Techniques for locating other aircraft visualy

[Özcan]

Hello!

From the latest 2 of my flights, i have noticed a pretty severe weakness in my flying. I'm having troubles locating other planes visually, even when the atc tells me exact bearings it can sometimes take me up to 15-20 seconds to spot a plane, aspecially if the distance is noticable.

Other people i have flown with tend to have a very easy time spotting other aircrafts. Many of them have been flying gliders and competing in it so it's of course a second nature to them.

My eyesight is very well, i can see well above 1,0 with both eyes in jaeger 3 system and colorsight is perfectly fine. So i draw the conclusion that my technique has to be the missing link. Or could it be a high mental workload that causes this?

I'm flying VFR in Sweden where i very seldomly have traffic surrounding me so what my instructor told me has been lost, i remember him telling me to scan the skies very slowly wich i take in account.

I would like to ask you what techniques, comments and ideas you have regarding this matter that sooner or later can get me into serious trouble!

Fly safe

Thanks alot
Özcan

[RatherBeFlying]

One of the nice things about flying gliders is the view through the canopy.

Perhaps less nice is how often you have company.

We all search for that distant flyspeck object, but my best acquisition distance for gliders and small a/c is about a mile -- and a quarter mile more often than I like.

At glider airspeeds, a quarter mile is workable, but less so for VFR transits at 120 kt.

The bigger stuff I do spot from farther away.

So my experience indicates that my vision picks up targets about the size of a fingernail at arm's length.

Always have your eye out for traffic. I've been in the initial climbout from a practice forced approach at a few hundred AGL and had to duck to avoid another a/c on a low level transit. I've also been vectored in front of a turboprop in a radar environment and gave the SLF a nice look at a glider as I got out of their way.

[IO540]

Özcan

You are about the same as most people. Most people can't see other aircraft.

[Codger]

Old school but it works.
Try looking a little bit away from where the noted traffic is supposed to be.
Vision, when it comes to moving objects is a bit better when a bit off axis.
Takes a little time working on it but if you become more aware of your peripheral vision you'll notice an improvement in picking up other aircraft.
Used to work on this by watching the television but actually looking at another object 40-50 degrees away from the screen. Takes a while but soon you'll know everything that is on the screen without looking at it directly.

[soay]

Try looking a little bit away from where the noted traffic is supposed to be.
Vision, when it comes to moving objects is a bit better when a bit off axis.
The trouble is that anything that's on a collision course is not going to be moving, relative to your view out.

[Sensible]

I find that my eyes if not actually looking at an object and relaxed seem to be focused about 3metres away from my body. I understand that this is a normal ocurrence when looking at close objects ie the instruments and then looking at haze out through the canopy. When Flying, I make a point of looking at the ground or a cloud pattern if visible somewhere distant before continuing my scan. I find this works well.

[effortless]

I have never been able to work out why I see some things and not others. We look and look and don't see but when we do we wonder where it came from. All you can do ius keep scanning and scan again.

It gets worse as you get old. I nearly took out a horse and cart on a Bulgarian motorway the other day. really didn't see it until I nearly hit it (I was in a car not an aircraft.):sad:

[Mark 1]

I believe the technique taught to military pilots is to continuously move your point of focus through a sweep going in a saw-tooth motion up and down and left to right, stopping only momentarily at one point.

As has been said, you can't easily pick out items that have little relative motion (hence possibly on a collision course) and this technique prevents the gaze being fixed and limited in scope. It also prevents the target being in your blind spot.

If you weren't aware of your blind spot, try drawing two crosses on a piece of paper 6" apart. Focus your eye on one cross and steadily move the paper away, at one point the second cross will disappear as it enters your blind spot.

[172driver]

Funny, the technique I was taught is the opposite - to concentrate on parts of the sky and move your eyes around this slice (say, 20%) in a sawtooth motion, then move on to the next slice, etc.

In reality, my guess is that 99% of mid-airs are avoided by the Big Sky theory and only 1% by the employment of MkI eyeball :uhoh:

In other words - Özcan, you are not alone. As others have said, the most difficult object to spot is the one that's on a collision course with you, i.e. static in your windscreen.

