"recycle your transponder"

MarkZ said:
The TRACON ARTS system picks up flight plan information, including beacon code, from the ARTCC computer. When a pre-determined time arrives, the ARTS computer forwards the departure track and beacon information to the appropriate sector's tab list. That way, when radar acquires the beacon code, it automatically associates track information and produces a data block on the display. Once that happens, the TRACON computer forwards the departure time to the ARTCC computer.

When an incorrect beacon code pops up, we usually see a Mode C intruder tag. That's when you hear ATC request a new code, and everyone has a happy day. Sometimes, that incorrect code belongs to another departure. That's when things get interesting. Now I have to verify that the automation is erroneous. Once I've done that, after fixing the erroneous data, I call the appropriate ARTCC controller and advise them the aircraft they think they are expecting is a ghost. We call that a "scratch and hold."

It happens every day, and takes all of a few keystrokes and phone calls to fix. If a pilot departs on a VFR code, the only difference is that there is no chance of an erroneous tag.

Maybe it's not such a bad idea to ensure the transponder gets a 1200 code prior to shutdown?
Click to expand...
Hey Mark, what's generally going on behind the scenes when you get assigned a new code mid-flight? I'd understand the occasional change, but once I got 4 xpndr changes in a 127nm flight: 1- The code for departure when I picked up my clearance, and told to expect a different one; 2- Initial contact with ZAU after departure I got the expected change; 3- Another change about halfway along with ZKC; 4- Final change when switched to St. Louis approach. Just curious as to what causes that...
 
I had an interesting one today leaving Norfolk for Chattanooga. We were running late getting to the airport (over an hour past my originally filed departure). So I refiled. CD gave me a squawk of 7025. On climb out before tower hands me over to departure, they tell me to recycle xpdr and squawk 7055. So I do that and then a few minutes later they tell me again. Then when I got handed off to Washington Ctr, they tell me to 'recycle' back to the 7025.

I asked if there was a problem with my gear and they explained that the two flight plans in the system created some confusion with different codes assigned.
 
I haven't paid much attention to GA on that side of the country, and I didn't realize 1200 was such a problem in the SFRA/FRZ. With that in mind, I can see Captain's point. There's not much sense in risking poking the bear if you can use a different code like 0000, or whatever.

But the book is the book. If R&W's manual says to do it, then there you go. If he does what he's supposed to do, it won't be a problem. I think iNdigo said it best - we've all gotta fly our airplanes!
 
Last edited:
HighFlyingA380 said:
Hey Mark, what's generally going on behind the scenes when you get assigned a new code mid-flight? I'd understand the occasional change, but once I got 4 xpndr changes in a 127nm flight: 1- The code for departure when I picked up my clearance, and told to expect a different one; 2- Initial contact with ZAU after departure I got the expected change; 3- Another change about halfway along with ZKC; 4- Final change when switched to St. Louis approach. Just curious as to what causes that...
Click to expand...


Was this during the ZAU shutdown? Typically beacon codes don't change much internal to an ARTCC unless there is a hiccup in the system. Yes, hiccups do happen.

In normal situations each ARTCC computer has its own beacon code allocation. It's like having 23 separate computers storing codes for each flight. If a transient flight has a code that the computer assigned another aircraft, the ARTCC computer assigns another code. The same thing can (but usually doesn't) happen when the aircraft passes from the ARTCC to the TRACON. Anytime the beacon code has to change due to a conflict, the first controller working the aircraft will assign the new beacon code.

So, it sounds like blind luck...

...unless you are a Weber pilot. ;)

I jest, because I love working you guys. You do some amazing things with those Caravans. Keep up the good work.
 
kayoh190 said:
I haven't paid much attention to GA on that side of the country, and I didn't realize 1200 was such a problem in the SFRA/FRZ. With that in mind, I can see Captain's point. There's not much sense in risking poking the bear if you can use a different code like 0000, or whatever.

But the book is the book. If R&W's manual says to do it, then there you go. If he does what he's supposed to do, it won't be a problem. I think iNdigo said it best - we've all gotta fly our airplanes!
Click to expand...

Reminds me of a situation back in the mid-80's. I was being ramped by a GA Inspector, after getting all of our certificates she went through our aircraft logs and announced "Where is your VOR check log?" to which I replied "We don't have one, it's a maintenance item and a preflight item per our manual". She wouldn't accept that and wanted to ground our flight for "being out of compliance with the regulations". Me and the mechanic tried to explain to her that 121 is a bit different than 91, but she wouldn't budge. After several phone calls, got out the GOM and MM and showed her the relative sections and a phone call to our POI, she relented.

