Scottish Info Coverage

[gasax]

Split off from the microlight crash. I've started this if only because of FBW comments;

GASAX
Quote:
I don't know what the plan was that these guys had. But there is no way they could raise Scottish unless they were at at least 5000ft in that area. Anything less and it is pretty spotty. And that is the case all the way until you get pretty near the coast on the other side. There are areas where it works at something around the height of the tops plus 1000 and there are areas it doesn't.

GASAX....You often make some very negative and false claims on this forum about Scottish Info....having been doing the job for the past 16 years I know every place that I will expect to lose contact with aircraft I am talking to....coverage is pretty good above 3000ft in most place's but bear in mind VHF is indeed line of sight so yes we can not expect total coverage from my 3 aerial site's that I am able to use.



So I'm saying that if you want to talk to Scottish from east to west be at 5000. FBW says its pretty good at 3000 in most places.

My personal experience is that I can hear the aircraft talking to Scottish as I cross the Cairngorm massive and the higher ground to the south (like Ben More) if at 5000. At 4000 most of the time. At less than that it is pretty spotty. When you are around the Glencoe area it is reasonably good

Now I would refute that this is very negative and false - because it is my experience so is there some information which you can give us FBW? As I posted on that thread I think that Scottish actually make a Basic service useful at least in terms of SAR. So where is the coverage 'pretty good' and where is is not?

[mad_jock]

Slightly aggressive mate, no need. FBW is a good bloke who puts in alot of his own personal unpaid time to promote flight safety in Scotland.

In fact there are more than a few scottish controller who are very active GA pilots and Scottish have been extremely forward with designing things to make the intergration of CAT and GA, gliding etc as sensible as possible. I can't think of any where else that has gliding transite corridors through airways and airways not being class A just so VFR traffic can get through.

[fisbangwollop]

GASAX....anything over the Cairngorm is never a problem as We have a TX/RX site on the East end of the Moray coast. If you follow the A9 below the tops I will lose you northbound past Blair Atholl as I lose you on my TX/RX site that is just north of Dundee on high ground till you are in view of the Moray Coast TX approaching Newtonmore.

The Great Glen is hopeless below 4000ft.

Between Oban and Lock Fyne below 2500ft not good and around Ranok below 3500 ft not brill.

As you are aware VHF is line of site so if below the hill tops yes R/T could be poor........as I said in my earlier posts we really do understand the areas that we can expect to lose contact....its the only sector I do and having done it for the past 16 years I have a reasonable understanding as to what I am talking about.

As Mad Jock says I put a fair ammount of my own spare time and effort visiting Scottish clubs and inviting them through to our facility at Prestwick in an effort to promote flight safety.....may be one day you would like to join me for the day and see if you really think I know what I am talking about.

In the mean time safe flying. :cool:

[bingofuel]

Interesting thread!

A suggestion would be to publish a coverage chart based on FBW's knowledge so that plots could, if they wished, plan their flights to remain in areas, or at altitudes, of known coverage. Of course some jobsworth would moan and claim they could not contact Scottish at 2501 ft in an area promolgated as good above 2500.

Some pilots won' t use radios, at present that is their choice, but even if coverage is poor in an emergency, 'someone' on the frequency might hear enough to get the SAR ball rolling.

Keep up the good work FBW

[Maoraigh1]

if they wished, plan their flights to remain in areas, or at altitudes, of known coverage.
I would fly to avoid visible weather, rather than follow a planned route. I always fly below the cloud.
Scottish Information are good - but only if they can be contacted. I find it difficult to predict where this will be, N of the Great Glen, through until the west coast. I often sign off to a listening watch with 127.275 as I leave the weat coast, but can hear Scottish in surprising places and altitudes before I call Inverness. Nobody is interrogating the transponder over much of the area, and our ELT got stolen from a vehicle.

[riverrock83]

My instructors actively encourage me to always be talking to someone on the radio, be that Glasgow Approach when East of Glasgow, Prestwick if staying local or Scottish Info if doing a Navex towards Dunfries. If I'm not talking to someone then I think something is wrong!

From my (very) limited experience I've struggled to contact Scottish below about 2500 feet when South of Prestwick. When I have been able to talk they've been great.

