Talk:Transponder code

"Removed for security reasons"

I assume by this edit summary that the threat is that a potential hijacker will read this article and figure out the pilots' secrets. The only problem is, if a hijacker has read the article and learned that you squawk 7500 when you're hijacked, you think they're not going to figure out that if the pilot is saying, "Uh, center, squawking 7-5-0-0," that they're up to the same thing? We'd either have to remove all of the information, which is pointless since this can be found in any number of publications (including the FAA web site), or there's no point in removing any of it. —Cleared as filed. 01:52, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The whole "squawking 7-5-0-0" business has been removed from official UK ATC phraseology for exactly this reason.BaseTurnComplete 13:44, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. The part about alternatively squawking 7500 and 7700 (which I've removed) is bollocks. In respect of 7500 the UK AIP states (UK AIP 1.6.2.2.1):

(c) Code 7500. To indicate unlawful interference with the planned operation of a flight, unless circumstances warrant the use of Code 7700;

What that means is, you squawk 7500 unless you also have a situation of distress (in the technical sense of the word) which warrants use of 7700. Any of those codes will wake the controllers up in any case.--195.55.110.182 20:47, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

Please see Talk:Squawk for my suggestions of what to do with the articles Squawk and Squawk (aviation) (I'm more pointing out the merge to this article than the other suggestions). PeepP 15:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, Squawk (aviation) should definitely be merged here. Secondary Oak 13:43, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, the two go hand-in-hand. BaseTurnComplete 18:00, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, both of them are essentially the same thing except for terminology.. @kshay 08:03, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge done.BaseTurnComplete 10:21, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]