Improve Light A/C Separation
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,580
Received 436 Likes
on
230 Posts
I would be very happy to fit FLARM, if it can get to critical mass for most flying machines. It has the big benefit that almost all could use it and all would benefit. I get zero benefit form my transponder.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I doubt any airframe manufacturer certifies their aircraft for flight in IMC. For flight under IFR yes, but for flying near a cloud??? (depending on the airspace)
I dont agree that the conversation is only relevant to high level. In fact the risk of a collision is far greater at low level because there is more traffic.
If you are willing to permit flying machines to operate without any commonly agreed means of identifying their position then you might just as well permit pilots to fly around with foggles or screens in VMC (sans safety pilot). In both cases you have removed any chance of see and avoid working.
IO540
You have a point, but as you know it is often inconvenient to fly airways, particularly on short legs. Often CAS restricts the aircraft to a corridor above the base, but in IMC below CAS. The options are to scud run or continue IMC in the corridor. There in lies the real risk of colliding with a glider that is transparent to air traffic and every other user of the said airspace.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Englishal sums up the attitude of many here:
"Unfortunately at the moment lots of "airspace" is not available to certain aeroplane types, due to performance reasons, qualification reasons and equipment issues"
....and so the proposal by many on this thread is to increase the airspace limitations, introduce additional controlled airspace and mandate increased equippage of kit that may not be suitable for the platform! So, to paraphrase....you don't have, or are unwilling/unable to invest in, the equipment necessary to fly in fully controlled airspace so we want others to spend money upgrading their equipment instead!
As has been pointed out elsewhere, the majority of mid-air collisions, despite rigourous procedures, technology, etc. appear to happen in CONTROLLED airspace. Therefore we need to ensure that the appropriate measures, commensurate with the actual (and not perceived) risks are adopted.
This thread also shows how much there is for us all to learn from each other about how we operate....Everyone is now a little more aware that gliders operate throughout Open FIR between ground level and FL195. Yes they can legally fly in IMC conditions, yes they have an established operating procedure for cloud flying that involves notification through a common frequency (130.4). Very few gliders are transponder/TCAS/Mode-S/ADS-B equipped which means they won't be picked up on the units in power pilots cockpits. Yes they can stay airborne for eight hours plus and fly for hundreds of miles and don't spend all their time within a few miles of the home site. Yes there can be several hundred gliders airborne at the same time. No, many power pilots don't seem to be aware of them.
Here's a quick test - if you fly tomorrow (Sat 30th), see how many gliders you spot on your trip. Then take a look at Daily Scores in a few days and see how many you should have seen. Then bear in mind that only a small number of pilots put their flights up on the ladder (not everyone is competitive).
Finally, a poster (Rod1?) mentions about introducing something that would undoubtedly help in VFR to reduce the risk...that of proper training AND TESTING of good lookout. When I do a check flight (gliders) with a pilot, lookout is an aspect that I will always be specifically watching out for (pun not intended). If a student pilot flies brilliantly, does a wonderful circuit and exhibits wonderful decision making but does not demonstrate good lookout then I will spend time with them to improve this before I will allow them to fly solo. I believe this to be the case with the other instructors at my club too. The very first lesson that I do with a new student is to stress the importance of lookout. I'd assumed this was the case throughout the aviation community and not just in gliding. Perhaps that isn't the case?
"Unfortunately at the moment lots of "airspace" is not available to certain aeroplane types, due to performance reasons, qualification reasons and equipment issues"
....and so the proposal by many on this thread is to increase the airspace limitations, introduce additional controlled airspace and mandate increased equippage of kit that may not be suitable for the platform! So, to paraphrase....you don't have, or are unwilling/unable to invest in, the equipment necessary to fly in fully controlled airspace so we want others to spend money upgrading their equipment instead!
As has been pointed out elsewhere, the majority of mid-air collisions, despite rigourous procedures, technology, etc. appear to happen in CONTROLLED airspace. Therefore we need to ensure that the appropriate measures, commensurate with the actual (and not perceived) risks are adopted.
