Collision Avoidance Systems

[Could be the last?]

There have been a number of threads recently on collision avoidance systems - So, how many different collision avoidance systems are UK Mil ac actually flying with? Or, more importantly, how many Mil ac (Including RPAS) are flying without any formal collision avoidance system?

[AdLib]

OK, I'll bite.

Every manned aircraft has at least one collision avoidance system on board.

Can't speak for RPAS.

[Evalu8ter]

Adlib, history would tell you that human lookout is sadly less than perfect.....

TCAS et al are useful, but only in certain classes of airspace. Class G below 3000' day VFR is a pretty dangerous place to be. That's where the non- Xpdr players are.

[A and C]

The Grob Tutors have a traffic system that indicates the position of other aircraft on the HSI, there is also a proposal to add FLARM, a system that is fitted to almost all gliders in the UK.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Always fly with a wingman! Saved me once!

[Lima Juliet]

FLARM also in and going into BBMF and VGS aircraft. The aircraft of Force Development Trg Centre (Halton) (formerly Jt Service Gliding Centre) also have FLARM embodied in their gliders and tugs.

LJ :ok:

[fabs]

I believe the Tucano lot are taking a serious look at FLARM too

[Evalu8ter]

I've not used FLARM, but I hear from some that have that it is pretty short range - designed for glider/glider confliction. It may struggle to give adequate warning time for something like a Tucano.

Fox 3, the rate we're going at a wingman will be a rare luxury!

[BEagle]

Collision avoidance systems intended for glider and light aircraft use are unlikely to be of any value for military use in aircraft such as the Tucano.

As for expecting ACAS II, designed to stop airliners hitting each other, to be of any use in highly dynamic military scenarios.....:rolleyes:

The old Cubic pods we had at ACMI in Deci' were pretty good, but even they suffered from lag during hard manoeuvre. No doubt some clever algorithms could be used to give some collision warning using the latest AIS devices, but only against cooperating, similarly-equipped air platforms.

00 is perhaps still the only solution outside controlled airspace...:uhoh:

[Background Noise]

Actually they are a lot of value. Tucano and Hawk T2 both have TCAS, in different forms, and both have been very effective.

[Slow Roll]

TCAS does have limitations against rapidly manouevering aircraft but operated in TA-only mode it can still provide an enormous amount of SA. It is also an excellent cue of approaching traffic in the low level environment and there is no way I would trade it out for rigourous look-out on its own.
As it can't see non-squawking traffic, guarding against complacency is probably the most salient point in GA areas. I suspect the arguments against implementing it on any platform would primarily be around the cost/weight/space/time challenges it would highlight.

[Evalu8ter]

Lookout will always be key; however, we cannot look in all directions at the same time, we can't see climbing traffic through the floor or behind other parts of structure. It's a layered defence with TCAS and similar systems aiding lookout. The answer may well come from Beagle's beloved 'drones'; the need for them to operate outside segregated airspace is driving work into Sense and Avoid technology. Such systems need to be reliable, small and affordable - and the sensor/algorithm package will be equally applicable to manned aircraft.

[Herod]

below 3000' day VFR is a pretty dangerous place to be.

We used to call it "Indian Country", because it was where you met all the Aztecs, Apaches, Senecas, Cherokees etc.

[ShyTorque]

The type of aircraft I fly have TCAS II and these days I wouldn't want to do without it. We are obliged to operate VFR/IFR/VFR in Class G and it's routine for us to switch from one to the other, sometimes a number of times during the same flight. In our circumstances, lookout can never be a full answer, even with two pairs of eyes in the cockpit.

[just another jocky]

.....FLARM, a system that is fitted to almost all gliders in the UK.

How I wish that were true.

There a far too many out there that do not have it fitted, nor is it likely to be mandated, sadly.

Very limited applicability for the closing speeds of a Tucano I would imagine but could be useful in the Tutor.

TAS in the Tutor is a very useful tool but not to be relied upon and certainly not as the sole source of deconfliction information.

[A and C]

The FLARM Take up numbers in the gliding community are are a bit uncertain as a lot of people have their own personal portable FLARM units that they velcro to the glare shield when they fly, the only thing that is sure is that there are more FLARM units in operation than are fitted permantly fitted to gliders.

