> Is there any legitimate reason for the pilot to disable the transponder?
Yes, of course -- any piece of electronic equipment might (a) begin to misbehave and interfere with other equipment or produce misleading results, or (b) catch fire and emit smoke into the flight deck, or (c) both. It's common sense to have a way to disable any piece of equipment on short notice.
I played a small part in the design of NASA's Space Shuttle many years ago, and we definitely kept the possibility of equipment failure in mind at all times.
> It seems like they should make it more difficult than just throwing a breaker in the cockpit.
On board an aircraft, the pilot has the highest authority. You don't expect to have to protect the aircraft from him -- more the reverse. That is why, when a pilot goes crazy, the results are usually catastrophic.
Yes, of course -- any piece of electronic equipment might (a) begin to misbehave and interfere with other equipment or produce misleading results, or (b) catch fire and emit smoke into the flight deck, or (c) both. It's common sense to have a way to disable any piece of equipment on short notice.
I played a small part in the design of NASA's Space Shuttle many years ago, and we definitely kept the possibility of equipment failure in mind at all times.
> It seems like they should make it more difficult than just throwing a breaker in the cockpit.
On board an aircraft, the pilot has the highest authority. You don't expect to have to protect the aircraft from him -- more the reverse. That is why, when a pilot goes crazy, the results are usually catastrophic.