PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
-   -   Electronic Conspicuity in the UK (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/609791-electronic-conspicuity-uk.html)

Genghis the Engineer 6th Jun 2018 21:58

Electronic Conspicuity in the UK
 
Can anybody help out with a bit of hopefully unclassified knowledge.

For a variety of reasons I'm taking an active interest in electronic conspicuity in the UK. There are multiple systems available, particularly in the GA community: FLARM, PilotAware, TPAS, and so-on and so forth. Recent UK Airprox Board reports have highlighted various proxes between UK light civil, and military aeroplanes - clearly stuff we'd all rather avoid.

Can anybody fill me in on what conspicuity systems (mode C, mode S, ADS-B, FLARM, etc.) are being carried on various military assets operating in UK airspace. Also - what traffic alerting systems is anybody carrying? I understand PowerFLARM on the G115 and Tucano fleets?, presumably TCAS on the Globemaster & Herc (but I'm assuming that, rather than know). Is anything else out there?

Or if nobody feels they can say on here - a steer as who I can ask officially would be great.

G

Mr. Vice 6th Jun 2018 22:10

Typhoon will be Squawking 3C and using RADAR to clear its flightpath, no TCAS system fitted.

airpolice 7th Jun 2018 11:47

What would be great would be a £200 ModeS ADSB based system, which would give everyone the screen that the Hawk T2 rear seater has. A fully dynamic display of what the aircraft you around are doing.

That's not going to happen until we all transmit gps data all the time, and the big problem is that where it is needed most, which is <3,000 feet is normally not transponder mandatory territory.

Maybe someday.

Genghis the Engineer 7th Jun 2018 12:28


Originally Posted by airpolice (Post 10167242)
What would be great would be a £200 ModeS ADSB based system, which would give everyone the screen that the Hawk T2 rear seater has. A fully dynamic display of what the aircraft you around are doing.

That's not going to happen until we all transmit gps data all the time, and the big problem is that where it is needed most, which is <3,000 feet is normally not transponder mandatory territory.

Maybe someday.

My spamcan syndicate has just fitted PilotAware Classic, which is doing most of that for that price.

I think that the next generation, forecast late this year - Rosetta and Aircrew are looking to do the whole hog for around £400.

AirCrew.co.uk

Rosetta - Pilot Aware


The biggest problems, in my opinion, are that we now have five gusting 7 different systems in use globally that aren't universally intercompatible, and at least two of them are using uncertified hardware, that creates a massive problem in fitting them into certified aircraft: whether military or civil.

Of course any electronic conspicuity system, so long as crews don't assume they'll see everything out there, is better than no conspicuity system.

G

BEagle 7th Jun 2018 13:57

PliotAware will eventually become the conspicuity Betamax. It uses unlicensed frequencies so will never be certifiable.

FLARM is useful for sailplanes in close proximity with each other and with a few powered aircraft flying from the same site.

The CAA has already said that the preferred solution will be based on ADS-B. So the contender for the most likely future system is probably Sky Echo platform plus a display / audio warning system.

When I reviewed a number of conspicuity devices a year or so ago, the only one which was of any use was the Trig device which didn't need a display - and gave only genuine collision warnings. I was quite shocked at the 'panel gazing' of many of the GA pilots involved - VFR implies L00KOUT, not staring at some iToy!

handleturning 7th Jun 2018 14:21


Originally Posted by BEagle (Post 10167360)
I was quite shocked at the 'panel gazing' of many of the GA pilots involved - VFR implies L00KOUT, not staring at some iToy!

This is the problem. The glider community tend to swear by FLARM and generally shout about it long and hard if you ever get into a discussion on such matters. An incomplete picture is more dangerous than none at all, particularly if used by low hours pilots without the experience to back it up. Understand Benson and Linton have FLARM displays in the Twr (but cannot use them for controlling), which raises some very interesting HF questions.

Lima Juliet 7th Jun 2018 19:26



Originally Posted by BEagle (Post 10167360)
PliotAware will eventually become the conspicuity Betamax. It uses unlicensed frequencies so will never be certifiable.

FLARM is useful for sailplanes in close proximity with each other and with a few powered aircraft flying from the same site.

The CAA has already said that the preferred solution will be based on ADS-B. So the contender for the most likely future system is probably Sky Echo platform plus a display / audio warning system.

When I reviewed a number of conspicuity devices a year or so ago, the only one which was of any use was the Trig device which didn't need a display - and gave only genuine collision warnings. I was quite shocked at the 'panel gazing' of many of the GA pilots involved - VFR implies L00KOUT, not staring at some iToy!