[piperboy84]

For what it’s worth !
Some thoughts I have regarding Scottish Information (SI) that tie into an earlier thread I started called "LOOKING FOR POINTERS/ADVICE/IDEAS and after reading some replies on the Ben More tragedy thread regarding the usefulness /utility of SI to pilots in difficulties.

Basically, my previous thread was about a rather unpleasant encounter with downdrafts and turbulence; however what was also unusual about this flight that I did not mention in the thread was that it was the first time I had EVER used SI. The reasons for this were most of my flying until this year was done overseas and I was not really sure who I should be talking too i.e. Leuchars, SI etc. and a little apprehension about not knowing the ropes. This was laziness on my behalf which prompted me before the flight in question to sit down and read up on UK control services /functions/coverage.

As I set off on the flight from Forfar to Oban I made my very first contact with SI which went well and gained a certain level of comfort knowing I had, to a degree, what I knew as “flight following”. I must admit that I stated in my previously mentioned thread that the encounter with the downdrafts/turbulence was not overly concerning, the truth is I was absolutely sh*tting myself. Right after I turned away from the ridge and while still getting seriously buffeted about I thought I had missed a call from SI so I initiated contact. For whatever reason, perhaps the controller detected anxiety in my voice, he very calmly asked if “everything was alright” to which I replied yes . The communication seemed to calm me somewhat and tone down my fear by a few notches perhaps because I thought subconsciously that if I am communicating, the aviation part of the equation can’t be that dire. I note that some replies in the Ben More tragedy alluded to the point that SI will not prevent an accident, which may be true. However, I believe that if a pilot in difficulties knows they are not alone that in itself can expedite his mental state returning from panicked to logical and maybe just perhaps avoid the problem escalating. Bottom line when in a difficult situation I will take all and any help I can get regardless of the type, even if it is just encouragement that aids my return to calmness which in turn will improve my skills as an aviator and rational decision making when addressing difficulties.

So well done SI, I will be using you again you can count on that !

[fisbangwollop]

Piperboy.....interesting and thanks.......only last year I was talking to a 3 axis micro C42/Jabiru??? As he was following the North Solway coast towards Northern Ireland....as dusk was approaching and he neared the coast just about to cross the North Channel he indicated to me that his fuel guage showed empty!!!...........I asked him if he wished to declare an emergancy?.....no was the reply as the aircraft was just out of overhaul and he believed the guage was faulty.........I suggested that as night was nearly upon us and a water crossing was about to be commenced would it not be prudent to land At Castle Kennedy only 5 miles away to actually check fuel remaining in the tank?.........no said he I am convinced its the guage!........OK then I say if you dont think its an issue why did you tell me.........his answer "Well you know what they say a problem shared is a problem halfed!!!"

So yes please pop on the frequency any time you please in an attempt to half your problems...:cool:

[NorthSouth]

fbw: doesn't your hair-raising story just illustrate perfectly the main problem with this debate?

Let me stress I am in no way seeking to denigrate the fantastic FREE service you provide - we are extremely lucky in Scotland. But in your "problem shared" scenario, if your cheeky chappy had continued across the North Channel on the last vestiges of vapour, run out halfway across and not got his mayday call out until he was below your cover so you were none the wiser, would you have concluded anything from not hearing from him again? If you were ultra-conscientious and started phoning round Newtownards etc to find out if he'd got there, and he hadn't, would you then have kicked off a full search?

Your 'fly on empty' pilot is in effect placing the burden on you for his safety, when you have very little capacity to help him (especially if he says no!) and he has deliberately put himself in a highly risky situation. It seems to me the difficulty is getting pilots like these to understand that they remain fully and solely responsible for their own safety, whether it's weather, terrain, fuel or whatever, and that just because they're talking to Scottish Info doesn't mean someone else is somehow guaranteeing their safety - or, worse still, somehow partially to blame if they go down.

NS

[mad_jock]

You wern't very sympathetic when I told you that I was freezing my nads off in a piper cub in Jan going up Glen Shee heading towards the Ghru. It certainly wasn't a problem shared. In fact I think it cheered your day up.

Although having a numb arse and testicals that resemble half a walnut can't really be classed as an emergency.

And to be fair N/S the info boys do actually check up on you if they have lost contact with you. As said they are proberly better at working out estimates than most pilots. Which is another reason why I suspect they want a pic and data in G-INFO because they certainly do give that number a phone to make sure you have arrived or phone the twr at your declared destination. I know that when I forget to ask the tower to let them know on the way in by the time I have shut down and got to a phone they have already phoned up and checked we are home.

