Recently I have been advised by ATC of several threats, some of which I and another pilot on board have never seen, even with regular updates on where to look.
This is why I find this to be a surreal discussion.
Knowledge produced no different outcome than blissful ignorance.
Although I realise that ATC determines potential conflicts by reference to objective criteria and procedures, and although I realise those dots and lines on RADAR screens may look awfully close, and although I realise that ATC is there to help (for which help I’m eternally thankful), I’m sometimes bemused at the traffic ATC considers others should know about and, in some cases, spot. It’s difficult enough spotting a 737, against a background of urban sprawl, on an ILS approach to the threshold of a runway that can be seen; Retard Vehicle 4 miles away and low? Yeah right…
And when are wedge-tailed eagles and pelicans going to be fitted with transponders for flights in controlled and E airspace?
When the RPT climbs out of Upper Kumbukta West, it must be very comforting for them to be alerted to and therefore be able to watch out for the aircraft 15 miles away on the same track squawking 1200 and an unverified level of 7,500’, also on the TCAS. The two gliders that are closer but just tiny specks on the windscreen? Blissful ignorance deals with those threats.
Knowing that there is
a potential threat may result in concentration on
that threat to the exclusion of
other, potentially bigger threats.
The published studies about where mid-airs occur, and the factors that contribute to them, are instructive.
Alerted see and avoid is better than un-alerted see and avoid, only if the alert is to
all threats, the relative risk of each threat is comprehended, and all those threats are
seen or properly positioned in the pilot’s mind’s eye.
(Mexicans who don't know where they are: QED!)