Another in the mind set "I don't agree with your procedures and you didn't consult me when you wrote them" even though they had been working fine for years.
 
RotorAndWing said:
Reminds me of a situation back in the mid-80's. I was being ramped by a GA Inspector, after getting all of our certificates she went through our aircraft logs and announced "Where is your VOR check log?" to which I replied "We don't have one, it's a maintenance item and a preflight item per our manual". She wouldn't accept that and wanted to ground our flight for "being out of compliance with the regulations". Me and the mechanic tried to explain to her that 121 is a bit different than 91, but she wouldn't budge. After several phone calls, got out the GOM and MM and showed her the relative sections and a phone call to our POI, she relented.

Another in the mind set "I don't agree with your procedures and you didn't consult me when you wrote them" even though they had been working fine for years.
Click to expand...

Would she allow you to do a VOR check right there and get on with your life or did she want to pursue the last flight non-compliance angle?
 
Captain said:
Would she allow you to do a VOR check right there and get on with your life or did she want to pursue the last flight non-compliance angle?
Click to expand...


Nope, she claimed there was no records of any VOR checks, and therefore we were not in compliance with Part 91.

However, the VOR checks were covered in the pilots preflight as well as the mechanics preflight, and under our manuals (FAA Approved) as long as they were in specs, no further action required.
 
Nistlerooy said:
Why even bring up the FRZ/SFRA? .....

I believe that the FAA would rather you do the same shutdown/startup/transponder procedures you are accustomed to, regardless of where you are. And in the case of FRZ/SFRA, a 1200 code will catch you no less flak than a 2000 code or any other non-ATC-assigned code. Mark described it well on the first page, from an ATC standpoint I's MUCH rather have an aircraft depart on 1200 than a previous discrete code.
Click to expand...

Gotta disagree with you there bud.

I did my training in the SFRA. As a student, I learned by experience how easy it is to forget to get the code. My instructor and I blasted off and for some intuitive reason he asked about the code. My amazed face gave away the answer. He dialed Potomac Approach freq in the radio, apologized, took control and got on the ground.
I don't remember the tongue lashing because I was already sorry deep inside my soul.
We blasted off a few minutes later without even shutting down the engine, called from his cellphone, got a new code and off we went.
I have specifically read about suspensions for 1200 violations. Never seen one for old code violations. If I make the mistake in the future I hope it's the latter and not the former.
 
MarkZ said:
Was this during the ZAU shutdown? Typically beacon codes don't change much internal to an ARTCC unless there is a hiccup in the system. Yes, hiccups do happen.

In normal situations each ARTCC computer has its own beacon code allocation. It's like having 23 separate computers storing codes for each flight. If a transient flight has a code that the computer assigned another aircraft, the ARTCC computer assigns another code. The same thing can (but usually doesn't) happen when the aircraft passes from the ARTCC to the TRACON. Anytime the beacon code has to change due to a conflict, the first controller working the aircraft will assign the new beacon code.

So, it sounds like blind luck...

...unless you are a Weber pilot. ;)

I jest, because I love working you guys. You do some amazing things with those Caravans. Keep up the good work.
Click to expand...
Can't say for sure; It very well may have been during ATC zero...

Yeah, it does have it's perks. Pretty easy to blane an imaginary heavy on a bad landing when pax comment... :D Always fun when pax are amazed that we raced and beat a jet downhill on the parallel.
 
Nistlerooy said:
Fair enough. It sounds like you have more experience flying there than I ever will. (I'm being genuine, no sarcasm intended, I'm legitimately yielding to your experience/knowledge)

My original reason for even weighing in was to call out the fact that this thread has severely been derailed. Though my thoughts apparently did the same and I didn't get many of my original thoughts down!
Click to expand...

welcome to PoA:D
 
Nistlerooy said:
Fair enough. It sounds like you have more experience flying there than I ever will. (I'm being genuine, no sarcasm intended, I'm legitimately yielding to your experience/knowledge)

My original reason for even weighing in was to call out the fact that this thread has severely been derailed. Though my thoughts apparently did the same and I didn't get many of my original thoughts down!
Click to expand...

WTF? I have more experience than him. You "yield to him" agreeing with me but argue with me. That's super.
 
Nistlerooy said:
Nah, I just chose to be the bigger man and walk away. No need to waste any more grey matter...on the matter.
Click to expand...

