Evening folks,

I've just seen a well-known pilot supplies website pimping a 'Portable Collision Avoidance System' on its homepage. Comes across as the little brother of TCAS.

Has anybody ever used something similar or know anything about how well these systems work? What's the principle behind them - I assume it centres on the transponder?

Any info appreciated - just an intrigued PPL student!

Cheers,

V1R

The "cheap" ones you've seen are indeed transponder echo based but they don't give you azimuth (bearing) information which IMHO makes them useless because one cannot usefully act on the warning.

Those that give you bearing info start at about 15k, installed.

Unfortunately, so many people fly without a transponder, or with a transponder switched off (accidentally and often deliberately) that the warnings you do get are just the few.

Most UK GA is done at very low levels, say below 2500ft. Higher up, the proportion of "serious" pilots goes up and transponder use is much more common, but then there is far less traffic up there.

Just my view. I'd save the cash for the best possible moving map GPS - that will transform your flying confidence and ability to go places (time to duck)

I have just started using a Trafficscope VRX, although it doesn't provide azimuth information it does mean that your aware of traffic that you haven't seen. It will never replace a very good lookout but does serve to show how many acft are out there that you miss, it's increased my lookout and paranoia

If it has any benefit it's that you will re prioritise your work load to locate
a threat that you haven't seen. The audio warning means that you don't spend any time looking at the VRX.

As IO540 said a surprising number of aircraft don't use/'turn on' a transponder
which you will get no warning of.

NTB

Surechecks new parent company have just announced a new version of their "cheap" traffic box that now tells you which way to look in one of four directions. That is pretty helpful if it works because when I owned the previous version that just told you in the traffic was high or low I found this could be a bit unsettling.

Having said all that it did spot a plane once that I didnt. In fact had it not bleeped I dont think I would have ever seen it and it would have passed by me without me ever knowing it was there.

Because it bleeped I was looking all over the place for it and it came out of a cloud just behind me.

http://www.zaonflight.com/

The thing is that you don't need to spend £500 to discover that there is a lot more traffic up there than you thought here was. I can tell you that for free

Except outside the UK, when there really isn't much...

You can also discover it for free by flying under a radar information service, with three passengers who do nothing but look for the traffic reported to you, as a fun exercise. If you can spot 50% of the reports you are doing very well.

Then there is the other god knows what percent who fly without a transponder. These are evident from reports like "traffic on a reciprocal heading, distance 1 mile, level unknown". You are obviously looking like hell but can't see anything. You switch on all your lights just in case. You are at 4000ft, he's at 800ft but he doesn't have a transponder

Statistically, the case for spending money on collission avoidance is very thin. Just as well, given how many people don't really want to be seen.

Interesting stuff - thanks for the info.

V1R