And although FBW is seen on here as the face of Scottish INfo the rest of them are very similar in thier service and shall we say application of common sense.

[Paris Dakar]

FBW and his colleagues do all they can to help GA fliers in their neck of the woods and I'd urge folk to take him up on his numerous offers to give people an insight into the work they do. I visited the unit a few years ago and it was a real eye opener.

Keep up the good work :ok:

PS....MJ, that journey could freeze your nads off in a car in January let alone a Cub. I lived in the Highlands in the mid 80's and I've never known cold like it. Happy days :)

[fisbangwollop]

NorthSouth.....fbw: doesn't your hair-raising story just illustrate perfectly the main problem with this debate?

Let me stress I am in no way seeking to denigrate the fantastic FREE service you provide - we are extremely lucky in Scotland. But in your "problem shared" scenario, if your cheeky chappy had continued across the North Channel on the last vestiges of vapour, run out halfway across and not got his mayday call out until he was below your cover so you were none the wiser, would you have concluded anything from not hearing from him again? If you were ultra-conscientious and started phoning round Newtownards etc to find out if he'd got there, and he hadn't, would you then have kicked off a full search?



NS

As a rule for traffic crossing the North Channel we would transfer the details to Belfast City ATC and ask the aircraft to call them as they coast out at Portpatrick.......in this instance not only that but did indeed advise Belfast of the situation.........as for losing contact with aircraft, well as I have said before,we tend to know where we will lose contactvwith you and if we do we try to make every endevour to make sure you arrive at your destination safe and well without calling out the cavalry...:cool:

[John R81]

My first trip up to the Western Highlands and routing from Cumbernauld direct to Invergarry I was suprised to hear from FBW when I signed on and gave my route that he expected to lose contact with me just after Fort William. However, with that warning I did check in with him just before and then sign-off. No suprises - I do like that in a flight!

Up until that point, good reception even though I was never more than 1,000 ft above the tops on route, and never above 4,000. (Helicopters - or this pilot - seem to be alergic to being too high. It must be the vast amount of time we spend down in the weeds - I am vey comfortable at 500 ft AGL!).

Professional, helpful, worth every penny. Thank you for the service, and for the help.

[Another_CFI]

As a Scot who lives well south of Hadrians Wall it strikes me that Scottish Info does a good job in a challenging terrain. Would it be sensible to publish (in the UK-AIP) a coverage map for Scottish Info at 2,000ft, 3,000 ft, 4,000ft anfd 5,000ft AMSL?

[Maoraigh1]

Today I called 127.275 from near the top of Ben Nevis, with my details, saying I would lose them on descent. As I passed 3200', I was given 119.875. I got no reply, and for some time heard only one other aircraft. Crossing from Loch Etive to Loch Awe, I heard them clearly, and passed my details. I thought they were acknowledged. There then followed a long process, being relayed by an unfortunate helpful pilot, of confirming my intentions. At 12.59Z I was over Loch Awe, routing towards Jura, estimating Oban at 14.00Z, having departed Inverness. I feel I caused a lot of bother, and would have been better, in that area, leaving the radio until approaching Oban. Brakes on time was 14.03Z, so my estimate was reasonably accurate.
I later worked 127.275 from Glenforsa to Lochinver, before returning to Inverness.

[fisbangwollop]

Maoraigh....We heard your initially call on 119.875 loud and clear as you reported over Loch Awe, after that we seemed to lose contact and you could not hear us....I asked GTYNE to relay and he told me later over the phone that even he who was 4000ft and in your position could hardly make you out.....as I have said in earlier posts below 3000ft to the south of Oban coverage on 119.875 can be poor, that said the fact an aircraft 2000ft above you and only a few miles away could hardly read your transmisions leads me to think your radio/ aerial set up may not be working too well?......that said we did ring Oban and tell them that you would be landing at 1400 after your flight towards Jura......Hope this explanation helps?:cool:

[Maoraigh1]

Thanks. No problem with Oban 118.05 from S of Kerrera. No problem on 127.275 from off Tobermory to E of Lochinver. If my radio was the problem, it was on just one frequency. As I said, I'll revert to talking to Scottish once I'm clear of the hills. (Unless I'm staying high) The accident thread comments which sparked this thread got me to try to contact earlier.

