Pietenpol-List: why the Mode C?

[matronics]

Original Posted By: "John Ford"
Jeff wrote->I'd be flying it out of some crowded, tower controlled airports with>concrete runways and fairly complex airspace -- not exactly a Piet's>native environment."Roger, experimental eight-niner-niner Juliet Charlie... cleared for taxi to runway three-two, no delay... Gulfstream II, you're number two to follow the experimental on three-two but go have a cup of coffee prior to taxi since he might be a while."Hey, these people are our servants, the airports are public use and paid for with our tax dollars, and the FAA's stated mission is to support and improve our lot in life. We have just as much right to use the airspace and airports as the heavies do, right? Right! Just watch out for the business of operating an experimental over densely populated areas and all that [FAR 91.319(c)].Reality check: I've flown a C-150 and Tomahawk out of airports as big as San Antonio Int'l. and most of my flying here in south Texas has been in active and busy MOAs and alert areas. While we do have a right to do so, it ain't fun sometimes. I've been on final to big airport runways in a little airplane, "no delay" being an often-mentioned instruction from ATC, with following traffic being a heavy or with King Airs sitting fuming at the hold line waiting for me to clear the active. It just takes the joy out of operations. But if ya gotta, ya gotta-! Obviously, if you're thinking of building a low and slow fun flyer and not an RV rattle can or something similar, anything you decide to build will have similar limitations.And like you said, you can sure violate a lot more restricted airspace in a bigger hurry at 170 MPH than you can at 70...Oscar ZunigaSan Antonio, TXmailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.comwebsite at http://www.flysquirrel.net________________________________________________________________________________Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 13:30:10 -0500

[matronics]

Original Posted By: "Dean Dayton"
I live inside the Mode C ring at Atlanta. We fly non radio aircraft all thetime with no problems. If the aircraft is manufactured with no electricalsystem, then Mode C is not required. We have (with special permission) flownthe L-2 Taylorcraft into Hartsfield and landed. Several of no-radio craftflew in, but had to follow a 150 with a radio. One of those darn Cub driversdid a loop on final, but thats another story.Oops, back to the subject. Our FISDO has helped us with the rules on ourPiets. If the engine needs a battery and generator to run, it is stillconsidered a non-electrical aircraft and no Mode-C required. Example:Corvair with a starter, battery, alternator, battery ignition system, notmagneto. But the first time you run a little tiny wire over to the handheldradio or GPS, you had better also run the wire to a transponder, becausethen it is required.Check with your local FAA, because they can "translate" the rules in manydifferent ways.Barry Davis----- Original Message -----

[matronics]

Original Posted By: Barry Davis
there's also the "other" way to get around it....Run battery and power your comm radio with it but keep the battery charged viaa wind driven generator.... The FAR states that an airplane with an engine drivenelectrical system needs a Mode C Xponder.... wind driven is exempt. Ihave even talked with a couple DAR's on this recently and they agree that itis perfectly legal.This is how I plan on doing my Corvair powered GN-1 which will be based withinPhoenix 30nm class BDJ ----- Original Message -----

[matronics]

Original Posted By: "DJ Vegh"
DJThanks for your info, we plan to recheck with our FISDO before we add thegenerators. We are using information given to us from an examiner about ayear and a half ago.Barry----- Original Message -----