My own technique, if ATC call a conflicting traffic and I simply cannot see it, is to at least make myself as visible as possible: turn on strobes, perhaps landing light and rock the wings.

[IO540]

99% of mid-airs are avoided by the Big Sky theory and only 1% by the employment of MkI eyeball

I agree 100%

The number of times I have been flying along, with 3 passengers, got a "contact" from the radar operator, and none of us could spot it... In fact none of us managed to spot about 3/4 of them.

Personally, I keep my look-out to a narrow band at my height, paying little attention to stuff below me. I fly as high up as I can, airspace/weather permitting, and find most traffic is way below. If I was flying at say 1000ft AGL then I would have 10x more contacts to watch out for.

On the one hand we are taught to navigate visually which means watching the ground; on the other hand traffic that is kerb crawling isn't going to get you! Fortunately I am done with all my training now and will never again have to do dead reckoning :)

[gpn01]

There's probably several reasons why glider pilots tend to spot other aircraft quite quickly, including:

- They constantly maintain a good scan cycle
- Maintaining a good lookout out is part of the training
- Gliders fly in quite a, potentially, high risk environment - due to proximity of other gliders and the potential for powered pilots who are staring at instruments instead of looking out (not necessarily a criticism, jus a fact of life)
- Because they're habitually looking out, their visual systems are trained better to do the task

Something that will help is to understand a little more about how your eyes work - and the fact that, without an object to look at, they will naturally focus on a point a few metres away - which is pretty useless for a pilot! A trick to overcome this is to focus on an object on the horizon (or on the ground) and actually look at it properly so that it is in focus. Then move your scan (left or right) and focus on the next object in the distance. This will help to train your eyesight as well as improve your chances of seeing something.

[G-KEST]

Best technique is to engage autopilot and close your eyes counting up to 60. If you manage to get there then open your eyes and disengage autopilot. In the event of your hearing a very loud bang before you reach 60 then you have indeed located the traffic.

Cheers,

Trapper 69
:rolleyes::uhoh::D

[BackPacker]

Glider pilots also have the advantage of knowing what a glider can and can't do, and what the generally agreed procedures are for gliders either in a thermal or in the circuit. They instinctively know where to look for the best place to spot other gliders. Plus, gliders do circle around a lot, making for a better visual target.

In the circuit, powered aircraft generally have the same advantage. We know more or less where other aircraft should and should not be, in what direction and at what altitude they should be flying. (Assuming they behave themselves properly.) So we know where to focus our scan.

But in cruise, powered aircraft may fly at all altitudes, in any position relative to convective clouds, in any direction, and generally in straight lines. Makes it very hard to spot aircraft in cruise.

I would not be surprised if gliders, because of this, can spot other gliders miles away, but are regularly surprised by a powered aircraft which cuts all of a sudden through their thermal, oblivous, seemingly, to the glider traffic. And the other way around too.

Oh, and gliders have far less blinkenlichten in the cockpit to play with and get distracted by.

[MyData]

Additionally to direct sighting... Pay close attention to the ATC, especially at those fields you are most familiar with. You can build up a very good mental picture of arrivals and departures.

This helps a great deal to plan ahead and predict where that traffic will be when you yourself are arriving / departing. Et voila - there it appears.

With younger passengers - play 'spot the other aircraft' game.

With older passengers (my father on first flight) ask them to keep a look out then don't act too surprised when something comes within 200ft of you to the right and underneath you!!!! "Oh indeed I did spot it, and just watched it fly towards us, a very interesting sight". OK, keep on keeping a good look out, and when you see something TELL ME.

[ProfChrisReed]

Something that helps for me is to move my head regularly (not just turning, but a few inches to one side or the other as well). This changes the relation of what's out there to the background, previously explained as why converging aircraft are hard to spot.

My glider canopy has a hoop between me and the nose, so I'm conscious that there's a blind area. I find that moving my head to look "past" the hoop will sometimes reveal something in the clear area, just because I'm looking at it at a slighter different angle.

Does anyone else think this helps?

[Whirlybird]

I'm sure all these hints are great, but I agree with IO540 (that's the second time I've agreed with him today; what's going on? ;)) Seeing other aircraft is extremely difficult. Anybody who tells you otherwise is lying, very lucky, or hasn't tried it.