This thread also shows how much there is for us all to learn from each other about how we operate....Everyone is now a little more aware that gliders operate throughout Open FIR between ground level and FL195. Yes they can legally fly in IMC conditions, yes they have an established operating procedure for cloud flying that involves notification through a common frequency (130.4). Very few gliders are transponder/TCAS/Mode-S/ADS-B equipped which means they won't be picked up on the units in power pilots cockpits. Yes they can stay airborne for eight hours plus and fly for hundreds of miles and don't spend all their time within a few miles of the home site. Yes there can be several hundred gliders airborne at the same time. No, many power pilots don't seem to be aware of them.
Here's a quick test - if you fly tomorrow (Sat 30th), see how many gliders you spot on your trip. Then take a look at Daily Scores in a few days and see how many you should have seen. Then bear in mind that only a small number of pilots put their flights up on the ladder (not everyone is competitive).
Finally, a poster (Rod1?) mentions about introducing something that would undoubtedly help in VFR to reduce the risk...that of proper training AND TESTING of good lookout. When I do a check flight (gliders) with a pilot, lookout is an aspect that I will always be specifically watching out for (pun not intended). If a student pilot flies brilliantly, does a wonderful circuit and exhibits wonderful decision making but does not demonstrate good lookout then I will spend time with them to improve this before I will allow them to fly solo. I believe this to be the case with the other instructors at my club too. The very first lesson that I do with a new student is to stress the importance of lookout. I'd assumed this was the case throughout the aviation community and not just in gliding. Perhaps that isn't the case?
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Cirencester UK
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540 wrote:
"I like flying VMC on top. Exactly zero chance, I would think, of meeting a glider there - no updraughts.
One is extremely unlikely to encounter any other traffic there, for that matter."
"No updraughts" - oh, yes there are! Best stay in blistful ignorance....! Because despite this long debate about gliders in clouds - implying thermalling up in cumulus, as distinct from close to the base of clouds - in reality and in my experience, this practice is far less frequent nowadays than, say, 40 years ago because modern gliders have so much better glide angle performance and therefore do not require the same absolute height to reach the next thermal as with poorer performance gliders. However...
as I was saying...blistful ignorance....in fact you will find gliders VMC on top in certain areas of the country when there are wave conditions. Modern gliding knowledge and met foreacsting (for this purpose) is so much greater now, and the equipment so much better, that the frequency of using wave lift has increased dramatically. So you will find (if not see!) gliders above cloud, usually riding the wave bars. For power guys who have never experienced this, you are really missing a magical world where the air is laminar smooth and the lift is creamy.
To get into the wave it is often necessary to take a short cloud climb under the leading edge of the wave bar. By short I mean perhaps 1 or 2 minutes, which gives the extra 200-400 ft to contact the wave lift. This sort of flying is no problem for glider pilots and represents an infitessimal risk to others (and self) if one does the calculation of time lapse / occassions / sky space, vertical and horizontal etc. And it is not in CAS. The rewards to the glider pilot are worth that tiny risk. And the fact is that when doing this sort of flying we exercise the sharp look out principle as well as comms on 130.4 to avoid other gliders searching for that elusive lift.
There is a lot of useful - mostly - debate here, but please remember glider flying in IMC, within the constraints quoted earlier, is legal and does not require transponders. And, to answer a question earlier about the rest of Europe, yes, it is legal in several (but not all) EU countries also.
"I like flying VMC on top. Exactly zero chance, I would think, of meeting a glider there - no updraughts.
One is extremely unlikely to encounter any other traffic there, for that matter."
"No updraughts" - oh, yes there are! Best stay in blistful ignorance....! Because despite this long debate about gliders in clouds - implying thermalling up in cumulus, as distinct from close to the base of clouds - in reality and in my experience, this practice is far less frequent nowadays than, say, 40 years ago because modern gliders have so much better glide angle performance and therefore do not require the same absolute height to reach the next thermal as with poorer performance gliders. However...
as I was saying...blistful ignorance....in fact you will find gliders VMC on top in certain areas of the country when there are wave conditions. Modern gliding knowledge and met foreacsting (for this purpose) is so much greater now, and the equipment so much better, that the frequency of using wave lift has increased dramatically. So you will find (if not see!) gliders above cloud, usually riding the wave bars. For power guys who have never experienced this, you are really missing a magical world where the air is laminar smooth and the lift is creamy.
