Squawk Charlie fm Gate to Gate

[Sean Harrison]

Is squawk mode charlie standard at all USA airports or just the major ones?

 

Most of the ones I have been using now say Squawk is required from the Gate, but not sure how wide spread this is at the moment.

[Richard Gerrish]

ASDE-X simulation varies from Artcc to Artcc. Check out the airport diagrams they'll tell you if our RW counterparts are using it, then either turn your transponder on or wait to be told to either way is acceptable on vatsim. The main thing is to be sure you have it on before you enter any active runways.

[Brad Littlejohn]

Is squawk mode charlie standard at all USA airports or just the major ones?

 

Most of the ones I have been using now say Squawk is required from the Gate, but not sure how wide spread this is at the moment.

 

No, and not even at all of the major ones. You're referring to ASDE-X, right? It's in use at some airports, but not even all Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B airports use it. Those Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B fields that don't: KLAS, KSFO, KDAL, KMCI, KCVG, KMSY, KCLE, KPIT, and KPHL. So it definitely isn't used everywhere. I would suggest to visit the given sector's website to see if they have any announcement or SOP stating that they are using it.

 

I know that we at ZLA are not.

 

BL.

[Sean Harrison]

Thanks Richard and Brad,

 

I guess I'll just have to check each facility as suggested. I was hoping for a standard across the board, but I guess it depends on what the facility has available inline with RW procedures.

 

Sounds good, thanks,

[Harold Rutila 974112]

As of October 7th, 2010, Denver no longer simulates ASDE-X, either.

 

http://forum.denartcc.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2755

[Davor Kusec 990407]

I was once told by a RW pilot that, generally speaking, they don't even turn the squawk off of mode C. They just turn the plane off. Basically, they are always on with mode C.

[Romano Lara]

Just one question, how does this works with VATSIM?

 

Is it just for realism's sake statement or something else. I'm just curious.

 

Whenever I control, as long as I can see you and you turn it on before entering any of my actives, you're good. When they are at the gate, I don't see the purpose why I have to see their full datablock when I only need their callsign and aircraft type that can be noted when they call for IFR clearance. Once they started moving, I can still see their callsign and a/c type, and having them squawk C changes nothing but clutter my view from an en-route's perspective.

[Garry Morris 920567]

This may have changed, but last I heard ZAB (PHX) is not simulating it either.

[Harold Rutila 974112]

Just one question, how does this works with VATSIM?

It doesn't! That's why we stopped simulating it.

 

ASDE-X is a radar-based situational awareness system for controllers that shows where everyone is in reference to a digital map on the screen. It's basically exactly what we see on our scopes already in GND or TWR mode.

 

ASDE-X requires aircraft to squawk Mode C to utilize some of the advanced functions of the software, like conflict alerts for aircraft on potentially conflicting taxiways. The Safety Logic System that comes with ASDE-X alerts controllers about the potential for runway incursions between two aircraft, such as one on short final and another crossing the same runway.

 

We already have the ASDE-X system in a way except for the Safety Logic System. We don't get conflict alerts for aircraft on the ground, and we don't get warnings about runway incursion issues. Our ground and tower modes provide all the information we need without needing aircraft to squawk Mode C.

Is it just for realism's sake statement or something else. I'm just curious.

Yes, it is all about realism, and really nothing else. We don't get any benefit from it. Some facilities require or "suggest" that their ground controllers use ARTS or STARS modes on the radar client to identify which targets are squawking standby (since nothing but the primary target is displayed in those modes when the aircraft squawks standby). But again, there's no benefit at all.

 

...and having them squawk C changes nothing but clutter my view from an en-route's perspective.

This is where we ran into the most problems. When just Denver Center is online, the controller can't set a filter for just Denver International Airport; VRC has an all-or-nothing filtering system where the filter covers the entire vis range. We have airports in the eastern side of ZDV that are up to 3,000 feet below the airport elevation of DEN. To ease the workload, such as not having to turn filters on and off all session long, it's just easier to have everyone squawk standby on the ground. That's our stance, anyway.

[Daniel Hawton]

This is where we ran into the most problems. When just Denver Center is online, the controller can't set a filter for just Denver International Airport; VRC has an all-or-nothing filtering system where the filter covers the entire vis range. We have airports in the eastern side of ZDV that are up to 3,000 feet below the airport elevation of DEN. To ease the workload, such as not having to turn filters on and off all session long, it's just easier to have everyone squawk standby on the ground. That's our stance, anyway.

 

One thing I do with VRC (best with multiple monitors) is I setup two windows for center.. I'll have run one side, and one on the other. Both set to DSR mode, but the filter system only filters within that window.. not the visrange. So I can have one side's visibility range higher to meet the higher terrain than the other's.

[Harold Rutila 974112]

This is where we ran into the most problems. When just Denver Center is online, the controller can't set a filter for just Denver International Airport; VRC has an all-or-nothing filtering system where the filter covers the entire vis range. We have airports in the eastern side of ZDV that are up to 3,000 feet below the airport elevation of DEN. To ease the workload, such as not having to turn filters on and off all session long, it's just easier to have everyone squawk standby on the ground. That's our stance, anyway.