[Özcan]

Thanks alot for your input!

When reflecting over this, I now think that i can spot other planes more easily over places i'm very familiar with. I've never had any problems when going the other routes i usually do. Maybe could this have to do with the mental workload.

[Fuji Abound]

I have said it before, but I think it is worth repeating.

“The principal means of avoiding collisions in uncontrolled airspace is “see and avoid”. Available evidence suggests that the effectiveness of “see and avoid” is questionable when used in isolation (i.e. not in conjunction with a radar service), implying an increased risk of failure to detect a loss of separation.”

That is what the CAA say.

The evidence is if you are very lucky you will first see another aircraft at 3 miles. At typical GA speeds you have less than 20 seconds after reaction time to see and avoid the collision.

Realistically if you are going to collide you probably will be unable to avoid the collision using "see and avoid". Please do not kid yourself otherwise. I did and I was wrong.

On the plus side you stand a much better chance of seeing aircraft turning towards you or of seeing gliders (who are likely to be constantly turning) and you should develop your see and avoid technique to avoid this type of traffic.

How can you improve your chances of missing other traffic.

Well it is something I thought a lot about. I have a number of suggestions concened with how and where you fly but (leaving those aside for another post)

TCAS clearly works but is expensive and if you are moving between different aircraft most will not have this fit.

Fortunately the mobile TCAS systems work.

I would not fly without one now - ever!

They are simple, reliable, and it is surprising how much traffic they pick up, that you dont see, but is within three miles.

IMO an investment worth every penny as long as you understand their limitations.

[Fuji Abound]

I am advised that when I fly it is a waste of time looking out of the window to make sure I don't bump into things.

Yep, I knew I was right about my earlier comments about PPRuNe.

That is just about as daft and pointless as it gets, becasue if you really thought I said that, then you must be reading it in a different language.

I spend a lot of time doing aeros - 'cse I love it - guess where I am looking.

I spend a lot of time flying a G1000 - with the autopilot on - guess where I am looking.

I spend a lot of time flying other aircraft - yes if they havent got a GPS with my own hand held - guess where it is - "screwed" on to the glare shield - right in the line of view.

I missed another aircraft recently - another twin, came form over the right shoulder and neither of us saw each other - and yet I reckon my look out is as good as anyones. Closest I ever want to get. Trouble is if you fly a bit you may never have a near miss. However, statistically for me every 750 hours has produced one a bit too close for comfort. Of course if you fly in poor conditions your ability to see other aircraft is even worse.

I can think of occasions even in reasonable viz, finding some haze routing towards a setting sun and you might as well be in IMC. If you think by looking out you will see another aircraft then you just have not flown enough to have experienced these type of conditions.

Guess where my PCAS sits - yep, on the glareshield. Guess the only time I look at it - when it beeps to tell me there is another aircraft within my 3 mile bubble - and if it is at the same height - which it also tells me and thats why I have a quick glance at it, I do something about it.

The one thing I am not going to be stupid enough to do any more is ignore all the evidence. I know the big sky theory is what keeps me safe most of the time. I know (because the experts tell me in consequence of some proper scientific studies) that see and avoid is far from guaranteed to save me. For that reason I am happy to get all the help I can - and will continue to do so.

What else do I do:

I am careful to avoid choke points if I can,

In restricted corridors, I will fly as close to the base of CAS as I can, nothing is hopefully going to be above me,

I get a RIS or LARS whenever I can,

I use FIS if I can,

I use the autopilot as much as I can, and I keep my eyes outside.

From my point of view something that costs me a few hours flying at most that gives me an extra element of protection is a superb investment.

Moreover, I know you will be grateful if it enables me to avoid you the next time you dont seem me, but I shall be less grateful that you thought you would see me, but when it came to the crunch your head was down in the cockpit staring at your map and slide rule because you thought that was the proper way to do things.

I fly a Tiger a bit as well. I love pottering around in it - no GPS, Im not going far, instruments as basic as you can get, I have a much better chance of seeing you becasue I am going so slowly, but I still recognise that with all those sticky out bits my vision is not great and I probably will not see you in your nice shiny twin zooming along at 170 knots - so guess what, I am still going to stick my PCAS on the glareshield, just like the scarf round my neck 'cse it keeps my neck warm.