To get into the wave it is often necessary to take a short cloud climb under the leading edge of the wave bar. By short I mean perhaps 1 or 2 minutes, which gives the extra 200-400 ft to contact the wave lift. This sort of flying is no problem for glider pilots and represents an infitessimal risk to others (and self) if one does the calculation of time lapse / occassions / sky space, vertical and horizontal etc. And it is not in CAS. The rewards to the glider pilot are worth that tiny risk. And the fact is that when doing this sort of flying we exercise the sharp look out principle as well as comms on 130.4 to avoid other gliders searching for that elusive lift.
There is a lot of useful - mostly - debate here, but please remember glider flying in IMC, within the constraints quoted earlier, is legal and does not require transponders. And, to answer a question earlier about the rest of Europe, yes, it is legal in several (but not all) EU countries also.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you fly quadrantle rules in cloud?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes they can legally fly in IMC conditions, yes they have an established operating procedure for cloud flying that involves notification through a common frequency (130.4).
In fact indulge me please and let me see if I've got to grips with this matter.
1. You fly aircraft that present a very poor radar target,
2. You fly aircraft that present a poor visual target, particularly when you are not thermaling,
3. You operate on a frequency that almost no one else is likely to be listening on (other than other gliders),
4. You use a TAS sytem that is almost unique to your fraternity and which cannot be interogated by radar, and then only a small minority of you do so,
5. You dont tell anyone when you are entering or in cloud other than your own kind,
6. When in cloud you dont obey the usual rules of the air (quadrangle FR),
7. If it all goes pear shaped you wear a parachute knowing that in all probability the occupants of the aircraft you collide with even if they were wearing parachutes are restricted by the design from deploying.
How am I doing so far.
Fine, if you are writing polemic rather than facts.
1. My mainly carbon structure is a pretty good primary radar target, better than many Group A aircraft. Others have commented on being told by radar controllers of 'numerous targets, presumably gliders'.
2. We manage to see each other pretty well, the best indication of lift is the presence of another glider behaving appropriately. Of course, a good lookout is needed.
3. Then now you are aware that frequency will warn you of gliders in the cloud you are blundering through in the open FIR, why not have it on your COM2? 130.400 in case you have forgotten.
4. FLARM use is increasing in gliders, at present rates of growth it will be a majority of cross-country gliders by 2011. It is also widely used by light aircraft and helicopters (including IFR equipped ones) in continental Europe where a high densit of glider traffic is common.
5. See 3.
6. The clouds we use (because that's why we use them) have vertical air movements often over 1,000 f.p.m. How accurately can you maintain your quadrantal height in view of that? In any case, not required by gliders, see the ANO. (I don't mind how you spell quadrantal, I knew what you meant).
7. Yes, I wear a parachute - the seating is designed so it's the easiest way to be comfortable. I am not relying on it saving my life if several hundred horses chew through my airframe, and therefore taking excessive risk (in my own judgement).
However, once again, why has this thread degenerated into a power/glider slanging match about a minuscule risk when it started about a tragic, and by no means unique, collision between two powered aircraft in VMC in circuit for the same airfield?
1. My mainly carbon structure is a pretty good primary radar target, better than many Group A aircraft. Others have commented on being told by radar controllers of 'numerous targets, presumably gliders'.
2. We manage to see each other pretty well, the best indication of lift is the presence of another glider behaving appropriately. Of course, a good lookout is needed.
3. Then now you are aware that frequency will warn you of gliders in the cloud you are blundering through in the open FIR, why not have it on your COM2? 130.400 in case you have forgotten.
4. FLARM use is increasing in gliders, at present rates of growth it will be a majority of cross-country gliders by 2011. It is also widely used by light aircraft and helicopters (including IFR equipped ones) in continental Europe where a high densit of glider traffic is common.
5. See 3.
6. The clouds we use (because that's why we use them) have vertical air movements often over 1,000 f.p.m. How accurately can you maintain your quadrantal height in view of that? In any case, not required by gliders, see the ANO. (I don't mind how you spell quadrantal, I knew what you meant).
7. Yes, I wear a parachute - the seating is designed so it's the easiest way to be comfortable. I am not relying on it saving my life if several hundred horses chew through my airframe, and therefore taking excessive risk (in my own judgement).
