Improve Light A/C Separation

[Fuji Abound]

I have given some thought to this since I dropped out the discussion because the discussion seemed to have run its course.

Run its course it may, but two aspects nag me.

The fact of the matter is there are two collision avoidance systems in use which are not compatible. All other factors aside that makes no sense. An analogy. There was a time when bumpers on cars all varied in height. It made no sense. We saw fit to standardise the height so that most would line up with each other and have a chance of doing the job they were designed for. Just common sense.

Aviation is deadly serious about safety, and yet we perpetuate a system with this inherent incompatibility.

FLARM, transponders and TAS are incompatible.

Now it will appear that because I am from the powered fraternity I am biassed towards transponders - and perhaps I am. However I have to take into account the existing infra structure that supports transponders - I have nothing against FLARM in principle, but I cannot ignore that it is a system unlikely to be adopted by a European wide regulatory authority that is on a path to more widely mandate the use of transponders.

The second aspect that nags me, is the value of insisting all flying machines carry transponders. On the one hand the evidence is persuasive that the risk of collision is tiny. I cant think of any other safety initiative where the cost woild justify the lives potentially saved to a lesser extent.

However, I also cannot ignore the individuals responsibility. It is horrific to imagine being involved in a mid air particularly in cases were you have been the lucky one to survive and others die. I guess most of us would be left questioning whether we had done enough to avoid the collision. The cost of a mode C transponder is a few hundreds of pounds, the cost of a PCAS unit is even less if you want to be active in collision avoidance on your own account. This is relatively little for us as individuals to pay in order to take another step towards being satisfied we have taken every measure we reasonably can. In short the individual cost is insignificant compared with the results of a collision. It is the individual component that defies the simple cost return analysis.

We each talk about our rights - our freedom. We want to be free to glide without being under anyone’s control, we want to be free to route point to point without being directed around the circumference because that is the only way AT can accommodate us, we want to be free to access airports outside of CAS. In short we each want these freedoms for different reasons and we each believe we are entitled. However, with freedom comes responsibility. Responsibility to demonstrate we can manage the risk. That’s one reason why I will always try and get a RIS outside CAS, that is another reason why I will fly in IMC only if I really must and then for the shortest possible time, it’s a reason for investing in a CAS and mode S and it’s a reason for working hard on my look out so I maintain the best look out I can. Having done all of these things I cant manage the risk of running into a glider in IMC because I have no way of knowing it is there. I cant manage it because it would seem even if I had FLARM, most gliders don’t, and even if I listened out on glider frequencies the fact that a glider had entered IMC based on a point on my route of 300 nm with which I might not be familiar and then without any assurance of operating at a predetermined height the information would be of very little help to me. In fact if I could relate the information to my position, the information is effectively telling me even though I have as much right to be in the same airspace it is me that should b”“”&^ off because that airspace has been sterilised, it has been declared purple, because the captain of a glider says so.

In short I am uncomfortable because it seems to me a whole load of reasons are being given by those who want privileges unique from other users of the airspace, and worse, by users who believe that it is everyone else who should stay clear of the patch of sky they decide to occupy, without their being prepared to modify the way they go about their business one iota.

Sorry chaps, but it is for those reasons that I feel your case does not stack up. I respect your freedom as much as I hope you respect mine. However, I don’t respect your freedom to do absolutely nothing that would be effective in avoiding your colliding with me, or giving me the chance to avoid colliding with you.

You can of course do one very simple thing. Buy a PCAS. It weighs about as much as a matchbox. It runs for around 8 hours on two AA batteries. It will stay put with simple attachment through at least 6G of aeros (that is the most I have tried at any rate) and best of all it will cost you a couple of hundred quid and you don’t need to fit a transponder. At least you are talking my language - its not perfect but you will have a good chance of getting out of my way even if I have no idea you are there.

Tell me why you wouldn’t buy one of these? Please tell me why you wouldnt get all your mates to do so, and even mandate the carriage voluntarily for IMC ops? I’d really like you to take one small, simple and cheap step to talk my language.

(I hope I am correct that PCAS does not require a transponder on the aircraft to which it is fitted - being able to rely on its own in built altimiter - I must re read the manual).