[IO540]

Don't let the trolls wind you up, Fuji ;) Just ignore them.

I am putting in TCAS (Ryan 600) as soon as I have another excuse for grounding the plane for a couple of weeks.

[Özcan]

I found that post very useless. If you're going to be a troll, please at least do it tastefully or somehow amusing. If you cannot accomplish neither, please refrain from posting garbage.

[whitehorse]

WR - you have just proved a point that I make to my students, it's the other bug**r that will kill you.

Keep your eyes out of the cockpit, search in a up/down motion with the eyes around the cockpit windows. Not forgetting to refocus your eyes on close range objects eg a rivit around the window frame, and then looking out again. If you stare at the horizon in one direction for long enough you will eventually focus on the fly on the window and have little chance of seeing the distant objects. (I think I got this while being trained as a SAR pilot in the RN)

[Fuji Abound]

WR - you have just proved a point that I make to my students, it's the other bug**r that will kill you.

Far too subtle for me.

Keep your eyes out of the cockpit, search in a up/down motion with the eyes around the cockpit windows.

Good plan.

However, best of all tell them that the people who license you, and will license them, and also those that license more pilots than any where else in the world (the FAA), say it isnt reliable.

However, all the best students should manage that while reading their map, ticking off their PLOG and doing there 15 minute checks.

Sadly it doesnt work. I have flown with them and their heads are in the cockpit for much more time than I would care. If anyone needs as much help as they can get these are the ones that need it.

I do accept the big sky will save them (and us) 99% of the time - I am just making a plea, becasue it is so engrained in PPL methodolgy, that you really should not kid yourself see and avoid will work reliably for the other 1% - sadly the evidence indicates otherwise.

I'd love to have a debate with you based on the evidence, I'd love it were you able to produce evidence to the contrary, I suppose I'd far rather not have my little traffic system on the facia, but until I see the evidence I will go on looking out as best I can, I will try and ensure I use the best scan I can and I will avoid as many cockpit tasks that might distract me and I will fly in a way to reduce the risk of collision BUT I will turn my collision avoidance system on every time :).

[stickandrudderman]

Whilst Wr's post wasn't actually helpful, I think you're being a little over-sensitive to what he said.
If you read between the lines what he's actually saying is that he longs for a simpler life! One les impinged upon by the modern social requirements to enure that one has consumed and digested the plethora of information which is now available to all, rather than continue on in ignorant bliss.
It's far safer these days to adopt the sheep like mentality and follow the crowd, 'cause someone else is usually taking the responsibilty!
In that sense I think you should cut the guy some slack!

[Fuji Abound]

If you read between the lines what he's actually saying is that he longs for a simpler life!

If he is he gets all the slack in the world from me. :D

[scooter boy]

Fuji - I love my TCAS too.

and I also look out of the window!

Happy flying,
SB

[gpn01]

I think it's great that somebody recognises that they want to improve their lookout skills....and long may that attitude continue.
I do worry when people start adopting the 'I have TCAS, so all is well' attitude. None of the existing aircraft borne collision avoidance technologies (e.g. TCAS, Transponder, ADS-B or FLARM) remove the risk of collision with another aircraft that isn't carrying the same technology. So, even if you have the latest all singing and dancing flashing little box, remember that you still need to be looking out for other aircraft, gliders, hang gliders, microlights, parachutists, balloonists, helicopters, etc. that might be flying in the area.
See and be seen isn't 100% perfect - yes there's always a risk that some b**g*r will arrive in the same bit of the air as you do and that you don't see them before things go bang. There's less of a chance of you spotting, and avoiding them, though if you fail to keep a good lookout, decide it's not worth it and keep your eyes inside the cockpit.
Interesting comment in an earlier posting about how glider pilots are more likely to spot other gliders because they know their behaviour (i.e. turning in thermals). That's probably incorrect - well flown modern high performance gliders fly for anywhere between 10 - 100km without turning or thermalling and are doing that at between 50 - 100kts. Operating height band will be anywhere between 500' and up to around 7000' on high cumulus days if they don't fly in cloud and 20,000+ if they do decide to fly in cloud (and even higher when using the wave effect of mountains). So, you'll find gliders at all heights in open airspace.
I teach gliding students that they should look in all directions and shouldn't concentrate solely upon looking at where they expect other traffic to be. A good wakeup call is to explain that they should be looking for the aircraft that they haven't yet seen - in the congested open airspace in the UK there's a high probability that there'll be other traffic around, it's just that you haven't noticed them yet. A good game to play, if there's at least two of you, is to see who can spot traffic first.....also helps you to improve your visual acuity.

