Mid-Air Collision - Gloucestershire

[ANW]

Apologies for returning this thread to the original subject, but does anyone know the other type of aircraft involved in this accident with the Cessna 150?

Apart from the posted BBC News link, the only other reference I can find refers to the CE150 having a mid-air with a 'microlight'. Now that covers a multitude of designs, ranging from 3-axis to flexwing. If the latter was involved as 'the other aircraft' then I would be surprised at its survival. Whereas a 3-axis type - high wing or low wing ? - could be a robust machine, depending on design.

[BEagle]

Monocock, do you mean the top of page 2 - or the beginning of the thread itself?

Anyway, whatever. Bothered, me?

I'm happy to stick to minimal regulation and no additional avionic requirements. The utter farce of meeting FM-immunity requirements cost us £17500 for 4 a/c and I'm not going to support ANY further mandatory avionic proposals.

Map, watch, GPS back-up and only talk on the wireless if you need to. Otherwise look out and enjoy.

Edited to add: The pilot who witnessed the collision told me that he thought the other aircraft "looked like a Robin". That's all I know - except that it made a sucessful forced landing and 2 people were seen vacating the aircraft.

[bar shaker]

Completely afree BEagle. The more safety aids you give someone, in any form of transport, the less they feel they have to be scared about.

I have had a few close encounters and on every occasion, the pilot was not looking out of the window. three were that close that I could clearly see they were looking down, one was further away but I could see the pilot looking out of his left window when I was on his right.

Makes good use of your eyes needs training. It also needs constant use. The pilot who looks at the GPS, then at the map then at the temps, then a quick scan across the horizon, then at the GPS... will rarely spot any other traffic.

We should fly with a constant scanning look out, occasionally taking our eyes inside to check only the things that must to be checked. We should also realise that during the time that we are looking inside and the first 10-20 seconds of resuming our lookout, is the time when we are most at danger.

If it was taught that 'eyes inside' was the most dangerous part of any cross country, I am sure avoidance would be better.

[Dusty_B]

RIS

A RIS is something else there to help me, and I'll take advantage of it if it's available. If the controller is too busy they will tell me. If they are not too busy, then I've just added to the safety of my flight, and others in the area.

This is not true.

The number of contacts a military controller can work on a radar service is limited - in the order of 6-12, I can't remember. Any more, and they have to turn extra trade away until resources become available.

I have been screwed over twice in the last 18 months where I have been facing a cloud break without a radar service because the controller was already operating at maximum capacity. If you ask for a RIS or RAS when the in-flight conditions don't warrent it, you are denying the same - AND LESSER - services to others who may need it.

So, if six people flying below a 8/8th cloud cover ask for a RIS 'coz it is free, the controller may feel under too much pressure to offer even a FIS to new traffic on frequency.

So in your "I'm safer" world, you would be denying a much valued RIS or RAS to IMC traffic, those who have a high cockpit workload, and in some cases MANY people who would like a FIS.

If you ask for what you need, then IF the controller isn't busy,guess what, he'll have the capacity to offer you traffic information anyway - he'd be daft not to.

And just because the frequency doesn't sound busy, doen't mean the mil controller is otherwise busy - you've no idea what he or she is working on UHF.



[edited to ponder...]
Are the folk who ask for a RIS when they don't need it the same people who use high intesity strobes while on the manouvering area???
[end ponder]

[SkyHawk-N]

Surecheck Trafficscope VRX

Blimey, after seeing the reaction my first posting caused I'm a bit worried about posting this question

Here goes ...

Anyone had any experience with the Surecheck Trafficscope VRX?

[capt.sparrow]

Rather than relying on electronic gizmos or radar cover why not use Mandatory Broadcast Zones (MBZs) like they do in Australia. This is a great way of improoving awareness of those flying in your area without the need of a ground station. You can sucessfully seperate yourselves by position reporting all sizes and speed of traffic.

