PBL,
Taking some comments out-of-order...
...I do take a stand. I am for transparency of information on all safety-relevant systems in which there is a public interest. Just as the UK has an Airprox Board that reports publically on all designated near misses, I think data on TCAS manoeuvres should be publically collected and publically analysed and displayed.
I can't disagree with that, although "public" should really mean interested academic groups, IMHO, unless you want it all appearing in the Daily Mail under "Killer Deathjets in Head-on Plunge!!"
If you are trying to get all pilots everywhere to follow an RA, it works against that message to publicise all the incidents in which TCAS might prompt inadvisable or unnecessary manoeuvres.
Without wishing to be rude, I think you've got it slightly backwards. What we
really don't need is people going around responding to RAs with Manoeuvre($Random). I'm sure you can see that?
So the incident narratives are suppressed (to which phenomenon I can attest, having tried to get data on TCAS incidents).
I'll take your word for it. I suppose you might have to cross proprietary and DPA boundaries to get this information as an individual, although I'm sure that agencies such as the AAIB and CAA would have as much access as they desired?
Maybe what needs to be done is to run a series of simulated encounters, no, let's make that a *lot* of encounters, using the actual software involved and analyse the results, possibly making changes to the software... Hmm I wonder if anyone has ever done that? (Sorry, been up for 36hrs after a delayed nightflight so am a bit sarky.
)