[Fuji Abound]

decide it's not worth it and keep your eyes inside the cockpit.

Can I finally say, at the risk of repeating myself (and as the one who brought up TCAS and pointed out that see and avoid doesnt actually work most of the time, and wishing I had not bothered)

that I did not say -

DONT KEEP A GOOD LOOK OUT and neither did I say KEEP YOUR EYES IN THE COCKPIT.

However, and on reflection, having thought about my experiences surprisingly I would probably have had no near misses if I had relied on the big sky and TCAS and never looked out the cockpit at all - life might have been rather dull though.

In fact of the three that were close, one was air traffic's fault in intermittent IMC in the hold. ATC apologised after, but if the aircraft was going to hit me I would never have seen it, but TCAS would have because I know it was transponding, the second I was the non flying pilot, happened to look up and there was the aircraft full screen about to hit us, the other pilot hadnt seen it, but I know it was transponding and finally a recent incident when I know we were both transponding. I can think of quite a few occasions when I have changed my course having seen another aircraft - but would any of those hit me - probably not.

You have a very good chance of seeing the sort of aircraft that are not transponding because they are liekly to be a lot slower or a lot larger (baloons). It is the fast moving light twins, singles, commercials operating outside CAS (and inside when ATC makes a mistake) and military that presents the greatest risk en route.

.. .. .. and yes, well done to the original poster for asking how to improve his look out, he got some good opinions, and I for one will be really grateful if they help him to see me when I didnt.

I just think we place to much reliance on see and avoid as the sole basis for avoiding collisions and anyone asking the question should also understand why.

[IO540]

If you write about TCAS, there will always be somebody who will stupidly accuse you of flying with your head in the cockpit and not looking out.

If you write about GPS, there will always be somebody who will stupidly accuse you of flying with your head in the cockpit and not looking out.

One wonders how much effort one should put into replying to those people. I think it's better to ignore them.

Drawing attention to available technology is a great thing. With TCAS, the extra info comes at zero brain cost to the pilot - assuming one can afford it, why not have it? It's obvious from flying under an RIS that most people who fly (powered) above a couple of thousand feet seem to be transponding these days. I know loads of people who can't wait for transponders to become mandatory but of course they won't post this in any forum...

As for gliders doing long trips and going to 20k feet, I would suggest that the glider population that does that is a tiny fraction of the total. Most gliders go around in the local area, and are relatively easy to spot because they are not on straight line trajectories.

[172driver]

I know loads of people who can't wait for transponders to become mandatory but of course they won't post this in any forum...


Well - I am and I do ;)

[Mikehotel152]

As a student pilot, shortly to do my skill test, I have to say that keeping a good lookout is the one thing that I need to concentrate on. I can fly a plane. Most people can manage that...

But it is far too easy to fly along for 5 minutes without looking out the aircraft properly. How many times have you driven your commuting route to work and then realised you can't remember any of the journey?!

It's also especially easy to forget to look out to the right, past your P2 or PAX, even though it is probably the most important sector because it's primarily your responsibility to avoid aircraft coming from that direction.

In my opinion it takes discipline to keep a good lookout and most people become lazy as self-confidence in their flying abilities increase. I would love to have a TACAS as a back up, same as I would like a GPS as a back up to my half mil chart, but only as back ups!

As for the precise method I use, I try to move my eyes from one space in the sky to another, look carefully at that space to let my peripheral vision pick up movement, then move my eye to the next spot. Seems to work. But I have to admit that I usually pick up traffic out of the corner of my eye when I'm NOT doing a careful scan of the sky.

I had one dodgy experience on my QXC. I caught movement in the corner of my eye and glanced down to the right to see a twin making a right turn about 50 foot below and 150 feet to the right of my aircraft. I thnk he came from behind, saw me and turned.