However, once again, why has this thread degenerated into a power/glider slanging match about a minuscule risk when it started about a tragic, and by no means unique, collision between two powered aircraft in VMC in circuit for the same airfield?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fitter2
An excellent reply.
As is often the case there are two sides to every coin. This discussion has explored both and I suspect some of us have learnt a deal more about gliders.
I have always wanted to have a go in a glider. I look forward to doing so.
PS sorry abot my spelling.
An excellent reply.
As is often the case there are two sides to every coin. This discussion has explored both and I suspect some of us have learnt a deal more about gliders.
I have always wanted to have a go in a glider. I look forward to doing so.
PS sorry abot my spelling.
3. Then now you are aware that frequency will warn you of gliders in the cloud you are blundering through in the open FIR, why not have it on your COM2? 130.400 in case you have forgotten.
I have a simple choice in collision avoidance. I can turn left, or I can turn right. Cockpit display of traffic information can help me make that choice.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
....and so the proposal by many on this thread is to increase the airspace limitations, introduce additional controlled airspace and mandate increased equippage of kit that may not be suitable for the platform! So, to paraphrase....you don't have, or are unwilling/unable to invest in, the equipment necessary to fly in fully controlled airspace so we want others to spend money upgrading their equipment instead!
As has been pointed out elsewhere, the majority of mid-air collisions, despite rigourous procedures, technology, etc. appear to happen in CONTROLLED airspace.
As has been pointed out elsewhere, the majority of mid-air collisions, despite rigourous procedures, technology, etc. appear to happen in CONTROLLED airspace.
Most collisions happen OUTSIDE CAS. The last two I can think of happened in class G.
I'll fit any practical equipment I think is nescessary and within reasonable cost if it increases safety. I don't know why some people are so against fitting a relatively cheap bit of kit to theirs....?
(Are you capable of giving your position as a distance and bearing from the nearest VOR? Don't worry, the question was rhetorical. I already know the answer.
)For the record, I (like ShyTorque) fly IFR helicopters in Class G airspace. I am also concerned about the fact that there might be other aircraft in the same cloud as me that I have no effective means of knowing about. This thread (and the other one specifically about gliders in clouds) has been a real education to me.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ShyTorque
I hope you were joking, but just in case you were serious;
“It enables those in receipt of a radar service in Class G”
I am a “fun flyer” I fly almost exclusively at the weekend. At the weekend almost all LARS is closed, and the ones that are open have no capacity to give me a RIS (I am VFR only remember in a permit aircraft). This benefit is effectively non-existent.
“or those using an ACAS system to avoid you”
I fly an LAA aircraft into strips and small licensed airfields (all over the UK plus some of Europe). The chances of me colliding with an airliner are billions to one (I stay clear of ILS’s etc). The fractions of 1% of the traffic I am likely to hit that have ACAS are probably flying IFR. Likelihood of collision billions to one.
My risk of a mid air is with other traffic at low level. I fly from a strip so the first 1500 ft up and down is the big risk. 80% of local traffic (I did some research) is not transponder equipped and not likely to be (busy gliding site, lots of micros and LAA with some GA mixed in). My only chance of avoiding them is to use my 1700 fpm RofC and the exceptional visibility of my aircraft, combined with a clearing turn at 500ft and keep the canopy spotless. I take this risk very seriously as the previous mid air involved an aircraft taking off from my strip, at 1400 ft agl.
The only technical tool which might improve things is FLARM. Because it was designed for gilders, it is light and can be portable. Almost all of the machines, which cannot fit a transponder, could fit it and it gives the user (the person paying) a benefit. If it starts to gain critical mass in the UK I will fit it.
To be fair, I get two benefits from my mode C transponder. I can get attention if I have a serious problem, and I am allowed in French class D (legally).
This does not stop me keeping it switched on and adjusted, but if it failed I would probably not bother replacing it. If it were possible to get a RIS more than one a year, I would agree it would be worthwhile, but I see no sign of this ever happening.