Yes, BEagle gets my vote. There is no place for the amateurish Pilot Aware in my opinion. The BBMF, the Tutors, the Tucano and the Viking gliders carry FLARM for the x-country glider mid air collision risks. The GR4 has a bespoke ACAS for, I think, Mode S? The Tucano has TCAS I. Most of the heavies have TCAS II with a few with TCAS I. That is about it for now.

As others have said, Typhoon and Lightning have a RADAR that will see most puddle jumpers at shortish ranges depending on what the light aircraft are made of. They also have Transponder Interrogators, but these have to be used sparingly in certain areas as they can make lots of traunsponders reply that could cause FRUIT (basically the garbling of the 1090 frequency). However, I also hear that Typhoon is likely to get an ADS-B In/Out capability.

Also, the CAMO would have a fit trying to fit this bodge into a military aircraft with all it’s secret wiggly amps potentially being compromised. (For those on here that don’t know then Pilot Aware is the dogs dinner posted below (soon all this will be put in a massive box instead). I for one would not want to trust my safety on this amateur set up.)

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...bcc28095c6.jpg


Duchess_Driver 7th Jun 2018 20:37

TCAS
 
I concur that these systems drive the head into the cockpit which is not what I like to see.

Another problem, evidenced again today, in somebody receiving a traffic service was informed of traffic (us) and responded with “have him on TCAS.” Whilst I may be being pedantic (who’d of thought?) this shows a misunderstanding of what the system actually provided - I am 99% certain that none of these systems actually provide an RA where appropriate. Or do they?

TBM-Legend 7th Jun 2018 21:40

So many options. To me some form standardisation is required in displaying the info or the total effect is lost.

PS: Lima Victor, please mow your grass!!!

Genghis the Engineer 8th Jun 2018 10:19

I confess that I find it quite comforting when I'm bouncing around in cloud, there's an airliner somewhere above or below me, and they report "we have him on TCAS" - as at least one of us knows the relative position of each other from a threat perspective.

Regarding driving a head into the cockpit, I think we should in that context remember just how large the blind spots are in most civil and transport cockpits.

I'm afraid that I don't have any diagrams for modern combat aeroplanes, but here's a Hammer diagram (this presents a 360degx360deg view onto a flat image, like a wall map of the world) for the Jaguar front seat...
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...7fc72f1ac3.jpg


There are blind spots, primarily below - but not that many.

Now compare to a Boeing 737 from the Captain's seat...

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...ea88dfcfa5.jpg
There are a lot of blind spots - including even in the pillars which unless they are less than the distance between the pilots eyeballs (typically around 80-90mm) are also a significant obstruction. Plus that it's asymmetric - so if the Captain is the one doing the lookout, she has a lot of blind spots to her right that she can do nothing about whilst her F/O is busy heads in.

And most light GA are only marginally better - this is from the left hand seat of a PA28...

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...915b4f2a50.jpg
It's really not hard to see huge blind spots there, and equally there are coincident blind spots - a descending or climbing PA28 has plenty of areas in the direction of travel they can't see.

So, I'm afraid I don't buy the argument that a small and well managed period of "heads in", in virtually any cockpit, isn't entirely well spent, if that is spent for nearby traffic on a screen - whether that screen is providing pure alerts, or spacial awareness. Clearly excessive such time is not advantageous but when the aeroplane structure is obscuring perhaps 60-70% of the outside view, spending 5% of one's time (these are numbers plucked from the air with no science behind them, so likely to be the wrong numbers, but you get the idea - 5% however is 10 seconds every three minutes) checking an electronic device for external threads does not seem to me to be excessive.

G

ShyTorque 8th Jun 2018 11:03

From past experience, those claiming that TCAS/TAS is detrimental equipment which merely "drives the pilot's head inside the cockpit" are likely to be those who haven't flown with it on a regular basis. Used correctly, it naturally becomes part of an effective lookout scan. A brief glance inside is all that's needed, as the pilot looks from left to right during his lookout scan process. The shortcomings of the system are well known and due allowance has to be taken, but seeing a transponding "blip" at a range of up to 12 miles allows the user to take far more timely avoidance than relying on the much shorter range of even the best human eyesight alone.

The reason some pilots say "Got him on TCAS" is probably to reassure the ATC controller so he can perhaps concentrate his attention on another developing situation and make the necessary RT calls to other aircraft, at least for a while. So don't criticise, the pilot is actually trying to ease the controller's workload in order to help others!