[liam548]

As said above, some kind of estimated coverage map, official or unoffical would be useful as a guide

[soaringhigh650]

As said above, some kind of estimated coverage map, official or unoffical would be useful as a guide

The only way you can get guaranteed radio cover is by flying close to or inside controlled airspace.

FIS will always just be that.

[gasax]

I refer to my former statments - if you want to talk to Scottish over the high ground, get to 5000ft and there should be few problems.

Lower than that it gets spotty.

Perhaps if FBW could give us the location of the repeater stations we could all make educated guesses about likely coverage?

[riverrock83]

Was at 3500 between Larne (Northern Ireland) and Loch Ryan on Saturday - Aldergrove App wanted us to contact Scottish on the way across but we weren't able to although were able to get a basic service from Aldergrove right the way across. Gave up and contacted Prestwick Approach / Radar when we hit land instead.

[fisbangwollop]

Liam...As said above, some kind of estimated coverage map, official or unoffical would be useful as a guide

Not easy to do really because there are so many variables that seem at times to affect range of signal.... aircraft radio type (some are affected when using Scottish Info on 119.875 if also you also have GPS on!!...position of aerial on the aircraft and direction of flight of aircraft in relation to the position of the TX/RX site. Only today I spoke to an aircraft at 1500ft over Oban town where as the other day I could not make contact with a Jodel at 2000ft in the same position!

GASAX.....Perhaps if FBW could give us the location of the repeater stations we could all make educated guesses about likely coverage? Without giving the exact locations one is on the NE Moray coast, another on high ground north of Dundee and the other on top of high ground in the Galloway hills.

Maorigh No problem on 127.275 from off Tobermory to E of Lochinver. Scottish info on that frequency use a TX/RX site on Tiree which gives better coverage once west of Oban.

What I intend to do though is to and try create and internet page that gives various pieces of information for GA aircraft operating VFR over Scotland. This will give the different Scottish Information sectors and the frequencies that are available.....hopefully I will give area's of known poor reception and any other usefull information that you guys flying over Scotland may need?? I will then create a link to this page through the "Fly On Track" web site.

[Bigears]

Fisbang, I know you're not wanting to give the exact locations away, but you've given a different island for 127.275 :p
Had a great walk along the beach at Islay yesterday, BTW

[fisbangwollop]

Oops....this sun going to my head :ugh: I meant to say Tiree.:cool:

[Maoraigh1]

My Mode S was being interrogated, at least some of the time, while I had trouble communicating on 119.875. I was given 7004. Would Scottish see my reg? Or do the information guys have a screen?
Would the info be recorded? (If I disappeared incommunicado) PS No GPS use.

[Dan the weegie]

I'd be shocked if there was no radar feed from CTRL but there might not be, info is info after all :)

[riverrock83]

My Mode S was being interrogated, at least some of the time
I'm sure someone will correct me, but being interrogated by a TCAS unit could cause this, and if the signal is weak (or trying to go through a mountain), it doesn't mean that your interrogation response was being received. I'm sure there are also some non-interlinked SSR stations around also (military?) which could interrogate your transponder.

I haven't visited fisbangwollop and his colleagues yet (despite flying from Prestwick) but I understand that although they do have visibility of a radar screen, it is as an advisory only - they normally use a map, some pens and a ruler.

[gasax]

I'm sure FBW said he has access to an 'airspace infringement tool' - which is the code for a radar feed which is not suposed to be used for traffic separation!

As to Mode S - I see Prestwick went out to tender at the beginning of this year to buy a Mode S radar, so eventually I suppose FBW will maybe even hang up his ruler and string....

[riverrock83]

Are you talking about Prestwick Airport or "Scottish and Oceanic Area Control Centre"? Prestwick airport currently uses an SSR feed from elsewhere which is visible on radar screens - I don't know about a tender (but then - I'm just a PPL student who has done a tower visit :ok:).

[fisbangwollop]

GASAX....I see Prestwick went out to tender at the beginning of this year to buy a Mode S radar, so eventually I suppose FBW will maybe even hang up his ruler and string....