I immediately felt guilty thinking I missed eye-balling him as he came from my left, but to be fair, I think he came from behind so I probably had no chance of seeing him. Nevertheless it was a close encounter in comparison with seeing dots on the horizon.

This must happen quite often, but it certainly woke me up and every dead fly on the windscreen suddenly became a potential Cessna in my head! :O

And remember chaps and chapettes, most GA seems to be at 2000-2300 feet...It only takes one collision to ruin your flying career...:\

There but for the Grace of God go I....:eek:

[gpn01]

"If you write about TCAS, there will always be somebody who will stupidly accuse you of flying with your head in the cockpit and not looking out"

......Yes, fair point and I'll apologise for making the inference that it could reduce your lookout. BUT I'll bet that there are others who DO think that technology removes the need to maintain a god lookout. More worringly is when they read it on a forum and so think it's a fact (rather tha tongue in cheek).

"As for gliders doing long trips and going to 20k feet, I would suggest that the glider population that does that is a tiny fraction of the total. Most gliders go around in the local area, and are relatively easy to spot because they are not on straight line trajectories."

....Cross-country glider sorties, as a percentage of total glider launches, probably is relatively small. However, on a nice thermic day, that still translates to well over a hundred movements operating between 500' - 7000', flying close to (or even in) cloud. All of whom are trying to minimise time spent circling and maximise time spent on track.

All I'm saying is that everybody nees to keep a good lookout and don't just assume that conflicting traffic will be where you're expecting it to be.

[IO540]

WR

I am all for "simple flying". Lots of people like it. I don't do it myself because it doesn't deliver what I need which is a mixture of local flights and long legs e.g. across the Alps to the south at FL160, IFR.

Regarding (1), just last week, Flight International reported on serious concerns over the safety of technically advanced aircraft (TAA) in the GA fleet. To quote FI: “glass cockpit aircraft accounted for 45% of the fatal weather-related accidents, compared with 15% for GA fleet with traditional instrumentation”. (Presumably this is in the USA.)

This one has been done to death in another forum recently, if I recall correctly. That kind of "research" is generally rubbish, especially if you see it in Flight International. It's very poor statistical analysis. The planes that go into "weather" are generally IFR tourers. These start at say $350k. These days, nearly all are glass cockpit. The buyers are not going to be doing sunny Sunday local bimbles; they will be using these things to go places - especially in the USA where you really can do that (loads of airports, hard runways, GPS approaches etc etc). A lot of these (esp. Cirrus) will go to relatively new pilots. The old codgers who have had their IR for 150 years and fly 300hrs/year along the same well worn routes will rarely be flying a glass cockpit spaceship. So there will be a big bias in the accident data, because the pilot population flying these types is different. If one is out to find a "problem" it is in the intersection of the mission profile and the lower pilot experience, not glass cockpits.

Regarding (2) Fuji quoted a CAA publication stating essentially that “see and avoid” is not reliable. (Digression: The full document was written MORE from the viewpoint of commercial air transport, i.e. a 737 pilot, rather than a Luton Minor pilot). Fuji and I are very close on this. I believe that when those that license those that license those etc tell me that I should have PCAS available then I will listen. Until then, I will wonder how many private pilots will be playing with their new box of tricks and not looking out of the window at the fast approaching non-transponding aircraft (and that is certainly not directed at you, Fuji). The evidence is not yet there one way or the other, despite what may appear obvious to some.

It must depend on where you are.

The only place where see and avoid might possibly apply to CAT is in terminal areas and in there the 737 won't be doing 500kt. It will be doing slightly over 200kt perhaps. That isn't a lot more than a half decent IFR tourer - I've seen 220kt (GS) myself. There is no practical difference between 150kt and 220kt especially given a decent level of cockpit automation. So for enroute flight, my view is that see and avoid still doesn't work - because a target on a genuine collision course will be stationary in one's field of view.

In the busy GA airfield circuit, see and avoid is the only way because TCAS won't work very well (due to numbers and proximity). This scenario remains dangerous, and there is no decent solution.