Having flown a number of different TCAS/TAS equipped helicopters over the past twenty years, (and twenty more before that without it, military fixed wing and rotary plus some civilian stuff) I would now feel very vulnerable without it. It's shown me many times that most pilots don't look out effectively, or don't know the rules of the air. Seeing as we all take the air law exam, (and hopefully no-one actually wants to be involved in a mid-air) it's more likely to be the latter!

Il Duce 8th Jun 2018 17:06

I have called "non-squawking" traffic to pilots and received the reply, "Got him on TCAS". So tempted on those occasions to say, "No you haven't, pay attention, I've just told you it's non-squawking therefore you can't have it on TCAS."

beardy 8th Jun 2018 18:56


Originally Posted by Il Duce (Post 10168381)
I have called non-squawking traffic pilots and received the reply, "Got him on TCAS". So tempted on those occasions to say, "No you haven't, pay attention, I've just told you it's non-squawking therefore you can't have it on TCAS."

I say again 'non squawking raw return'

Lima Juliet 8th Jun 2018 19:02

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...48405ffb33.jpg
Genghis

Not too convinced on the accuracy of that drawing for the PA28 - you would have to be sitting in the back seat to see both seat backs that are depicted in your diagram!

Here is a pretty typical forward view from the left hand seat of a PA28...

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...e24100fa2f.jpg




Genghis the Engineer 8th Jun 2018 19:25

You might want to check what "180 degrees" means, as illustrated in the diagram, which is a flat representation of a full sphere. Your photograph is probably showing around 25 degrees left and 45 degrees right of forwards, and maybe 30 up and 20 down.

Also, collisions don't necessarily happen head on! That of course is why cockpit view diagrams use either the Hammer of Molinye graticules, that show the full sphere.

G
(163 hours in PA28s, but trying not to add any more, simply because just about anything else in my logbook is more interesting to fly.)

2 TWU 8th Jun 2018 20:39

Re the Tucano, don't know what FLARM is but I was flying the machine when TCAS was fitted. TCAS was, and presumably still is, a great back up but not a replacement for proper lookout.

Genghis the Engineer 8th Jun 2018 21:12

FLARM is basically low power TCAS for gliders, working on its own frequencies and encoding.

G

ShyTorque 8th Jun 2018 22:19


Originally Posted by Il Duce (Post 10168381)
I have called non-squawking traffic pilots and received the reply, "Got him on TCAS". So tempted on those occasions to say, "No you haven't, pay attention, I've just told you it's non-squawking therefore you can't have it on TCAS."

Why didn't you? In UK most controllers will advise "primary return only" if traffic isn't giving a secondary radar return.

Genghis the Engineer 8th Jun 2018 22:24

Is it outside the realms of possibility that geometry / path length / attenuation mean that a transponder return isn't seen by a groundstation but is seen by a nearby aircraft?

G

Lima Juliet 9th Jun 2018 07:40


Originally Posted by Genghis the Engineer (Post 10168453)
You might want to check what "180 degrees" means, as illustrated in the diagram, which is a flat representation of a full sphere. Your photograph is probably showing around 25 degrees left and 45 degrees right of forwards, and maybe 30 up and 20 down.

Also, collisions don't necessarily happen head on! That of course is why cockpit view diagrams use either the Hammer of Molinye graticules, that show the full sphere.

G
(163 hours in PA28s, but trying not to add any more, simply because just about anything else in my logbook is more interesting to fly.)

But Genghis those diagrams are very misleading. Because what you can see is very dependent on head position. If I put my face next to the left hand window in a PA28 I can see a lot more than the diagram shows. If I put my head forward I can see a lot more up.

i know collisions can happen at any angle and are dependent on aircraft speed, bearing, heading, climb/descent rate and relative altitude. It also depends on human physiology as well - we don’t see too good behind us as predators!

So my point is, that the aircraft design is only a small factor for most modern aircraft - you need to fly something like the Comper Swift where looking out ahead is pretty tricky!

The other thing to point out is that the majority of the RAF’s FLARMS are actually PowerFLARMs and so they detect ADS-B as well. If the amateurish Pilot Aware did ADS-B Out instead of some random Betamax format (thanks BEagle) then it would be useful. FLARM is the same, but as the gliders have invested in it then it makes sense for now. But what we need is a common International standard - that is ADS-B - so when I take a Typhoon or A400M to other countries I can see the light aircraft not just some amateur lash-up knocked up in someones shed!


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:29.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.