[Dusty_B]

Capt Sparrow,

There's just too much traffic in too little space for that sort of thing. In the south of England, you're rarely going to be more than 5-20 miles from an airfield with an assigned frequency, so few people would find it relevent to be on an "open" frequency for cruise - you chat to whoever can give you the best service, or whoever you're passing close to.

[capt.sparrow]

Sure, this is a problem, but being able to talk directly to your traffic and arrange between yourself seperation works very well rather than using a go between or cluttering a busy FISO freq with circuit traffic. On one occassion I have very safely arranged seperation between me (PA28) a cessna and a B737 in flight and a A321 waiting to take off - all in uncontrolled airspace.

[dublinpilot]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A RIS is something else there to help me, and I'll take advantage of it if it's available. If the controller is too busy they will tell me. If they are not too busy, then I've just added to the safety of my flight, and others in the area.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



This is not true.

Dusty_B,

I may be wrong, but my understanding is that even if the controller has agreed to give me a RIS, he can later downgrade that to a FIS if his workload gets too big. I'd have no problem being downgraded if someone else needed it more than I. But I'm not letting it go to waste. If it's there, someone may as well use it.

As for asking for a FIS, and expecting to get a RIS because the controller isn't busy, that's plain silly. Expect the service you've agreed, and nothing more.

dp

[Dusty_B]

I'd have no problem being downgraded if someone else needed it more than I

How are you, the controller, or I going to know that you don't need the service as much as I do?

It doesn't work like that! It's a first-come, first served basis.

[dublinpilot]

Well, the fact that I've advised him I'm VFR, and it's a nice day out, and you call up IFR, requesting a RAS for cloud break, might give the controller some clue as to who needed it most.

In reality, if it's a nice day out and I use up a valuable FIS, it's unlikely that you'll need the same service to break cloud.

[farcanal]

The other aircraft involved was a Eurostar-operated from a strip near my village-thankfully both crew pretty much unharmed,although prettymuch shaken up I guess.

[bookworm]

So in your "I'm safer" world, you would be denying a much valued RIS or RAS to IMC traffic, those who have a high cockpit workload, and in some cases MANY people who would like a FIS.

We haven't had a mid-air collision in IMC in the UK for 40 years, but collisions between flights in VMC are, as evident from this very thread, a regular event. Why do you feel that the traffic in IMC is in greater need of a RIS than a flight in VMC?

[shortstripper]

On the question of Tcas ect .... how will these gizzmo's help in the biggest danger area of all, ie the airfield vicinity and circuit?

I have nothing against TCAS except the idea of it being forced on me. But therein lays the problem; unless all are equipped with transponders they are useless! Even if we were all eventually forced to carry them, how would they help in the circuit?

My T31 simply can't accommodate due to panel/cockpit space, not to mention power, weight and cost (eventual build cost will be less than the average transponder). It would be a very sad day if all such aircraft were forced to stay out of the air so that the more affluent/complex type owners can wrap themselves in cotton wool!

Safety is always an emotive issue, but life without some danger is likely to be very very boring! (and probably unhealthy)

SS

[High Wing Drifter]

Shortstripper,

I think your question was rhetorical, so I agree, with +/-200' (and more in many) variance with Mode C transponders, I doubt TCAS would be any use whatsoever anywhere near a busy aerodrome. I think it was ShyTorque who said that his company finds a basic TCAS as fitted to their helicopter fleet very useful in Class G cross country though.

Bookworm,

but collisions between flights in VMC are,..., a regular event.

Hmmm. I think that's arguable. I would say possibly regular (depending on what you consider rehular) but infrequent. Purely from memeory I can only recall three in the last three years. Two gliders, a microlite and a helicopter and this thread's subject.

[BRL]

Now I know this is going to annoy some people but I am closing this thread.

It has gone from a condolences thread to all over the place, I am suprised it took me three pages to do this.

I refer to Whirly's post on page one as one of my reasons for this descision.

If you think people may learn from this kind of event/accident then start another thread on why you think this happened.

As usual, if you want to take this further, PM or email me [email protected].