francisco collazos
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2021
- Messages
- 650
- Display Name
- ciscovet
So I found out there are 4096 unique transponder combinations because each number location goes from 0-7. Does anyone know why there are no 8 or 9's used?
The numbers 0 to 7 are used in base 8, which is called octal.
I'm not sure why they chose octal instead of base 10, way back when.
Probably because octal is easily converted to and from binary without wasting any bits, while decimal is not.
… Computers think in powers of 2 while humans think in powers of 10.
Computers don’t think. They are programmed by humans to operate.
The numbers 0 to 7 are used in base 8, which is called octal.
I'm not sure why they chose octal instead of base 10, way back when.
That's certainly true.
I'm just not sure why the bits were so precious, for this application. If they had been willing to waste a few bits, they could have chosen BCD (binary coded decimal), to represent the digits 0 to 9.
Is one of the objectives of ADS-B to replace transponders eventually?We've run into this sort of problem with 640 KB RAM and IPV4 computer network addresses where we *thought* those would be more than enough. I wonder if we'll see a day when more than 4096 aircraft are flying within a Center's area. If drones will need individual transponder codes I could see us getting there in my lifetime.
Then they "operate" in base 2. We know computers don't "think" like people do, .....
People think?Then they "operate" in base 2. We know computers don't "think" like people do, you don't have to be so pedantic.
Bits still are precious. Radio frequencies are a limited resource and we’re still using the same antiquated modulation techniques from way back when. Remember the uproar from the ADS-B mandate? Now imagine if every transponder in the world were to be made obsolete so that we can switch to a better more modern modulation scheme.I'm just not sure why the bits were so precious, for this application. If they had been willing to waste a few bits, they could have chosen BCD (binary coded decimal), to represent the digits 0 to 9.
Original area codes were allocated based on how long they would take to dial on a rotary phone. New York is 212 because it was most frequently called and that's the shortest area code you can dial (2 only ties up the line for two ticks as the dial rotates back to neutral). Chicago is 312 which took slightly longer. Places called less frequently would get 8 and 9 in their area codes.
Original area codes were allocated based on how long they would take to dial on a rotary phone. New York is 212 because it was most frequently called and that's the shortest area code you can dial (2 only ties up the line for two ticks as the dial rotates back to neutral). Chicago is 312 which took slightly longer. Places called less frequently would get 8 and 9 in their area codes.
That was when they dropped the requirement that the middle digit had to be 0 or 1.
I think part of it was to make them distinct from the prefix. In the early days, prefix (first 3 of the local number) never had a 0 or 1 as the middle digit.
We've run into this sort of problem with 640 KB RAM and IPV4 computer network addresses where we *thought* those would be more than enough. I wonder if we'll see a day when more than 4096 aircraft are flying within a Center's area. If drones will need individual transponder codes I could see us getting there in my lifetime.
Is one of the objectives of ADS-B to replace transponders eventually?
You’re typing on a rotary iphone?I’m on my iPhone which precludes the somewhat longer answer...
In theory, yes. The FAA moves at a glacial pace but it is happening.
And the Exchange had a name. For example, my 213 number was 833-xxxx which was Terminal Exchange or TE3-xxxxentirely correct. The prefix is known as the exchange. With seven-digit dialing, an exchange needed to be 100% distinguishable from an area code. I’m on my iPhone which precludes the somewhat longer answer but it’s essentially this.
Is one of the objectives of ADS-B to replace transponders eventually?