Collision Avoidance
Avoid imitations
Joined: Nov 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 15,115
Likes: 1,091
From: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Effectively those who fly on instruments/autopilot will prefer to fly high, and that will bring in a degree of separation. My issue is with those pilots who plan to fly lower and mix it with us 'indians' then blame us for getting in their way - quoting safety as a rationale.
I don't think anyone is blaming "us indians"- who is that group, anyway? As far as avoidance and "getting in the way" is concerned, the rules of the air apply to everyone, irrespective of nationality.
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
From: Maders UK
"I've watched my (very experience) pilt friend, and he is spending so much time looking at the screens and fine-tuning his flight profile, he almost never looks out."
JAYSUS!
Here is further perpetuation of the groundless myth that those who have TCAS do not keep a look out.
Why don't we all go back to the days of non-radio biplanes, flying helmets and no electrics in the cockpit. We could munch carrots to keep our vision sharp (like blackadders glorious 20 minuters) and exchange steely-eyed tales of derring do in front of bowled-over maidens in the flying club bar.
what bollocks!
Get real, the future is here, get a GPS, get a transponder, and for God's sake activate mode-C, (if you can) get a TCAS and use a combination of avionics and eyeballs to keep you as safe as possible.
Anyone with experience counted in thousands of hours will have had enough close calls to confirm that use of the eyeball as a sole means of collision avoidance is a flawed concept.
SB
JAYSUS!
Here is further perpetuation of the groundless myth that those who have TCAS do not keep a look out.
Why don't we all go back to the days of non-radio biplanes, flying helmets and no electrics in the cockpit. We could munch carrots to keep our vision sharp (like blackadders glorious 20 minuters) and exchange steely-eyed tales of derring do in front of bowled-over maidens in the flying club bar.
what bollocks!
Get real, the future is here, get a GPS, get a transponder, and for God's sake activate mode-C, (if you can) get a TCAS and use a combination of avionics and eyeballs to keep you as safe as possible.
Anyone with experience counted in thousands of hours will have had enough close calls to confirm that use of the eyeball as a sole means of collision avoidance is a flawed concept.
SB
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
From: Dublin
Scooter Boy, it would be interesting to get your thoughts on the NTSB report - about post 26 in this thread.
My thoughts are that the TCAD may have been the cause of the acceident.
My thoughts are that the TCAD may have been the cause of the acceident.
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:
The pilot's inadequate visual lookout during cruise, and the pilot of the other airplane's inadequate visual lookout during climb.
The pilot's inadequate visual lookout during cruise, and the pilot of the other airplane's inadequate visual lookout during climb.
dp
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
From: Maders UK
"interesting to get your thoughts on the NTSB report - about post 26 in this thread"
My opinion as requested:
the TCAS worked for the pilot who had it. He got an audible warning and this might have saved the day had he then been able to visually locate the traffic and maneuver accordingly. Seems it was the subsequent use of the eyeballs in locating the conflicting traffic that proved "inadequate".
I would have this one down as a near-TCAS-save.
At 275 kt closing speed the eyeball is woefully inadequate.
IMHO TCAS is useless without lookout but the corollary is also true, lookout is vastly better when augmented with TCAS.
SB
My opinion as requested:
the TCAS worked for the pilot who had it. He got an audible warning and this might have saved the day had he then been able to visually locate the traffic and maneuver accordingly. Seems it was the subsequent use of the eyeballs in locating the conflicting traffic that proved "inadequate".
I would have this one down as a near-TCAS-save.
At 275 kt closing speed the eyeball is woefully inadequate.
IMHO TCAS is useless without lookout but the corollary is also true, lookout is vastly better when augmented with TCAS.
SB
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
From: An island somewhere
IMHO TCAS is useless without lookout but the corollary is also true, lookout is vastly better when augmented with TCAS.
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
From: Midlands
“Get real, the future is here, get a GPS, get a transponder,”
I agree with you, provided you add, if practical. I have just wasted lots of time trying to explain why most flying machines CANNOT fit a current tec transponder under current rules. The CAA fully agree with this which is why “GA” won the argument over mode s for all which has been abandoned.
Rod1
I agree with you, provided you add, if practical. I have just wasted lots of time trying to explain why most flying machines CANNOT fit a current tec transponder under current rules. The CAA fully agree with this which is why “GA” won the argument over mode s for all which has been abandoned.
Rod1
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
From: England
Originally Posted by Rod1
Do we really want to ground all this because some rich guys with all the toys cannot be bothered to work on lookout. If you all feel that without a transponder you are in too much danger to carry on flying then give up and let the rest of us have a bit more room to play with. I have always believed in the brotherhood of aviation, but perhaps I am just incredibly stupid.
In 6k visibility, two aircraft approaching each other in a head on collision course, at a closing speed of 240kts, will have 50 seconds to take avoiding action. A full scan should take at least 20 seconds, so if the target was spotted at the end, rather than the beginning of the next scan, and you had a look at your map between scans, your reactions had better be sharp!