Prestwick Airport has nothing to do what so ever with where I am based at the Scottish Area Control Centre whom are part of NATS....check out the following link if you want more info and watch the "Introduction to NATS video"..........as for Scottish Information operating on 119.875 this is a NON RADAR Service....if you speak to Scottish Information on 127.275 this sector does use radar and at times traffic and height permitting you may be offered a radar service.In the mean time I will continue to use my ruler, piece of string and 1:500:000 aeronautical chart...:cool:

NATS | A global leader in air traffic control and airport performance (http://www.nats.co.uk/)

[Joe'le'Toff]

I used to make educated guesses based on this:

UK Airband Transmitter Sites & Frequencies (http://www.airbandonline.co.uk/uktrans_map.htm)

Don't know how accurate or up to date it is though.

[riverrock83]

Save you going through the site, it says for 119.875
Windy Head (Aberdeen)
Craigowl hill (Dundee)
Lowther Hill (Dumfries).

Listed as Scottish Control rather than information.

[piperboy84]

Sorry to resurrect this thread, but used SI for the second time ever today and true to form they were great and the service was first rate. A couple of exchanges even gave me a chuckle. Checked in with them over Loch Lomond on my way back from Oban to Forfar and after initial contact the controller asked me to restate my equipment type to which I replied again “M7” there was a slight delay then she advised another aircraft that a “M7” was nearby, he acknowledged this but added that he would need to Google what a M7 was, to which the controller replied that is exactly what she had just done!
Further along I got a traffic advisory, I responded that “I did not have a visual but did have them on the screen at my 5 o’clock and 3 miles”. Now I have been dying to say this ever since I bought my handy dandy used PCAS of ebay and I finally got the chance today (it’s the small things in life that make my sad old arse happy !!)

Keep up the great work SI

[mad_jock]

Please don't tell people that you have anything on anyform of TCAS/collision avoidance tool.

In the grand scale of things it means nothing to either controllers or other pilots. Its only when you can see the traffic that the controller can deem you are self seperating and don't require updates. So yes use it so you know which sector it shoud be in for trying pick it up. But until you have it with the mark one eyeball nobody can presume that you really do have the traffic.

[riverrock83]

MJ - surely by saying what PB said, he made it clear he didn't have the other aircraft in sight (he wouldn't if it was at 5 o'clock) but the other aircraft would then know roughly which direction to look.

Since they were talking to Scottish Info they will both have been in class G so were doing their own separation anyway - so the lovely lady at Prestwick will ignore his comment as you say.
However we all know that the Mk1 Eyeball is much more effective when given an idea where to point it, and by reporting as he did, this will have aided the other aircraft's primary collision avoidance system in finding a potential conflict.

[piperboy84]

MJ,
For sure nothing replaces a visual, and i was somewhat skeptical about the whole TCAS concept as i initially thought it may dilute my visual scans or make me more reliant on the machine as opposed to looking. However in practice its quite the opposite, it really is a net addition to the visual scan and helps target/focus the scan, another thing it is really got for is military jets, not for avoiding them as the closing rate is so quick but merely as a heads up they are coming and so it does not scare the **** out of me when they swoosh past (which happens a lot around my home strip) and they are easily identifiable as military on the screen due to the closing rate.

Since i started using it ( if i remember correctly i paid about £400 for it) there has been many times when i have been cruising along and it alerts me to traffic in the area i was just looking at, upon refocusing i have been able to pick them out.


The SO controller may have ignored the comment but the other traffic immediately acknowledged my call via the controller which gave me a level of comfort.

In the particular instance i mentioned the TCAS was really helpful as i was level at 1200 there was a scattered layer between 1700 to 2000 and the other traffic was showing at approximately 2300 to 2600 so a visual may not have been possible.

[mad_jock]

I work with TCAS every day. It is agreat tool for vertical speration but is ****e at lateral.

You may feel that you have an additional level of comfort but in real life you are just in the same situation as you were with out it. Until you can see it you arn't seperated.

Your RT call saying you have it is meaningless and clutters up the RT.

The only way you can assure seperation is by getting a level seperation.

I suggest you read up a bit more on the limitations of TCAS and what its actually designed to do. It is not an airborne radar type display.

[piperboy84]

I work with TCAS every day. It is agreat tool for vertical speration but is ****e at lateral

Why is that?

I suggest you read up a bit more on the limitations of TCAS and what its actually designed to do

I understand the fairly numerous limitations of the "P"CAS (portable) unit , I assume the TCAS for commercials has far more capabilities.