Rod1
I hope you were joking, but just in case you were serious;
“It enables those in receipt of a radar service in Class G”
I am a “fun flyer” I fly almost exclusively at the weekend. At the weekend almost all LARS is closed, and the ones that are open have no capacity to give me a RIS (I am VFR only remember in a permit aircraft). This benefit is effectively non-existent.
“or those using an ACAS system to avoid you”
I fly an LAA aircraft into strips and small licensed airfields (all over the UK plus some of Europe). The chances of me colliding with an airliner are billions to one (I stay clear of ILS’s etc). The fractions of 1% of the traffic I am likely to hit that have ACAS are probably flying IFR. Likelihood of collision billions to one.
My risk of a mid air is with other traffic at low level. I fly from a strip so the first 1500 ft up and down is the big risk. 80% of local traffic (I did some research) is not transponder equipped and not likely to be (busy gliding site, lots of micros and LAA with some GA mixed in). My only chance of avoiding them is to use my 1700 fpm RofC and the exceptional visibility of my aircraft, combined with a clearing turn at 500ft and keep the canopy spotless. I take this risk very seriously as the previous mid air involved an aircraft taking off from my strip, at 1400 ft agl.
The only technical tool which might improve things is FLARM. Because it was designed for gilders, it is light and can be portable. Almost all of the machines, which cannot fit a transponder, could fit it and it gives the user (the person paying) a benefit. If it starts to gain critical mass in the UK I will fit it.
To be fair, I get two benefits from my mode C transponder. I can get attention if I have a serious problem, and I am allowed in French class D (legally).
This does not stop me keeping it switched on and adjusted, but if it failed I would probably not bother replacing it. If it were possible to get a RIS more than one a year, I would agree it would be worthwhile, but I see no sign of this ever happening.
Rod1
Well, FWIW Robin400, seeing as a) I wasn't in that helicopter, b) I've never flown out of Oulton Park and c) this 'incident' wasn't publicised either on here or in the national media, how on earth is it meant to 'ring a bell'? 
Were you IMC at this time? Because, otherwise, I can't see how it relates to my post about concerns about meeting gliders in IMC.
(If you were VMC, which I suspect you were, then I can only surmise from your very brief details that 'see and avoid' worked in this case - ie you saw him, so you avoided him. There's every chance that the heli pilot never even saw you.
The fact that you had your Mode C 'on' was absolutely the right thing to do. But remember a couple of facts - although some IFR helicopters have TCAS fitted (ShyTorque is one of the 'lucky' ones), the majority don't. And, secondly, if the heli was in the climb-out, there's every chance that he was either too low level or had not had the time to receive a radar service from Liverpool or Manc.)
Were you IMC at this time? Because, otherwise, I can't see how it relates to my post about concerns about meeting gliders in IMC.
(If you were VMC, which I suspect you were, then I can only surmise from your very brief details that 'see and avoid' worked in this case - ie you saw him, so you avoided him. There's every chance that the heli pilot never even saw you.
The fact that you had your Mode C 'on' was absolutely the right thing to do. But remember a couple of facts - although some IFR helicopters have TCAS fitted (ShyTorque is one of the 'lucky' ones), the majority don't. And, secondly, if the heli was in the climb-out, there's every chance that he was either too low level or had not had the time to receive a radar service from Liverpool or Manc.)
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ShyTorque
“It enables those in receipt of a radar service in Class G”
Originally Posted by Rod1
I am a “fun flyer” I fly almost exclusively at the weekend. At the weekend almost all LARS is closed, and the ones that are open have no capacity to give me a RIS (I am VFR only remember in a permit aircraft). This benefit is effectively non-existent.
............................................................ ...................
I have read through all this thread and the overall feeling I'm getting is one of selfishness; "it doesn't help me/affect me so I'll do nothing"! I am not directing that comment at any one poster.
Cheers
Whirls
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Age: 80
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please let me asure you all that I am not trying to apportion blame.
I ony posted this event to illustrate frailty of the system.
Only after passing through our level were we aware of the situation.
Yes it was VMC, we just both happened to be in nearly the same place of sky.
This triggered my interest in Flarm.
I ony posted this event to illustrate frailty of the system.
Only after passing through our level were we aware of the situation.
Yes it was VMC, we just both happened to be in nearly the same place of sky.
This triggered my interest in Flarm.