Originally Posted by Kit d'Rection KG
I have never seen a TCAS target which couldn't be confirmed in both range and azimuth using airborne radar (...)
It is perhaps weakest used as as an SA tool in the vertical sense, because some manufacturers and operators set the display parameters very low, typically own altitude +/- 2600ft.
WOW! I have never seen TCAS target which azimuth&distance I could verify by using airborne radar but perhaps that's because WX radars are very lousy at detecting & tracking other airplanes and there are no other radars on ATR. What are you flying, Kit? My guess is either sentry or foxhound. As for situational awareness, with speeds and RoCs normaly used by transport category aeroplanes, 12 nm and +/- 2700 ft are more than adequate.
B737 climbed 1000 ft within 2 seconds.
That would mean, they arrested the descent and climbed 1000ft within
2 seconds.
Now if you calculate that, you end up with a climbrate in excess of 30000 fpm.
How realistic is that, and what would be the g-forces implied?
Absolutely unrealistic.
To climb 300m in 2 secs, one needs average vertical velocity of 150m/s. Let's assume acceleration and decceleration are constant. It's oversimplification but it will give even lesser normal acceleration than peak acc required in "realistic" scenario. So in the first second of climb one needs to accelerate fom zero to 300m/s and in the second the same amount of decceleration is required. And that's pull-up of 30G, followed by -30G nose-over. That kind of normal acceleration would pulverize 737 (and pax too).
Most fighters in use today carry transponders compatible with civllian mode C. A colleague of mine was once practice intercepted by pair of Armee de l'air Mirage 2000C's. First ATC asked them if they agreed to be intercepted. After they agreed, soon they got TCAS targets on ND and ATCo warned them that fighters will soon turn off their xpndrs to avoid triggering RAs. Mirages did that at about 6 Nm distance and turned them back on after disengaging.