[500 above]

In the particular instance i mentioned the TCAS was really helpful as i was level at 1200 there was a scattered layer between 1700 to 2000 and the other traffic was showing at approximately 2300 to 2600 so a visual may not have been possible.

As you have noted, you have PCAS - a non approved avoidance aid. The aircraft that I fly has TCAS 2 change 7. Believe me, it has it's limitations. It's very nice to have, but no substitute for the Mk.1 - even at altitude. As Mad Jock said, it is not fantastic at lateral. We often 'see' targets or proximate traffic jumping around the screen, doubt there all fast movers doing supersonic speeds! The altitude readouts (we can select relative which is usual, or absolute alts) always seem accurate. It's always fun in RVSM being 1000' separated from another jet especially if it's a heavy. Had a yank in Houston say to centre controller "we got him on the fish finder"... :ugh:

In answer to your question, yes, it's ten fold better than a PCAS system. It's a great SA tool. Rest assured, we still maintain lookouts. A controller won't let us (correctly so) maintain our own separation based on it. Visual is visual in a non radar environment, end of.

[mad_jock]

Just the way it works and the way the signal is processed.

In the tech forums on here they have had folk that designed the thing talking about it and why there is no 3D seperation using it.

Its all to do with pulse length, digital radar signal, doppler shift and other such stuff.

Traffic collision avoidance system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_Collision_Avoidance_System)

Pretty good write up to be honest and also how I understand the state of play to be.

[riverrock83]

I believe vertical distance is more accurate because it is using the flight level broadcast in the mode C (or equivalent mode S) transmission.
Distance is fairly accurate as it uses properties in the signal (that doppler shift thing presumably).
However direction is much harder to detect. For an analysis, see http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA293670 (I don't know how directionality is calculated).

Most of the time, the error is around 4deg but can be as much as 30deg. The error is installation specific (as the directionality is effected by the shape of the aircraft the detection system is attached to). In the link above, there was very poor detection around the 180 deg bearing due to interference from the aircraft's tail. Perhaps thats why PCAS units only give you a basic 45deg compass point rather than a bearing? Depending where in your aircraft you put it will depend on its accuracy.

However in saying that, I still can't see what the problem is with saying that someone is 5 miles behind you when the airwaves are fairly quiet, so long as everyone knows how big a pinch of salt to take that information with.

Of course - PCAS is only useful if someone else is actively pinging the mode S transponders in the area (a TCAS unit or an SSR) so you can listen in, and the other aircraft have a working mode S transponder in the first place.

[mad_jock]

However in saying that, I still can't see what the problem is with saying that someone is 5 miles behind you when the airwaves are fairly quiet, so long as everyone knows how big a pinch of salt to take that information with.

So transmitting meaningless thoughts, I can't even call it information, is to be encouraged?

"Visual with traffic" has a defined meaning and can change the way that people can operate.

[riverrock83]

If you are asked to say your current position to an information service before you reach your next reporting point, the information is going to be something like "3 miles north of X town, 1300 ft on QNH 995 HPa". That is enough information to provide basic situational awareness to other aircraft, giving them a direction and height to give the Mk1 eyeball a direction to look in. The information provided by PCAS (or TCAS) is as accurate, providing a basic help to situational awareness.
Certainly you don't know whether thats the correct aircraft, and the direction may well be off by 30deg, but it gives you a starting point for the MK1 eyeball. That is useful information. Why not share it?

[mad_jock]

Because it is meaningless crap and leads to less educated pilots thinking they have some form of seperation when they don't.

It also means those of us that are going to ignore such meanless crap have to listen to it before deciding its meaningless crap.

Then muttering under our breaths "whoopty do"

Its in the same league as "your on guard" when folk are doing practise pans.

And similar to 500's experence all the TCAS units I have used give way more errors than 30 degs especially with none mode S contacts. The contacts jump from left to right sides on the screen and also forwards and backwards. The slower the traffic the more error there seems to be calculating what it is doing.

More to the fact you have been given traffic which you think you have on your screen you declare it. That traffic thinks everything is fine. Actually unless that traffic has been asked you don't have a clue if it has its transponder turned on, your contact could very well be something else. That none transpondered aircraft could then change level with out saying anything and your still looking for that other traffic which is actually on another frequency.