Being a "bigger man" would be admitting when you're wrong. I do it and so can you.

I didn't bring up squawking 2000, R&W did. I simply said 2000 was better than 1200 in the DC area. I also brought up 0000 and others. The point is 1200 is specifically forbidden in that area. You choose to take issue with my point. Might be because you didn't understand what I was saying as evidenced by you taking my quote out of intended context.

Regardless, Jay flies there and agreed with my concern. So while arguing with me about it you apologize to Jay and cite his 'experience'... presumably in the area. Nothing against Jay but I'm pretty sure my total time exceeds his both in general and in that specific area. As an extra bit of experience in my corner I have, in fact, been violated for exactly what we're talking about...squawking 1200 where one shouldn't be.

With that in mind I find it more than curious that you're wiling to apologize to Jay based on his experience while still holding issue with me...who Jay was just agreeing with in the first place.

You and I both know the 'bigger man' comment wasn't actually meaning anything other than being a childish dig at me in some attempt to boost your ego at my expense. I see you're new here so maybe you're still trying to figure it all out...dunno. But don't be surprised at how you've already rubbed me the wrong way with how you've handled this thread.

Now I'm going to be the bigger man and walk away.




(j/k...just wanted to point out how dumb that looks)
 
Last edited:
Nistlerooy said:
Why even bring up the FRZ/SFRA? You're taking a completely unrelated scenario and throwing it in to try and bully your point.

It's not unrelated and I'm not using it to 'bully my point'. It's my entire point. If the SFRA didn't exist I wouldn't have any issue at all with setting 1200.

Since when? It's my understanding that the only time squawking 2000 is appropriate in the SFRA/FRZ (which shouldn't have even been brought up to begin with) is when ATC is offline. Any departure, VFR or otherwise, within the FRZ/SFRA shall be on an ATC-designated discrete transponder code.

The FAA is a huge proponent of doing the same thing the same way every time. While they caution against expectation bias, standardization helps to eliminate errors and missing important steps--which is why we have a checklist. It would seem to reason that being on ANY code other than an ATC-assigned code--be it 1200, 2000, or a previously used code--is a violation. So...does it really matter?

Yes, there are government employees (not ATC) whose job is to sit and monitor the SFRA 24 hours a day looking for 1200 codes. When they see one the wheels of government start turning. I think it's silly, but nobody asked me. So yes...it does really matter.

I believe that the FAA would rather you do the same shutdown/startup/transponder procedures you are accustomed to, regardless of where you are. And in the case of FRZ/SFRA, a 1200 code will catch you no less flak than a 2000 code or any other non-ATC-assigned code. Mark described it well on the first page, from an ATC standpoint I's MUCH rather have an aircraft depart on 1200 than a previous discrete code.

I'm not anti-procedures. I've never on this forum ever suggested someone blow off company procedures. However, procedures can be wrong and can be modified. Every pilot here working for a carrier has the ability to suggest procedural changes to the CPO and/or safety department where the suggestion can be reviewed and implemented if approved. You can bet if my company had a procedure to set 1200 at the end of a flight I'd be sending an email to change that procedure company wide or at least in the DC area.
Click to expand...


See? Didn't really walk away and I wasn't really suggesting I'm a 'bigger man'.
 
Captain said:
Being a "bigger man" would be admitting when you're wrong. I do it and so can you.

I didn't bring up squawking 2000, R&W did. I simply said 2000 was better than 1200 in the DC area. I also brought up 0000 and others. The point is 1200 is specifically forbidden in that area. You choose to take issue with my point. Might be because you didn't understand what I was saying as evidenced by you taking my quote out of intended context.

Regardless, Jay flies there and agreed with my concern. So while arguing with me about it you apologize to Jay and cite his 'experience'... presumably in the area. Nothing against Jay but I'm pretty sure my total time exceeds his both in general and in that specific area. As an extra bit of experience in my corner I have, in fact, been violated for exactly what we're talking about...squawking 1200 where one shouldn't be.

With that in mind I find it more than curious that you're wiling to apologize to Jay based on his experience while still holding issue with me...who Jay was just agreeing with in the first place.

You and I both know the 'bigger man' comment wasn't actually meaning anything other than being a childish dig at me in some attempt to boost your ego at my expense. I see you're new here so maybe you're still trying to figure it all out...dunno. But don't be surprised at how you've already rubbed me the wrong way with how you've handled this thread.

Now I'm going to be the bigger man and walk away.




