The 471xxx block of ICAO-24 codes is allocated to Hungary, which ties in with the previous registration.
The 39Dxxx block is allocated to France. Assuming that the one highlighted in red is actually correct, that is what should be entered into the transponder. Your registration paperwork may have the correct code, or failing that, you may need to approach the DGAC.
NCYankee wrote:
No. I would interpret it that you need to set the transponder ICAO 24 bit address to the value of 471907.
You’re right if the aircraft is still registered in Hungary as HA-JML. But it appears that the message is indicating that the current address being squawked is the old ICAO address for HA-JML but the aircraft is really F-HVAL and therefore squawking a Hungarian address for a French-registered aircraft. From the thread, I understand that it has now been moved under the French register as F-HVAL in which case zuutroy would seem to be correct. This is also substantiated by a search here:
While not authoritative and qualified with a “Code not yet positively confirmed”, the code returned from this source for F-HVAL is indeed 39D40B which substantiates the initial message received by zuutroy. Changing the code to 39D40B should address the problem.
The French DGAC lookup site only provides basic info and requires a written requested to get a full copy of the registration information, so it’s not much help other to confirm that a Mooney is registered as F-HVAL. If the serial number is used for the search, that would confirm the exact aircraft in question but still not provide the ICAO 24 bit address.
zuutroy wrote:
It’s currently F-HVAL since Dec 2016. I will make the change suggested if it’s a DIY job, but if not I’ll hold off for a bit as I haven’t decided whether to leave it as F- or go to EI- yet.
It’s surely a DIY job on a Trig transponder. I would think it’s similar on your model, unless protected by an “installer only” key. Who changed the flight identifier to F-HVAL? If it was anybody with avionics experience, they should have changed the hex code as well.
That I don’t know. Previous owner was a part-145 shop owner so he potentially should have known what he’s at. I’ll have a dig around in the settings over the weekend.
zuutroy wrote:
Previous owner was a part-145 shop owner so he potentially should have known what he’s at.
The one at LHKV? Yes, they should have known…