[liam548]

MJ,
For sure nothing replaces a visual, and i was somewhat skeptical about the whole TCAS concept as i initially thought it may dilute my visual scans or make me more reliant on the machine as opposed to looking. However in practice its quite the opposite, it really is a net addition to the visual scan and helps target/focus the scan, another thing it is really got for is military jets, not for avoiding them as the closing rate is so quick but merely as a heads up they are coming and so it does not scare the **** out of me when they swoosh past (which happens a lot around my home strip) and they are easily identifiable as military on the screen due to the closing rate.

Since i started using it ( if i remember correctly i paid about £400 for it) there has been many times when i have been cruising along and it alerts me to traffic in the area i was just looking at, upon refocusing i have been able to pick them out.


The SO controller may have ignored the comment but the other traffic immediately acknowledged my call via the controller which gave me a level of comfort.

In the particular instance i mentioned the TCAS was really helpful as i was level at 1200 there was a scattered layer between 1700 to 2000 and the other traffic was showing at approximately 2300 to 2600 so a visual may not have been possible.


what model is it the XRX?

[fisbangwollop]

Sorry to resurrect this thread, but used SI for the second time ever today and true to form they were great and the service was first rate. A couple of exchanges even gave me a chuckle. Checked in with them over Loch Lomond on my way back from Oban to Forfar and after initial contact the controller asked me to restate my equipment type to which I replied again “M7” there was a slight delay then she advised another aircraft that a “M7” was nearby, he acknowledged this but added that he would need to Google what a M7 was, to which the controller replied that is exactly what she had just done!
Further along I got a traffic advisory, I responded that “I did not have a visual but did have them on the screen at my 5 o’clock and 3 miles”. Now I have been dying to say this ever since I bought my handy dandy used PCAS of ebay and I finally got the chance today (it’s the small things in life that make my sad old arse happy !!)

Keep up the great work SI

Hi Piperboy84.....I was training our new femail FISO at the time we asked you to confirm your aircraft type.....once you said a "Maule" I was able to show her a picture of that type. I also had to laugh when you told me you obtained your TCAS off Ebay.....nice to talk and hopefully talk again soon.:cool::cool::cool:

[2 sheds]

I was training our new femail FISO
Has she just been posted?

2 s

[Crash one]

Fisbang,
Please thank your female associate for her help on Monday for phoning on my behalf when I should have known better that Fife is shut Mon Tues. My apologies for wasting her time.

[fisbangwollop]

Fisbang,
Please thank your female associate for her help on Monday for phoning on my behalf when I should have known better that Fife is shut Mon Tues. My apologies for wasting her time.

No problem, again I was sitting and training her on that occasion too....it was good training for her as I explained often we are in a position to help pilots by making the odd simple phone call as in this case and pass on to you the airfield data....always nice to help :cool::cool::cool:

[Crash one]

Much apreciated. One day I'll do a D&D practice, I have never called them even during training. Are they still looking for the practice?

[piperboy84]

Liam

what model is it the XRX?

Yes xrx v2

[piperboy84]

MJ
all the TCAS units I have used give way more errors than 30 degs

Mine is at least 30 degs off most of the time but a quick look at the compass give me the general direction of the traffic and where to look.

e.g. if i am on a 090 compass heading and the PCAS says i am on a 030 with traffic at to my left rear quadrant, i am gonna guestimate its at my left front quadrant between 360 and 90

[mad_jock]

Oh gone on then you can make your RT call but just make it factually correct.

"Roger, I have an unidentified contact on my unapproved TCAS unit which may or maybe not be the traffic your on about G-xy"

In the open FIR in a none Radar enviroment you haven't a clue whats out there. And have no way of knowing what you are picking up on your box of tricks. Or more to the point what your not picking up.

[piperboy84]

MJ
Oh gone on then you can make your RT call but just make it factually correct

Thats funny!!

But the one of the reasons for having is not for making RT calls based on what its showing (or not showing), but for the 50/50 chance of picking up traffic coming up my ass that I have a 100% certainty of not seeing

[fisbangwollop]

Crash one
Much apreciated. One day I'll do a D&D practice, I have never called them even during training. Are they still looking for the practice?

