I’m a student pilot who flies from Hanscom Field in Massachusetts. For
those unfamiliar with the setup, it’s a the primary field of a Class D
airspace, which sits under the floor of the Boston class B airspace, and is
entirely enclosed within the 30n.m. DME of Boston.
Yesterday I was up doing some solo pattern work – so I never left the class
D airspace. After my 3rd touch & go, the controller told me that my
transponder was stuck in Ident mode. I cycled the transponder, but it made
no difference. He asked me to switch it off so that I didn’t clutter up his
scope. I complied, and had no problems the rest of the practice.
Now for the question – is this a violation of the requirement for a Mode C
xpdr within 30 miles of a class B airport, or does the requirement get
waived by the fact that I stayed within class D airspace without the thing
operable, under the specific instructions of ATC?
Does anyone care?
Adam.
Adam Broun (bro…@world.std.com) wrote:
: Now for the question – is this a violation of the requirement for a Mode C
: xpdr within 30 miles of a class B airport, or does the requirement get
: waived by the fact that I stayed within class D airspace without the thing
: operable, under the specific instructions of ATC?
ATC can authorize exemption from the transponder rules. I’ve had to do
it a couple of times here (I’ve even arrived at Dulles NORDO).
-Ron
Adam Broun <bro…@world.std.com> wrote:
> Now for the question – is this a violation of the requirement for a Mode C
> xpdr within 30 miles of a class B airport, or does the requirement get
> waived by the fact that I stayed within class D airspace without the thing
> operable, under the specific instructions of ATC?
The rules are in FAR-91.215, specifically 91.215(d). I suppose by
excruciatingly literal interpretation of the FAR, you were in violation,
since I don’t see "just wanting to do some touch and goes" in the list of
exemptions, and as all good student pilots know, ATC cannot authorize a
FAR violation.
On the other hand, as a practical matter, if ATC told you to turn
your xponder off, and was happy to have you continue in the pattern, I
wouldn’t loose any sleep over it.
–
Roy Smith <r…@nyu.edu>
Hippocrates Project, Department of Microbiology, Coles 202
NYU School of Medicine, 550 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016
"This never happened to Bart Simpson."
Adam Broun <bro…@world.std.com> writes:
>Now for the question – is this a violation of the requirement for a Mode C
>xpdr within 30 miles of a class B airport, or does the requirement get
>waived by the fact that I stayed within class D airspace without the thing
>operable, under the specific instructions of ATC?
You’re covered. See FAR 91.215(b) which requires the transponder to be
used in your area. The significant words are at the start of the
paragraph:
91.215
(b) All airspace. Unless otherwise authorized OR DIRECTED by ATC,
no person may operate [in your area without a working squawk box]
ATC directed you to turn it off, so 91.215(b) no longer requires you to
have it on.
Now, if you started your flight knowing that the transponder was
broken, that would be another issue unless you got ATC authorization.
I’ve had a similar situation several years ago when I lost a transponder
to a nearby lightning strike near ABQ on a trip to the west coast; I
got continuing permission on each leg where the box would have been
required, and had fun teaching both FSS and ATC people what equipment
code /W meant. (RNAV but no transponder)
Joe Morris / MITRE
In article <roy-1202961522200…@mchip8.med.nyu.edu>,
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
Roy Smith <r…@popmail.med.nyu.edu> wrote:
>Adam Broun <bro…@world.std.com> wrote:
>> Now for the question – is this a violation of the requirement for a Mode C
>> xpdr within 30 miles of a class B airport, or does the requirement get
>> waived by the fact that I stayed within class D airspace without the thing
>> operable, under the specific instructions of ATC?
> The rules are in FAR-91.215, specifically 91.215(d). I suppose by
>excruciatingly literal interpretation of the FAR, you were in violation,
>since I don’t see "just wanting to do some touch and goes" in the list of
>exemptions, and as all good student pilots know, ATC cannot authorize a
>FAR violation.
> On the other hand, as a practical matter, if ATC told you to turn
>your xponder off, and was happy to have you continue in the pattern, I
>wouldn’t loose any sleep over it.
The Canadian regulations governing the use of transponders contain the
phrase "unless otherwise instructed by ATC". Do the FAR’s not have this?
—
Fred G. Black, P. Eng. E-mail: bl…@bnr.ca Nortel North America
PP-ASEL,G Phone: (613)-763-7452 (W) P.O. Box 3511 StationC
(613)-823-6017 (H) Ottawa, Ontario
My opinions only Canada K1Y 4H7