(j/k...just wanted to point out how dumb that looks)
Click to expand...


I've watched you dig yourself into so many holes on this forum. :rolleyes2:

It's Christmas morning, why not take a day off and enjoy it? You'll be the "bigger man" for it.......:thumbsup:
 
RotorAndWing said:
I've watched you dig yourself into so many holes on this forum. :rolleyes2:

It's Christmas morning, why not take a day off and enjoy it? You'll be the "bigger man" for it.......:thumbsup:
Click to expand...

Some of us dig. Merry Christmas.
 
Captain said:
Being a "bigger man" would be admitting when you're wrong. I do it and so can you.



I didn't bring up squawking 2000, R&W did. I simply said 2000 was better than 1200 in the DC area. I also brought up 0000 and others. The point is 1200 is specifically forbidden in that area. You choose to take issue with my point. Might be because you didn't understand what I was saying as evidenced by you taking my quote out of intended context.



Regardless, Jay flies there and agreed with my concern. So while arguing with me about it you apologize to Jay and cite his 'experience'... presumably in the area. Nothing against Jay but I'm pretty sure my total time exceeds his both in general and in that specific area. As an extra bit of experience in my corner I have, in fact, been violated for exactly what we're talking about...squawking 1200 where one shouldn't be.



With that in mind I find it more than curious that you're wiling to apologize to Jay based on his experience while still holding issue with me...who Jay was just agreeing with in the first place.



You and I both know the 'bigger man' comment wasn't actually meaning anything other than being a childish dig at me in some attempt to boost your ego at my expense. I see you're new here so maybe you're still trying to figure it all out...dunno. But don't be surprised at how you've already rubbed me the wrong way with how you've handled this thread.



Now I'm going to be the bigger man and walk away.









(j/k...just wanted to point out how dumb that looks)
Click to expand...

Let it go dude.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Let it go dude.
Click to expand...

Why? Why can't I ever be right? Is there some reason why, on every single topic, I have to be wrong? Even when I'm right there's some perception I'm still wrong because it's me.

Merry Christmas btw.
 
Captain said:
Why? Why can't I ever be right? Is there some reason why, on every single topic, I have to be wrong? Even when I'm right there's some perception I'm still wrong because it's me.

Merry Christmas btw.
Click to expand...

Sing it with me, "If not setting VFR is wrong, then I don't want to be right"

You've got to own it.

Merry Christmas to you too.:)
 
Captain said:
Why? Why can't I ever be right? Is there some reason why, on every single topic, I have to be wrong? Even when I'm right there's some perception I'm still wrong because it's me.

Merry Christmas btw.
Click to expand...

Maybe stop being such a victim?
 
Captain said:
Why? Why can't I ever be right? Is there some reason why, on every single topic, I have to be wrong? Even when I'm right there's some perception I'm still wrong because it's me.
Click to expand...

I dunno man - seems to me that you're looking for some sort of validation on this board. We're just a bunch of anonymous internet dudes - if you're happy with your decisions and interpretations - what difference does it make what we think?

As far as making changes to my manual - yeah, that's not going to happen. My manual doesn't tell me to squawk 1200, but I work with the most inflexible, stuck in the 1970s, "but this is just the way we do it", pilot group that exists in all of aviation. We make Delta look like Space-X. Never mind the fact that I'm in my mid-30s, which renders me essentially invisible. I'd have more luck telling the FAA to change the rules of the FRZ/FSRA. :rofl:
 
Oh, and Merry Christmas, everyone!

And Captain, if we ever cross paths - beers on me, man. :)
 
denverpilot said:
At least you won't bother the people sitting around watching for the 1200 squawking terrorists. All terrorists squawk 1200, don'tchaknow?
Click to expand...

it happened once, it'll happen again and it's something we can sink our teeth into even if it won't accomplish anything - that's what the bureaucrats say...
 
Captain said:
Why? Why can't I ever be right? Is there some reason why, on every single topic, I have to be wrong? Even when I'm right there's some perception I'm still wrong because it's me.

Maybe you should do what George did on Seinfeld and always do the OPPOSITE. Then you will always be RIGHT!
Click to expand...
 
coloradobluesky said:
Captain said:
Why? Why can't I ever be right? Is there some reason why, on every single topic, I have to be wrong? Even when I'm right there's some perception I'm still wrong because it's me.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should do what George did on Seinfeld and always do the OPPOSITE. Then you will always be RIGHT!
Click to expand...

Now THERE'S an idea!

:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top