No problems, give me a call first on 119.875 then I can do a quick check that they have no real emergency in progress.........in fact they are always asking me if I can find an aircraft to do a practice pan for their own training purposes. :cool:

[mad_jock]

There hasn't been any rear mounting of aircraft in the accident reports and if you are in visual conditions its up to the other pilot to see and avoid. You seeing them on your box of tricks doesn't add anything to the situation. What you going to do steer away based on your box of tricks?

You have no clue at all what is really around you in a none radar enviroment.

But really your call means nothing. It spreads miss-information more than anything else.

It may sound to you that its cool but actually makes you sound like a clueless pillock.

And GA aircraft up north please give scottish info a shout if you fancy a DnD event. Otherwise they start asking commercial aircraft to play there games and you feel a right tw@t at FL180 calling a practise pan on 121.5 unsure of your position.

[piperboy84]

Right MJ lets put your money where your mouth is !

I see your in Aberdeen, why don’t I pick you up in the Maule and we will fly around Aberdeen and Angus for an hour and I will bet you lunch that my “box o’ tricks” alerts and accurately locates more traffic quicker than you can visually.

[mad_jock]

Nah mate way way east.

4000 hours working with TCAS and know the limits 2000 hours of which is in class G. If it tells you to do something, do it and ask questions later. Apart from that don't do anything. And know that knowbody gives a toss what I can see on it.

You are in class G speaking to a none radar information officer. You have zero clue that the contact is the one they are talking about. You have zero clue that the one they are talking about is even squawking, you have zero clue that the one you are picking up is even working that service. Yet you make a pish RT call that you have them on a box of tricks.

My TCAS unit is a honeywell $65k installation and it can't do what you think your unapproved ebay special can do.

[fisbangwollop]

Mad Jock......surely anything that is going to assist both your own lookout and any info I as a FISO can tell you about must be a bonus.??.......I think your just getting grumpy being away from Scotland for too long.....about time you were back in that Cub in minus 16 freezing ya knackers off.......anyway whilst your away your missing the delightfull tones of "Ugly Betty" ....:cool::cool::cool:

[mad_jock]

Yes it can be used to give a hint of a direction to look out for a visual contact of something who knows if its the one you have passed information on.

I have zero problem with people having such units and would encourage people to get one if they can afford it. Although I must admit I don't have a clue about these unapproved units but they seem to get the thumbs up on here.

Its the RT call giving meaningless information that the aircraft has a contact on that unit. Notice I say "a contact" you have no way of knowing that the contact is the one thats being talked about.

Its a dirty habit of pilots giving the call, and I freely admit that the commercial pilots are just as guilty as private.

With anyluck CAP 413 will get addition on the subject that will put all the flight deck discussions to an end. Most training deptments in Europe are pretty hot on stamping it out these days.

[fisbangwollop]

To be fair MJ I have never had an aircraft say to me that they have traffic on TCAS without a prompt.........often though as in this instance we are talking about I have advised an aircraft of possible traffic info and they have responded with yes we can see something on TCAS..........also often I have called traffic and been told yes we are visual............as you are well aware we NEVER asume in ATC so even though they can see something either visual or electronically it may not be the subject aircraft I am giving info on!....:cool:

[mad_jock]

yes we can see something on TCAS

Its that the training deptments are trying to stamp out.

The call to say visual is completely diferent because it is calling a statement of fact and you can presume that they are going to see and avoid.

For example if you declare visual with traffic a procedural controller can the give you a visual climb/decent against with both aircraft being happy. They couldn't if both planes have each other on TCAS.

Having something on TCAS means nothing at all. And can lead the ill informed presumption that they are seperated when they arn't. In a radar enviroment it just takes up air time for zero safety increase. Even if you do have something on TCAS you don't alter anything to try and avoid that contact until it gives you a resolution. Mode A only squawks are a complete pain to deal with because you will only get a traffic advisory on them even if you are sitting happy at FL180 in controlled airspace.

[mrmum]

I'm not really understanding how there's that much difference between a light aircraft pilot seeing some traffic indication on a quasi-TCAS, that is vaguely the position and level that (non-radar) Scottish Info. said there might be something. Compared to them having a distant visual contact, roughly in the vicinity of the last reported (estimated) position, at the last reported level of someone else that's getting a basic off Scottish.
In either scenario, the traffic "seen" may, or may not be the aircraft you are being told about.

[mad_jock]

Exactly, not sure, don't mention you have anything on the RT.