It is my understanding that the VGS fleet is currently looking at POWER FLARM, this also picks up ADS-B making it much more useful and I suspect that this is the system that has been proposed for the Tucano fleet.

The UK ATC provider NATS and the CAA are currently starting an experiment with light aircraft to trial light weight ADS-B system that is reliable and low cost, the CAA is not charging fees for minor modifications to fit this equipment being used in this experiment.

Unfortunately this trial can only be carried out on Annex 2 aircraft and home builds this in stark contrast EASA demands an STC to fit this equipment to Annex 1 aircraft, for a new type this will cost £15 K just for the paperwork.

The difference in attitude to fitting collision avoidance equipment between EASA and the UK CAA / NATS is stark to the point of being almost criminal on the part of EASA, while this is not strictly a Military Aviation problem it becomes one when a military aircraft hits an ADS-B equipped aircraft that has not had the system enabled because the owner can't afford the £15 K for the EASA paperwork.

[Could be the last?]

It appears that a lot of the solutions are built around transponders, and the tech is fitted to FW ac who operate predominantly outside of Class G airspace. However, what are rotary ac using, other than lookout, to mitigate realtime mid air collision avoidance? And how useful is the equipment fitted to ac, such as a C-130, who can drop into low-level and be subjected to the same hazards as RW ac, but not as agile to avoid collisions?

[ShyTorque]

However, what are rotary ac using, other than lookout, to mitigate realtime mid air collision avoidance?

See post #14 ;)

[Could be the last?]

S-T

So all RW types from Gaz through to AH, including DHFS are fitted with xpdrs?

[wigglyamp]

DHFS helicopters have an Avidyne Traffic advisory system installed (same as on theGrobs). I believe this is also going into Wildcat. Gazelle are getting a Garmin TAS system. Don't know what Merlin, Chinook etc are getting/have already got but all rotary platforms are meant to be getting a traffic avoidance system.

[A and C]

I am told that some of the Merlins ( the ex Danish ones ) had TCAS a fitted but as this was not fitted to the those aircraft built for the UK there was no budget to support the system.

I would be pleased to be corrected if this is not true.

[ShyTorque]

S-T

So all RW types from Gaz through to AH, including DHFS are fitted with xpdrs?

I think you will find that is the case. Although I've been civvy RW for some long time, certainly I think the last RAF RW I flew without one was the Whirlwind 10 when it was used as a basic trainer.

[Could be the last?]

S-T

Apologies, I need to word my replies better! Wrt xpdrs, how I should have worded the reply is - so all RW ac are being fitted with some form of collision avoidance technology/xpndr? This would then lead me to ask that for them to be effective it would require all ac to have some form of similar system, which we know is not the case, or even mandated!

[ShyTorque]

Yes, it's important to ask the right question if you want the right answer!

Most, if not all, UK military RW aircraft do already have a transponder because that has been an MOD requirement for many years. However, I'd say they lag quite some way behind the civilian rotary world wrt collision avoidance systems being fitted; I've been flying civilian TCAS 2 equipped helicopters since 1998.

[Could be the last?]

Not withstanding the patronising tone of the previous reply, this is my point -

RAF training plane in near-miss with remote-controlled aircraft over Cambridgeshire | Daily Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2943766/RAF-training-plane-near-miss-remote-controlled-aircraft-came-just-40ft-skies-Cambridgeshire.html)

Collision avoidance systems using a xpndr are not the complete answer!

[ShyTorque]

CBTL,

I hadn't intended to be patronising, but I was perhaps teasing you slightly. You asked about transponders and I answered that question for you.
You then said that your question was about actually TCAS or similar collision avoidance equipment. I assume you fully understand the difference but you haven't indicated whether you are a pilot or not.

However, all licensed pilots (especially military trained) do, or should, know that today's collision avoidance devices cannot replace proper lookout, and conversely, human lookout is very much imperfect in the airborne environment. That's why it's a requirement to maintain a good lookout, using TCAS or similar when available to merely assist with visual acquisition of other aircraft.

The problem with remote controlled aerial devices is that they are usually very difficult to see due to their small size, they often move erratically and unpredictably and they do not operate with regard to the principle of see and be seen, or the rules of the air with regard to right of way, which are legal requirements for aircraft operating in the open FIR.