IO540
So, with the kind of TCAS systems available to GA today, all one is going to get is other traffic azimuth/altitude information, and since ATC giving a Radar Information Service (the most common radar service one goes for, OCAS) aren't allowed to even suggest which way to turn, the pilot is never going to be acting in conflict with ATC.
You somewhat miss the point I was trying to make (no doubt poorly). TCAS gives an "indication" of bearing, but it is sometimes poor, and variable (tragets hop about in bearing but are of course unerringly accurate in range).
The article makes the point it is very easy, either by poor interpretation of, or poor accuracy of, the "bearing" to actually reduce the separation by taking action on it.
Take a head on target at 1NM when you wish to start avoidance, and a 5 degree "uncertainty" in bearing. If you are on opposing tracks, and 0 degrees off, then you would hit each other. If you are 5 degrees off you would be 500' apart - close, but you live. Trouble is, if that accuracy is misinterpreted / wroingly displayed, you may take the lateral action and cause the 500' to become nothing
As was being implied by some (inappropriate) action taken in the article.
TCAS in fact can be 30 degrees out... what sort of accuracy can the GA systems out there guarantee? As you say
I am afraid that in GA we are pretty well on our own and have to do our own "safety management".
and on an individual basis I can agree. Trouble is, for a manufacturer, or regulator, or indeed anyone, to encourage or mandate such systems causes the big "liability" word to enter the equation... where the consequences of it creating a collision outweigh leaving people to look out and bear the responsibility.
NoD