A "toy" could help in all those situations, but only if the "brotherhood of aviation" installs transponders.
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
From: Midlands
“A "toy" could help in all those situations, but only if the "brotherhood of aviation" installs transponders.”
Back in the real world we understand that the "brotherhood of aviation" cannot fit the d*** things. So we work on our lookout and do not over rely on a toy which can only “see” a small percentage of threats. If the CAA come up with a mobile phone size unit with a 10 hour battery life from a built in battery then things change. With current tec TCAS will miss almost all the people who could kill you on a Saturday PM over Derbyshire at 2000 ft. You can either except that and work on your lookout, or decide lookout does not work, that flying is too risky for you and give up.
Rod1
Back in the real world we understand that the "brotherhood of aviation" cannot fit the d*** things. So we work on our lookout and do not over rely on a toy which can only “see” a small percentage of threats. If the CAA come up with a mobile phone size unit with a 10 hour battery life from a built in battery then things change. With current tec TCAS will miss almost all the people who could kill you on a Saturday PM over Derbyshire at 2000 ft. You can either except that and work on your lookout, or decide lookout does not work, that flying is too risky for you and give up.
Rod1
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
Rod, with the amount of time you have spent on here in the past telling everybody how easily you can do pilot maintenance on your permit machines, why not re-make some parts out of lighter materials, shave a few kg off the empty weight, and then you could fit a transponder.
I don't think the powered planes that truly have no electric power available for accessories represent a significant hazard to other traffic. They tend to fly at very low levels.
Your requirement for a mobile phone sized unit with an integral battery is a bit silly. Why not have it fit into a wristwatch - would be even smaller then
I don't think the powered planes that truly have no electric power available for accessories represent a significant hazard to other traffic. They tend to fly at very low levels.
Your requirement for a mobile phone sized unit with an integral battery is a bit silly. Why not have it fit into a wristwatch - would be even smaller then
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
From: England
Originally Posted by Rod1
You can either except that and work on your lookout, or decide lookout does not work, that flying is too risky for you and give up.
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
From: Midlands
“I don't think the powered planes that truly have no electric power available for accessories represent a significant hazard to other traffic. They tend to fly at very low levels.”
You really are out of your depth on this. Lots of home built aerobatic types have no electrics and fly just as high as you. I suppose I will now get told that home built aircraft are not allowed to do aerobatics…
Rod1
PS the mobile phone device was put forward by our very own CAA as a solution to this very problem. Unfortunately, nobody has been able to build one which was rather "inconvenient" for the CAA.
You really are out of your depth on this. Lots of home built aerobatic types have no electrics and fly just as high as you. I suppose I will now get told that home built aircraft are not allowed to do aerobatics…
Rod1
PS the mobile phone device was put forward by our very own CAA as a solution to this very problem. Unfortunately, nobody has been able to build one which was rather "inconvenient" for the CAA.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
Rod, with the amount of time you have spent on here in the past telling everybody how easily you can do pilot maintenance on your permit machines, why not re-make some parts out of lighter materials, shave a few kg off the empty weight, and then you could fit a transponder.
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
From: UK
Don't run me over, please
... and how long is it before I and my colleagues are going to be banned from flying at 45kt without a TAS and ModeS transponder because we can't get out of the way of you fast boys quick enough.
The faster you fly, the more chance I have of being run over from behind. I already get a stiff neck trying to maintain a 360degree lookout scan!
MB
The faster you fly, the more chance I have of being run over from behind. I already get a stiff neck trying to maintain a 360degree lookout scan!
MB
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,198
Likes: 0
From: South Norfolk, England
I've not said anything up until now as those who think TCAS, GPS ect ect are the answer to everything simply do not listen to anything they don't want to hear. I'd happily fit a transponder if 1) I had the panel space, 2) It wasn't likely to fry my balls!
My a/c is happy low down, but I do fly high when the mood takes me. It's not irresponsible, it's simply my right. My a/c cost me £2500 to make, and it's the only thing I can afford to fly right now. The fact that those with more money would prefer me and my kind to keep out of "their" sky is a sad reflection on modern society. My answer is simply STUFF YOU! If you can't see beyond your nose, you are not fit to SHARE my (and your) airspace. If you truly think you can buy your safety, and would happily force out those that cannot, then you really can say that you know the cost of everything and the value of nothing!
SS
My a/c is happy low down, but I do fly high when the mood takes me. It's not irresponsible, it's simply my right. My a/c cost me £2500 to make, and it's the only thing I can afford to fly right now. The fact that those with more money would prefer me and my kind to keep out of "their" sky is a sad reflection on modern society. My answer is simply STUFF YOU! If you can't see beyond your nose, you are not fit to SHARE my (and your) airspace. If you truly think you can buy your safety, and would happily force out those that cannot, then you really can say that you know the cost of everything and the value of nothing!
