VATUSA Forums

General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Owen Bliss on December 09, 2018, 08:59:40 PM

Title: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Owen Bliss on December 09, 2018, 08:59:40 PM
There is a lot of talk about realism on Vatsim lately. So why do all pilots have to have their transponder in mode-C when in the class G, and E airspace, and clear of the mode C vail? As an approach controller its more realistic when I can’t identify a primary target on my radar scope. The only thing a Mode C transponder does when in G, and E airspace is displaying the altitude, and speed of the target. I find it more interesting when I must vector aircraft around the primary targets as if It was real life.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Josh Glottmann on December 09, 2018, 10:18:24 PM
I always leave my transponder on when flying in the real world. There is no benefit to turn it off unless you are trying to hide from ATC. If I'm not speaking with anyone, I sure want them to be able to see where I'm at better in case they're pointing me out to someone else. I'm not really sure what realism you're trying to go for here... There are planes without transponders and I guess some people leave it off, but I'm not going to turn my transponder off just because I left a Mode C veil or entered class E airspace.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Ryan Barnes on December 09, 2018, 10:39:03 PM
VATSIM COC requires that pilot's not squawk standby.

COC A.B.4 - "Except while on the ground prior to making initial contact with ATC or upon request of ATC, a pilot should not squawk standby. A pilot should not squawk standby while flying to his destination, even when there is no appropriate Enroute air traffic control available."
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Matthew Kosmoski on December 09, 2018, 10:43:07 PM
Per 91.215(c), if you're equipped with an operable transponder, you're required to squawk mode C in E, anyways:

Quote
(c)Transponder-on operation. While in the airspace as specified in paragraph (b) of this section or in all controlled airspace, each person operating an aircraft equipped with an operable ATC transponder maintained in accordance with § 91.413 of this part shall operate the transponder, including Mode C equipment if installed, and shall reply on the appropriate code or as assigned by ATC.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.215
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Nickolas Christopher on December 10, 2018, 12:14:33 AM
Note that a Mode C transponder reports altitude, not speed.

And, if you have a Mode C transponder, use it even if you technically don't have to. Why withhold information that can make the controller's job easier?
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Dhruv Kalra on December 10, 2018, 12:43:35 AM
Everything above is accurate.

That being said, if someone wants to simulate flying an old Cub or similar around without an electrical system or a transponder, I’m not going to go frantically go running to enforce the CoC either.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Owen Bliss on December 10, 2018, 07:00:25 AM
Everything above is accurate.

That being said, if someone wants to simulate flying an old Cub or similar around without an electrical system or a transponder, I’m not going to go frantically go running to enforce the CoC either.

This is my exact point. I got suspended for 48hours from vatsim a few months ago for flying whilst simulating no mode c transponder. I was forcibally removed from the network by a moderator that was buddies with the controller.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Rick Rump on December 10, 2018, 07:04:02 AM
You violated the CoC, you could have requested to simulate it from the controller and if they were fine with it then you would have been gravy until the next controller.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Matthew Kosmoski on December 10, 2018, 10:24:28 AM
Everything above is accurate.

That being said, if someone wants to simulate flying an old Cub or similar around without an electrical system or a transponder, I’m not going to go frantically go running to enforce the CoC either.

This is my exact point. I got suspended for 48hours from vatsim a few months ago for flying whilst simulating no mode c transponder. I was forcibally removed from the network by a moderator that was buddies with the controller.

Is that all there is to the story?  Most of the sups I know wouldn't issue a 48 for that without there being a little more going on.  Typically, you'd get a message telling you to turn on your transponder and hit the mode C button.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Owen Bliss on December 10, 2018, 01:02:41 PM
I'm having a hard time conveying my point. My point is, the rule regarding Mode C transponders is slightly absurd. There is no rule in real life stating that I must have my transponder on when I'm clear of the Mode C Veil.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Owen Bliss on December 10, 2018, 01:14:49 PM
Everything above is accurate.

That being said, if someone wants to simulate flying an old Cub or similar around without an electrical system or a transponder, I’m not going to go frantically go running to enforce the CoC either.

This is my exact point. I got suspended for 48hours from vatsim a few months ago for flying whilst simulating no mode c transponder. I was forcibally removed from the network by a moderator that was buddies with the controller.

Is that all there is to the story?  Most of the sups I know wouldn't issue a 48 for that without there being a little more going on.  Typically, you'd get a message telling you to turn on your transponder and hit the mode C button.