(4) Those that licensed those that licensed etc and the likes of Fuji that taught me to fly stressed the importance of an effective lookout. They taught me not to spend time head in the cockpit studying a map, but like all others, I found it immensely difficult initially. But we have to gain this skill. In my experience of “close contacts” (I’ve not had any real scares – perhaps I won’t fly without TCAS when I have) they have been almost exclusively with sophisticated singles (and that is not a poke at IO540). I reckon (but don’t know) that too many such aircraft are flown by those who fly only relatively few hours per year in them, and who are often one step behind their game. As these are normally transponding, perhaps I should take Fuji’s advice and buy a PCAS!

It's indeed likely that there are some right plonkers flying IFR tourers. There certainly are plonkers flying all other types - I hear some on the radio every time I fly. But I would suggest this is nothing to do with the aircraft type or the equipment. The reality of flying a well equipped plane is that you are not doing a great deal and are looking out more or less constantly.

Having said that, if I am flying a leg, VMC, I will be on autopilot which is tracking the GPS and looking out around my own height band. If I see another plane about to pass 300ft under me (note: 300ft looks very close to us pilots) I just let it go. That pilot might think "that idiot, he's got his head down fiddling with his GPS" but (a) he was seen and (b) 300ft is loads of separation. There is no need to do anything about it.

[Twiddle]

I can just confirm what other have said re spotting other aircraft, on quite a few occasions I've been advised that there's been a police helicopter, xyz height, south of you by xxx and couldn't spot it (with others in the helicopter who also couldn't see it - and no, not my granny and her mother either) - and these are aircraft that are painted to be noticed.

You can improve your chances by ensuring that when you brief your passengers you tell them to keep a good lookout and advise you if they see anything, even if they believe you have already spotted it.

[Fuji Abound]

Some very interesting posts.

With regards "advanced" cockpits I think there is a risk that some pilots could spend more time inside the cockpit than they should. There is a lot more going on compared with a "traditional" cockpit and a temptation to get caught up in button pushing. TCAS adds yet another component.

It is therefore vital that pilots become familiar with these cockpits as quickly as possible and remain wary not to let their skills degrade. There are some very good cockpit simulators around - as many hours as possible using these on the ground will pay dividends.

Never the less I recognise that there are those who will fly this type of aircraft and lack the currency on the equipment they need.

However, accepting this as a given, since these pilots "see and avoid" will have already been compromised, they are exactly the pilots that will benefit from TCAS or PCAS even more than those current and familiar with the kit.

There may be some confusion how PCAS and TCAS works. It is one piece of equipment that requires the minimal of "supervision" in the air.

In its simplest version PCAS only requires you to define the "safety bubble" on the ground in terms of horizontal and vertical separation. Once that done there is really nothing to do in the air. An aural alert will be given through your headset if another transponding aircraft enters the "bubble". Only then a quick glance at the display will tell you if the traffic is at the same height, above or below, its trend relative to you, its distance and direction in 90 degree sectors.

If see and avoid has failed it may just alert you to a serious risk. At two miles if you haven’t seen the traffic and it is at the same level as you it is well worth changing level - you still have time.

[fireflybob]

Something which I don't think has been mentioned yet is to make sure the windscreen is clean before flight. A screen full of squashes flies doesn't enhance lookout too much!

Head movements (aka rubber necking) make a big difference - beware aircraft hiding behind canopy stays etc.

Make sure before entering a climb (this includes a go around) that you check above and behind, before entering a descent you clear the airspace below by turning off heading 20 degrees or so and checking the intended descent path, when climbing or descending "weave" every 1,000 ft minimum and when you descend on the deadside do so whilst turning rather than flying parallel to the landing runway.

In the open FIR (jungle airspace) I would suggest there is more random separation (although beware choke points etc.) whereas as you come into the circuit area a/c are funnelling towards the landing runway which is why circuit discipline is important.

I recall many years ago that the USA did an indepth study into mid air collision risk and commented that the highest risk time was when operating within 10 nm of an airport with mixed VFR/IFR traffic. Also most close airproxes and/or midairs occur with one aircraft between the 10 oclock and 2 oclock postion so this is where your main scan needs to be concentrated.
The aircraft which pose a threat will not be changing relative bearing so are, I would suggest, more difficult to spot. If you look out the window and see another aircraft with changing relative bearing there should be no collision risk.