SS
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
From: An island somewhere
I've not said anything up until now as those who think TCAS, GPS ect ect are the answer to everything simply do not listen to anything they don't want to hear. I'd happily fit a transponder if 1) I had the panel space, 2) It wasn't likely to fry my balls!My a/c is happy low down, but I do fly high when the mood takes me. It's not irresponsible, it's simply my right.
My a/c cost me £2500 to make, and it's the only thing I can afford to fly right now. The fact that those with more money would prefer me and my kind to keep out of "their" sky is a sad reflection on modern society. My answer is simply STUFF YOU! If you can't see beyond your nose, you are not fit to SHARE my (and your) airspace. If you truly think you can buy your safety, and would happily force out those that cannot, then you really can say that you know the cost of everything and the value of nothing!
My a/c cost me £2500 to make, and it's the only thing I can afford to fly right now. The fact that those with more money would prefer me and my kind to keep out of "their" sky is a sad reflection on modern society. My answer is simply STUFF YOU! If you can't see beyond your nose, you are not fit to SHARE my (and your) airspace. If you truly think you can buy your safety, and would happily force out those that cannot, then you really can say that you know the cost of everything and the value of nothing!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
From: England
Originally Posted by shortstripper
The fact that those with more money would prefer me and my kind to keep out of "their" sky is a sad reflection on modern society. My answer is simply STUFF YOU! If you can't see beyond your nose, you are not fit to SHARE my (and your) airspace.
Originally Posted by Rod1
If you all feel that without a transponder you are in too much danger to carry on flying then give up and let the rest of us have a bit more room to play with.
It's undeniable that transponders would help everyone. The problem is making them practical and affordable, so it would be better to try to see how that could be achieved, rather than sinking to these depths of intolerance.
Avoid imitations
Joined: Nov 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 15,115
Likes: 1,091
From: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
SS, A disappointing and largely uncalled for response; where on earth did you find all that pent-up vitriol?
I am lucky enough to fly a TAS equipped aircraft for the owner - they come with the equipment as standard. I don't fly for pleasure, only as my job, but I am obliged to use the same airspace as "sport" pilots like yourself. In these times of increasing useage of airspace we should all be trying to do what we can to keep us all safe. "Stuff you" is hardly conducive to flight safety of anyone.
TAS, or TCAS certainly does not comprise the whole answer to flight safety; used properly it can only enhance it. I know no-one who thinks it is the full answer and a replacement for a proper, effective lookout. Again, I think these so-called pilots who think it IS the full answer are the product of more crewroom mythology. Everyone who uses it is fully aware of the limitations of this equipment.
I know one pilot who has miraculously survived TWO mid-air collisions, both in pre-TCAS days. One faster aircraft hit him from above and behind, as it descended in Class D airspace, the other from below, in Class G. Not surprisingly, his lookout is now rather intense. He is a big fan of TCAS because he knows how limited lookout can be.....
I am lucky enough to fly a TAS equipped aircraft for the owner - they come with the equipment as standard. I don't fly for pleasure, only as my job, but I am obliged to use the same airspace as "sport" pilots like yourself. In these times of increasing useage of airspace we should all be trying to do what we can to keep us all safe. "Stuff you" is hardly conducive to flight safety of anyone.
TAS, or TCAS certainly does not comprise the whole answer to flight safety; used properly it can only enhance it. I know no-one who thinks it is the full answer and a replacement for a proper, effective lookout. Again, I think these so-called pilots who think it IS the full answer are the product of more crewroom mythology. Everyone who uses it is fully aware of the limitations of this equipment.
I know one pilot who has miraculously survived TWO mid-air collisions, both in pre-TCAS days. One faster aircraft hit him from above and behind, as it descended in Class D airspace, the other from below, in Class G. Not surprisingly, his lookout is now rather intense. He is a big fan of TCAS because he knows how limited lookout can be.....
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
shortstripper
The "IFR crowd" (or whatever one wants to call them) is not in any way trying to push VFR pilots out. For starters, there are far more VFR-only pilots flying than ones with IFR privileges.
Speaking for myself, what I don't agree with is some people saying this and that cannot be done when there are technical solutions right now.
Unfortunately "anti Mode S" and "anti transponders" generally have become a sort of religion, often without any rational justification. One could argue that Mode S is pointless but the general concept of a Mode C (altitude reporting) transponder is pretty solid, except where genuinely technically impossible or just plain silly (like on a parachutist).
The "IFR crowd" (or whatever one wants to call them) is not in any way trying to push VFR pilots out. For starters, there are far more VFR-only pilots flying than ones with IFR privileges.
Speaking for myself, what I don't agree with is some people saying this and that cannot be done when there are technical solutions right now.
Unfortunately "anti Mode S" and "anti transponders" generally have become a sort of religion, often without any rational justification. One could argue that Mode S is pointless but the general concept of a Mode C (altitude reporting) transponder is pretty solid, except where genuinely technically impossible or just plain silly (like on a parachutist).