Matthew,

As far as that goes, I was flying a Piper Cub around a class delta airport in the SLC airspace. The Controller that 'walloped me' at the time was live streaming (not with my knowledge) and assumed that my intent was to mess with him. After the incident occurred I found a clip of the conversation he had with one of his friends (which was the supervisor that popped me). The controller was heard saying over the stream and I quote, "“Sign on to get this guy to go away and to make him stop flying the pattern." The supervisor logged onto a center position that he was not certed for and sent me a "ContactMe" message. I forgot to switch back to the tower freq after he abruptly signed off, and I was then kicked from the network then I received an email stating that I am being banned for 48 hours for Not squawking mode C when airborne, and Failing to contact controllers when asked to. To sum it up, the controller was working against me because I was flying a non mode transponder equipped A/C. It's not a big deal. I just feel like it's a stupid rule.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Kenneth Haught on December 10, 2018, 01:23:00 PM
If the information you stated is in fact what happened Owen, I would highly suggest that you send any relevant information via email to [email protected] so that it can be looked at for misuse of supervisory privileges. As was pointed out it is not typical for a supervisor to give a 48hr suspension for the first offense, unless the member involved is violating a major foundation of the network (swearing, harassing someone, etc), or has a significant history of similar infractions.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Matthew Kosmoski on December 10, 2018, 02:48:17 PM
I'm having a hard time conveying my point. My point is, the rule regarding Mode C transponders is slightly absurd. There is no rule in real life stating that I must have my transponder on when I'm clear of the Mode C Veil.

Reread my post about the law, and you'll see that there are requirements real-world outside of a mode-c veil for aircraft so equipped.

Matthew,

As far as that goes, I was flying a Piper Cub around a class delta airport in the SLC airspace. The Controller that 'walloped me' at the time was live streaming (not with my knowledge) and assumed that my intent was to mess with him. After the incident occurred I found a clip of the conversation he had with one of his friends (which was the supervisor that popped me). The controller was heard saying over the stream and I quote, "“Sign on to get this guy to go away and to make him stop flying the pattern." The supervisor logged onto a center position that he was not certed for and sent me a "ContactMe" message. I forgot to switch back to the tower freq after he abruptly signed off, and I was then kicked from the network then I received an email stating that I am being banned for 48 hours for Not squawking mode C when airborne, and Failing to contact controllers when asked to. To sum it up, the controller was working against me because I was flying a non mode transponder equipped A/C. It's not a big deal. I just feel like it's a stupid rule.

While in the real world you'd be exempted if that Cub was never originally equipped with an electrical system, VATSIM is not the real world.  If it was, we wouldn't need to make that differentiation.  I know you know the rules:  Choosing to ignore them, regardless of the rest of the story, is going to earn consequences.   VATSIM made the choice a long time ago to "simulate" **all aircraft** being equipped.

I'm not going to second guess the action through speculation, but if it's as unfair as portrayed, Kenneth has the right solution to address it, so I hope you follow up as he suggested.  Be sure to send them copies of the clips or whatever you have to substantiate the quote, etc.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: James Hiscoe on December 10, 2018, 04:22:17 PM
I'm having a hard time conveying my point. My point is, the rule regarding Mode C transponders is slightly absurd. There is no rule in real life stating that I must have my transponder on when I'm clear of the Mode C Veil.

In real life they also don't have a contactme feature to instruct hapless pilots who have no idea where they are to check in. However as pointed out there are rules beyond the Mode C veil, but clearly that's separate from desiring to simulate a thing like a Cub.

I'm honestly not bothered by non mode C or even non transponder if it were one out of many with one and I've had to deal with it occasionally due to apparent pilot error or some kind of bug in their client so its actually a necessary situation to be able to handle skill wise in my opinion. You can't just argue that reality lets you do this so on the network you should expect to be able to though. The CoC has no requirement to match reality exactly. I'd personally be happy if we had a provision put into the CoC that allows non ModeC/transponder operation as a controller consent thing just like emergencies. Until then though....
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Ryan Pitt on December 10, 2018, 07:07:37 PM
VATSIM COC requires that pilot's not squawk standby.

COC A.B.4 - "Except while on the ground prior to making initial contact with ATC or upon request of ATC, a pilot should not squawk standby. A pilot should not squawk standby while flying to his destination, even when there is no appropriate Enroute air traffic control available."