 

One thing I do with VRC (best with multiple monitors) is I setup two windows for center.. I'll have run one side, and one on the other. Both set to DSR mode, but the filter system only filters within that window.. not the visrange. So I can have one side's visibility range higher to meet the higher terrain than the other's.

That's a great idea. The problem, unfortunately, is most of us don't have a second monitor.

[Daniel Hawton]

You can always use smaller windows too... I often use a smaller window to keep the weather, controller list, and ground views around my main controlling window(s). I am lazy, and don't like having to zoom if I don't have to

[J Jason Vodnansky 810003]

The Code of Conduct answers this question quite nicely...

 

JV

[Dhruv Kalra]

The Code of Conduct answers this question quite nicely...

 

JV

 

Really? Allow me to quote the CoC.

 

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.

 

Emphasis mine. I would cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ify a statement in an ATIS broadcast or a control instruction regarding transponder Mode C activation to be upon request of ATC. I fail to see the CoC violation you're supposedly pinning on this.

[Daniel Hawton]

I find it annoying to be on a radar position and have pilots spawn and immediately squawk C... even before calling for clearance. Half seem to automatically squawk VFR so my scope gets cluttered with either limited data blocks, or VFR tags. Just what I need my screen cluttered with.

[Andrew Doubleday]

Filters are there for a reason to declutter... ASDE-X can easily be simulated via use of filters, setting realistic data tags, and using ARTS radar... It works beautifully.

[Romano Lara]

This is a general question: what is the point of simulating ASDE-X on VATSIM when you can effectively control ground without it. First off it does nothing but clutter your screen, second - you really don't need to have an aircraft squawking normal on the ground for any purpose. We cannot mimic the real world conditions for that matter, we always have radar and we always use radar.

 

As Jason Baxter says: what gives?

 

P.S I'm a single monitor user by the way.

[Dhruv Kalra]

I personally find that on a busy night, it's easier to work ground or tower with ASDE-X simulated. Aircraft don't display a full datablock until they're ready to taxi. This lets me easily differentiate between aircraft that have clearance and taxi instructions and those who are just sitting at the gate.

[Alexander Cohrs]

Don't know if many of you US guys work with Euroscope (I guess it's only few people), however, then it would make a difference.

 

If you set Euroscope to realistic settings, with Mode S, you'd only see an aircraft symbol on the ground and - depending on your settings - probably the ICAO code of the airline. If you'd like to simulate ASDE-X, you'd need the pilot to set transponder to Mode C. But again, this refers only to Euroscope AND to the guys like me that like to use the realistic mode.

 

Alex

 

Disclaimer: Obviously, we don't use ASDE-X at Central Africa, as I can't image they have that in real world. However, I just wanted to give you guys some view from the Euroscope users perspective.

[Daniel Hawton]

Filters are there for a reason to declutter... ASDE-X can easily be simulated via use of filters, setting realistic data tags, and using ARTS radar... It works beautifully.

 

Filters don't work if you have a sector with a wide variety of terrain. You got one airport at 400 MSL, and another at 3,400 MSL. The ILS intercepts are between 2000-3000 MSL for the first airport. Good luck filtering that and still controlling your airspace efficiently.

[Andrew Doubleday]

You make a point in the aspect of variances in terrain being an issue. I guess something to consider with a new radar client if that ever flourishes for the USA - accurate radar coverage so you can set filters for different sites and solve the clutter problem.

 

It works well for flat areas though. Specifically the way ZMP has been using it for some time now. I've had the opportunity to work M98 there a bit recently while using it for MSP. Setting a filter of roughly 1000 MSL, roughly 200' above field elevation on the scope (simulating radar coverage fairly accurately as you won't see targets below certain altitudes) and using the ASDE-X map on a separate window with the use of ARTS radar mode. Works well for much of the same reason Dhruv said. Added sense of realism, it's neat to see to say the least. Again, totally optional (not enforced by ZMP)... Haven't had a problem with pilot compliance, however.

 

 

Regards,

 

AJ

[Dhruv Kalra]

AJ has it right. We don't enforce it - if you want to squawk standby until you're short of the runway, I have no problems with that. In fact, our KMSP SOP reads as follows:

 

Pilot participation in the simulation of ASDE-X Surveillance equipment is encouraged in order to enhance realism, but not required. In accordance with VATSIM CoR, controllers shall not deny services to aircraft unable or unwilling to operate with Mode C altitude encoding on during ground movement operations.

[William Lewis]

I was once told by a RW pilot that, generally speaking, they don't even turn the squawk off of mode C. They just turn the plane off. Basically, they are always on with mode C.

I did the same during my flight training. Heck was it me Davor that told you.

[Daniel Hawton]

I was once told by a RW pilot that, generally speaking, they don't even turn the squawk off of mode C. They just turn the plane off. Basically, they are always on with mode C.

I did the same during my flight training. Heck was it me Davor that told you.

 

That's because real world ASRs don't pickup much below about 200-300 AGL.. so approach isn't cluttered with tags. On VATSIM, it's different at least for VRC. It picks up everything regardless of altitude.

[Harold Rutila 974112]

How many times have we had this discussion?