Originally Posted by PBL
In contrast, the manoeuvre in Scenario 2 resolves the conflict with the unseen 2 o'clock traffic.
Originally Posted by FullWings
Because you haven't come close enough to the other traffic to trigger an RA yet.
Exercise 1: Modify the scenario to make your reply inappropriate.
Originally Posted by FullWings
In your scenario No. 3 you're assuming that the traffic you can see is the one that has generated the RA...
Originally Posted by PBL
I am not assuming anything at all.
Originally Posted by FullWings
No? Then I'm having problems with the meaning of this sentence:
Originally Posted by PBL
..you get a climb RA for your visual target at 10 o'clock.
Exercise 2: Explain the difference between an assumption and a statement.
Originally Posted by FullWings
OK, the aircraft that's going to hit you is at 9 o'clock. You haven't spotted this but you have seen the one at 10 o'clock. You ignore the RA because "you've seen it". Crunch.
The TCAS screen apparently was painted two targets at 9 o'clock and at 10 o'clock, and the 9 o'clock was lit up red. That was not a scenario I set.
Originally Posted by PBL
Or it is a military aircraft, or a NORDO, or an older bizjet, or a Legacy whose pilots just kicked off the transponder ...
Originally Posted by FullWings
Or it's a cruise missile, a weather balloon, a flying saucer, a flock of birds, etc. Very easy to find edge cases where the system may not work but how realistic are they in a positive radar environment?
According to Flight International, bizjets are quite realistic in the positive radar environment round London, indeed are said by the airlines to be causing a disproportionate increase in traffic. I would imagine in other places as well.
I don't think there is much point in continuing discussion unless you are going to take it seriously. Either you see the point of my scenarios, or you don't. If you do, it would be nice to get the answers. If you don't, it would be nice to have you say so loud and clear.
PBL