like
what else could the NTSB possibly do? They politically just can't not
take action, leave things how they are and hope that airliner
collision does not happen. I thought the letters were well written and
appropriate and I support the FAA removing the transponder exemption.

So a local N. Califonia/Nevada rant: I've seen/heard transponders work
at Reno with traffic being diverted and I've had a close call with a
GA aircraft that also convinced me that for where I fly the
combination of a transponder first and a PCAS second are useful tools.
And in our area it is not just Reno, I also fly south of the San
Francisco Bay Area and we have heavy traffic going overhead into San
Jose who are oblivious to gliders being in the area, an issue on wave
days when we get up to their altitudes. Many of the popular XC routes
also cross several VORs and there is lots of GA traffic in the area at
all altitudes flying radials into those VORs (the ones with student
pilots in them with a IFR visor on worry me most). PCAS and Tansponder
helps with these.

The Sacramento Delta area near Travis AFB is another problem area,
where gliders fly close to or occasionally cross the Sacramento delta.
Travis AFB is the busiest military airlift operation in the USA, it
does operate on weekends at times (unlike the sectional implies) and
heavy/fast military aircraft operate outside of the marked danger zone
and there are lots of transiting GA traffic *and* Travis approach who
provide ATC services for civilian traffic in the area (a much larger
area than the Travis alert area on the sectional) are completely blind
to all non-transponder equipped aircraft to their south east because
of radar reflections from electric power windmills on the ground. I
have found Travis approach to be very easy to work with and happy to
have gliders with transponders on flight following, and they seem to
get we are gliders (they will also take position reports from non-
transponder equipped gliders). The requirement above 10,000 feet or
the 30nm veil won't require gliders in this area to have transponders
but hopefully most folk in the area are already aware of the issues.

Flying last weekend many of the gliders had transponders and Zaon MRX
(seems Santa has been kind to some pilots) and it is great to hear the
enhanced awareness on the radio as people check off who else is close
to them. Yes they all are just tools and your mileage may vary, and
again the biggest thing is not destroying the sport overnight by
taking out an airliner.

Darryl

While heading off topic, I just checked the latest San Francisco
sectional chart and the warning about radar visibility only for
transponder equipped aircraft south east of Travis AFB is now on the
sectional. Travis AFB has been working with the FAA for a while to get
this warning on the sectional, good on them for doing so.

Darryl

my club is inside the 30nm veil.. as are two other locations around PHX
BT

wrote in message
...
Good report. I think transponders will be necessary, and a good
thing. Remember, it just makes them required above 10,000' or in the
Class B 30 mile veil, not everywhere - just like everybody else! I
would guess that most (not all, unfortunately) training flights would
be outside the airspace where xponders would be needed.

The cost issue? We pay almost 2K$ for parachutes, glider computers
are over 2K$, etc. It just follows the trend of the sport - it isn't
cheap flying anymore (unless you stay below 10k ft). If you want to
run with the big dogs, etc..

Batteries? I would think the new technology (Nimh, etc) would allow
an Xponder to be powered all day. A non-issue, IMHO.

I just got my PCAS, so I can see the other VFR traffic (that isn't
talking to ATC but has to have a transponder), and a transponder is
next (when I figure out where to stick it in my panel).

Or, as MasterCard would put it:

Transponder and installation: $3000

Fancy battery to power said transponder: $100

Watching the Southwest 737 jinking out of your way as you core a 12
knot thermal just outside Phoenix's Class B airspace: Priceless!

Kirk
66

If you want to hurt the sport of soaring, wait till we have a mid-air with
an airliner and 150 people are killed.

Mike Schumann

wrote in message
...
On Mar 31, 8:10 pm, "BT" wrote:
If you read the NPRM for ADS-B, you'll remember that you cannot even get
above 10K MSL without ADS-B regardless of the aircraft, glider, balloon,
lawn chair... makes no matter.

So Transponders now, and ADS-B later.

BT

"Greg Arnold" wrote in message

...

I see they want to require transponders in all gliders, with the
transponders always on.

Assuming transponders become mandatory in gliders, what concerns me
most is that we may find that folks may not be willing to install
transponders in their ships. This might be especially true in older
gliders that may have a value of anywhere from $5K to perhaps $ 15 or
20K. I can see folks selling their gliders (perhaps to overseas
buyers) and giving up on the sport. We are having enough trouble
growing the sport and I'm afraid this could really hurt soaring in the
US.

Some clubs, operating on the edge, might fold as they may have to
install transponders in every 1-26 and 2-33. They may be unwilling to
comply, and as a result, disband. I am a realist and I do understand
the concerns of the NTSB, but this potential new requirement, though
not unexpected, could really have an adverse effect on soaring
operations in the US.........



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Apr 1, 9:56 am, "Mike Schumann"
wrote:
If you want to hurt the sport of soaring, wait till we have a mid-air with
an airliner and 150 people are killed.

Mike Schumann

wrote in message

...



On Mar 31, 8:10 pm, "BT" wrote:
If you read the NPRM for ADS-B, you'll remember that you cannot even get
above 10K MSL without ADS-B regardless of the aircraft, glider, balloon,
lawn chair... makes no matter.

So Transponders now, and ADS-B later.

BT

"Greg Arnold" wrote in message

...

I see they want to require transponders in all gliders, with the
transponders always on.

Assuming transponders become mandatory in gliders, what concerns me
most is that we may find that folks may not be willing to install
transponders in their ships. This might be especially true in older
gliders that may have a value of anywhere from $5K to perhaps $ 15 or
20K. I can see folks selling their gliders (perhaps to overseas
buyers) and giving up on the sport. We are having enough trouble
growing the sport and I'm afraid this could really hurt soaring in the
US.

Some clubs, operating on the edge, might fold as they may have to
install transponders in every 1-26 and 2-33. They may be unwilling to
comply, and as a result, disband. I am a realist and I do understand
the concerns of the NTSB, but this potential new requirement, though
not unexpected, could really have an adverse effect on soaring
operations in the US.........

--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

If the FAA wants to mandate transponders and/or ADS-B for gliders, I'd
like VFR for gliders to FL245, like before, at least west of the
Kansas line as part of 'free flight'.

Frank Whiteley

If the FAA wants to mandate transponders and/or ADS-B for gliders, I'd
like VFR for gliders to FL245, like before, at least west of the
Kansas line as part of 'free flight'.

Frank Whiteley-

Yeah, that would be cool! VFR thermal climbs to 22k ft cloudbases
over the Grand Canyon...BTDT!

Break - how about a way to show IFR & jet arrival and departure routes
on our nifty moving maps? We show all kinds of airspace that we know
to avoid - if we had the arrival and departure routes depicted
(showing direction and approximate altitude), along with VORs (already
possible, of course), we would have another tool to know where to look
for traffic.

Time for a quick email to the SeeYou forum, i think...

Kirk
66