If that is indeed the rule, the word "should" means that it is recommended, not required.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Robert Shearman Jr on December 10, 2018, 07:46:54 PM
VATSIM COC requires that pilot's not squawk standby.

COC A.B.4 - "Except while on the ground prior to making initial contact with ATC or upon request of ATC, a pilot should not squawk standby. A pilot should not squawk standby while flying to his destination, even when there is no appropriate Enroute air traffic control available."

If that is indeed the rule, the word "should" means that it is recommended, not required.
Here we go again with the "should" vs "shall" business.

https://forums.vatsim.net/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=74306&p=515691
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Ryan Parry on December 10, 2018, 08:07:40 PM
From the linked Vatsim thread posted by Kyle Ramsey (emphasis mine)....

Quote
SUPs don't go looking for these, they respond to calls from ATC. If ATC doesn't call then there is no problem; if they do then there might be if the pilot refuses to cooperate when given an instruction to put in a VFR code, because at that point they are now violating the part that says they must comply with ATC and Supervisor instructions.

So, in other words, if ATC is ok with it then it is fine. Just check first. Simple.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Owen Bliss on December 10, 2018, 09:23:29 PM
VATSIM COC requires that pilot's not squawk standby.

COC A.B.4 - "Except while on the ground prior to making initial contact with ATC or upon request of ATC, a pilot should not squawk standby. A pilot should not squawk standby while flying to his destination, even when there is no appropriate Enroute air traffic control available."

If that is indeed the rule, the word "should" means that it is recommended, not required.

I seccond this.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Matthew Kosmoski on December 10, 2018, 11:18:32 PM
VATSIM COC requires that pilot's not squawk standby.

COC A.B.4 - "Except while on the ground prior to making initial contact with ATC or upon request of ATC, a pilot should not squawk standby. A pilot should not squawk standby while flying to his destination, even when there is no appropriate Enroute air traffic control available."

If that is indeed the rule, the word "should" means that it is recommended, not required.

I seccond this.

While I fully agree with you from a policy-compliance language perspective, there are plenty of places where they've documented an interpretation otherwise, effectively creating a precedence of s/should/shall/g on matters like these.  As with anywhere else, interpretive precedence often carries more weight than the letter of the law.  You could go argue this to them, but the same interpretation has held fast for years, and continues to be held.  About the only way you'd be able to make any meaningful change on that front is to work your way to the top.

For what it's worth, I dislike the mode-c everywhere rule (and I'd never wallop a pilot for it), and I dislike a number of the other rules that are mandated from above, but they're the rules we agreed to when we sign up.  So long as they persist, we have already agreed to be bound by them.  I don't even wallop non-responsive pilots unless they actually create a problem, and even then, I do my hardest to work around them.  Simple mistakes don't always deserve the ban hammer, especially if they're not actively detracting the fun of the others online.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Matt Bromback on December 11, 2018, 09:28:59 AM
Owen,

Situations like this happen from time to time, and it could really be about anything, this one is about transponders. My advice to you is turn this into a teaching moment not just for yourself, but the controller also. It is very easy to get caught up in the moment and get defensive or try to argue your point, but at the end of the day was it worth it? You received a 48hr ban for not hitting a single button? I mean come on dude!

I have been sent contact me messages many many many times before where I was flying VFR and the controller thought he needed to talk to me. What did I do? I contacted them!! If it was a ARTCC I was familiar with I would kindly hop on the TS, find the controller, and have a nice conversation about what I was doing. 99% of the time the controller learns a lot from it, and supervisors aren't called. If you are not familiar with the ARTCC just simply file some feedback for that controller for the ARTCC staff to review, in the meantime comply with the contact me requests to be on your way.

See my point? It's kinda silly in the grand scheme of things.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Owen Bliss on December 11, 2018, 08:08:15 PM
Owen,

Situations like this happen from time to time, and it could really be about anything, this one is about transponders. My advice to you is turn this into a teaching moment not just for yourself, but the controller also. It is very easy to get caught up in the moment and get defensive or try to argue your point, but at the end of the day was it worth it? You received a 48hr ban for not hitting a single button? I mean come on dude!

I have been sent contact me messages many many many times before where I was flying VFR and the controller thought he needed to talk to me. What did I do? I contacted them!! If it was a ARTCC I was familiar with I would kindly hop on the TS, find the controller, and have a nice conversation about what I was doing. 99% of the time the controller learns a lot from it, and supervisors aren't called. If you are not familiar with the ARTCC just simply file some feedback for that controller for the ARTCC staff to review, in the meantime comply with the contact me requests to be on your way.

See my point? It's kinda silly in the grand scheme of things.

I agree with you, it's silly. However, It's not as if I was protesting not turning on my transponder. I was just forcibly removed and banned from the network within 60 seconds of the Supervisor contacting me. I had no time to react. The supervisor was abusing his powers to say the least but, thats old news.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Matthew Kosmoski on December 12, 2018, 12:42:05 PM
I was just forcibly removed and banned from the network within 60 seconds of the Supervisor contacting me. I had no time to react. The supervisor was abusing his powers to say the least but, thats old news.

Any progress or status updates on following up with [email protected]?
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Owen Bliss on December 13, 2018, 08:33:19 AM
I was just forcibly removed and banned from the network within 60 seconds of the Supervisor contacting me. I had no time to react. The supervisor was abusing his powers to say the least but, thats old news.

Any progress or status updates on following up with [email protected]?

Unfortunately, no. The incident took place nearly 6 months ago, and I never received a formal response from Tim Barber. It was kind of just shaken off, and forgotten about. It's not a huge deal since it was never listed on my action log.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Matthew Kosmoski on December 13, 2018, 09:44:14 AM
I was just forcibly removed and banned from the network within 60 seconds of the Supervisor contacting me. I had no time to react. The supervisor was abusing his powers to say the least but, thats old news.

Any progress or status updates on following up with [email protected]?

Unfortunately, no. The incident took place nearly 6 months ago, and I never received a formal response from Tim Barber. It was kind of just shaken off, and forgotten about. It's not a huge deal since it was never listed on my action log.

Supervisor actions don't get documented in your VATUSA action log.  Did you email Tim Barber directly or supervisors@ as instructed?  I've never seen something brought to supervisors@, no matter how silly, get shaken off without so much as a response.
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Chris Hadden on December 13, 2018, 10:11:11 PM
Not sure if you still remember the name of the SUP, but I would get in contact with Tim about it.  And I am no supervisor, but from what I hear, you should receive an email from the sup explaining what happened and why you were suspended with what the individual broke within CoC. We have to hold them accountable too, something like that can't just slip by without any light. If you can't get in contact with Tim, search higher. (VATGOV8, or 1+2)
Title: Re: Mode C Transponders
Post by: Kaylan Fullerton on December 14, 2018, 11:09:57 PM
Matthew,

As far as that goes, I was flying a Piper Cub around a class delta airport in the SLC airspace. The Controller that 'walloped me' at the time was live streaming (not with my knowledge) and assumed that my intent was to mess with him. After the incident occurred I found a clip of the conversation he had with one of his friends (which was the supervisor that popped me). The controller was heard saying over the stream and I quote, "“Sign on to get this guy to go away and to make him stop flying the pattern." The supervisor logged onto a center position that he was not certed for and sent me a "ContactMe" message. I forgot to switch back to the tower freq after he abruptly signed off, and I was then kicked from the network then I received an email stating that I am being banned for 48 hours for Not squawking mode C when airborne, and Failing to contact controllers when asked to. To sum it up, the controller was working against me because I was flying a non mode transponder equipped A/C. It's not a big deal. I just feel like it's a stupid rule.

Owen,

While I hope you do not stop seeking a proper resolution to this, I would like to apologize for the negative experience on behalf of ZLC. ZLC only has one Mode C veil in the entire ARTCC and two Class D fields that lie within it. Judging by direction of this post so far, it seems clear you knew that you were clear of it (the veil that is). Our guys know that the CoC requires Mode C, but they also are taught when (and when not) it is "realistically" required. Most of my controllers (not all apparently) have no issue and enjoy the challenge of simulating such an environment for you.

The part I find quite embarrassing (if accurate) is the whole "get this guy" statement. While he was "technically" within his right to require you to squawk Mode C, it's actions like that drives good pilots further and further away from my ARTCC or even worse this network. I can't speak for the other 21 facilities, but if you ever find yourself in ZLC again, please provide me and Kyle (DATM) with this feedback so we can crush this at the source. I would like to believe we are your first line of defense for stuff like this. Our feedback form on our site is the best way to get that to us. Without you (the pilot), there is no point to being a controller so your experience on the network is equally as important to us.

With all that like most have already stated, I would seek resolution regardless of how long it has been. Chances are unless said individuals are identified, things like this become trends.