I get up to 4,000' quite often, 6,000' occasionally, and 9,500' only once; I don't hedge-hop at 2,000' if I've got the option not to. I very rarely seem to pick days with no cloud at all to go flying.

Only aorund places like London and Manchester and the occasional airway. Most of the time you can get to 55 quite readily, even quite close to London and if there is Class D then you can often get a clearance through. I agree though that Class A does put a dampener on things because there is no way to get a clearance through if it "doesn't touch the gorund".

If there is a layer of broken cloud, try and get on top because once up there *most* other people will be below it, and certainly all gliders. I came back across Wales a few weeks ago and went at 7500. There was a layer of Bkn at 4000-5000 so at 7.5k we were in the smooth in the sunshine, there was no one else around (saw a few others below the cloud) and no airspace worries. Plenty of holes to get back down through and Cardiff could see us from 100 miles away and quite happily gave us a traffic service.

Capt Stables remarks about the transponders not being switched on interests me.

It was my understanding mainly from reading the stuff that the MoD issues -
for instance on the 'low flying system'

For example, DASC are able to reassure them that it is an MoD requirement3 that ‘Except for aircraft con ducting authorised operational missions, entry to the UK Low Flying System is prohibited unless aircraft are equipped with a serviceable IFF/SSR transpon der and a Mode 3/A squawk with mode C (where fi tted) is being transmitted’.

On collision warning systems;

Which military aircraft have a CWS fi tted? Most UK military transport/‘wide-bodied’ aircraft have TCAS fi tted as do the Tucanos at Linton-on-Ouse. (see page 44 in this issue). While there are currently no military Fast jets with a CWS, the Hawk 128 should have TCAS fi tted when it comes into service, and there is an ongoing evaluation of a possible CWS for the Tornado GR4. No military helicopters currently have a CWS

On mode S;
The Ministry of Defence has a programme to fit Mode S capable SSR transponders to its military aircraft to help protect freedom of movement and improve interoperability

But if they decide not to switch them on then it makes all of this nothing more than window dressing. Anyone with definitive knowledge of whether aircraft in the 'low flying system' must squawk?

Did my first trip across the channel at the weekend (to St Omer and back), and being from lovely class G covered North E Scotland, the amount of traffic in the SE of England was quite a surprise.

Had 2 or 3 moments in the one flight with aircraft on constant bearings which we had to turn and avoid - they either hadn't see us (all lights on/waggling wings but no joy), or weren't going to move. And none of them were talking to who we were.

A high wing cessna which dropped out of the 1500 cloud base in front of us, a Robin on a reciprocal heading 200 ft below, a high wing cessna into South-end who wasn't moving for anyone, an those are just the ones we could see!

And the RT was terrible - Poor London Info controllers having to tell people to stop broadcasting all over each other - one french guy stomped on 5 tx in a row and had a very "pointed" response from London.

We're now seriously considering a XRX, as it wasn't funny after the 2nd or 3rd time - but given the number of "negative transponder" calls to London, who knows!

And it was especially annoying as it was always *us* that had to turn away for an orbit - they just kept plodding on.

Mandatory transponders and mode S suddenly started seeming like a very very good idea!

I wonder if pilots following tracks to/from similar waypoints are causing these near misses?
In shipping therer are GPS assisted collisions where ships are heading for same nav point.
Lister

My experience of the SE corner is pretty similar to Slopey's. Most of it I suspect is people using routings which pass over the Manston to Folkstone area. Everytime I flown through there it is busy, similarly around the GA fields and the 'rat runs' between controlled airspace.

Certainly a gadget would help but obviously is not the whole answer. As for everyone having a transponder? Cannot see it every happening - if only for the well rehearsed Mode S arguments.

Even here in the quiet-ish north it is not unusual to find paragliders, hanggliders and weightshift microlights at typical GA altitudes and they outnumber all of the GA fleet.

Just as a passing comment; it is my understanding that we don't call "TCAS Climb" (or "TCAS Descent") any more. The call is simply "Resolution Advisory" whichever way you are manoeuvering.

SoCal App
 

My close call were all outside class B but withon about 15 miles from the outer 30NM ring. By close call I am talking about misses by less than 100-200 yds. This was on VFR flight surrounding Minneapolis. I find the TIS-B finds plane much earlier than I can visusally see them starting at about 6 NM.

So Cal App
 

I was outside the classB veil. TIS-B tends to report traffic on the screen about 50 NM out from Minneapolis radar. I was on a common traffic advisory or local airport frequency. On one occassion I managed to talk to the other pilot as he & I reported a position and altitude that were about the same. On one occassion the near miss was a head on, in which with each aircraft trvelling about 150 MPH leaves only about 10 seconds to see and avoid. I didn't see the plane coming on but the TIS-B system alerted me to the position, altitude, and direction. so it allowed me to focus quickly in the right direction. I saw the plane and took immediate evasive action. I'm pretty sure he didn'r see me. Even the guy I was talking to on a 90 collision course didn't see me until I said look straight ahead and up a I had pulled up due to the TIS-B alert. I agree that I need to be continuously looking but it sure is nice to be alerted to planes I may miss. Thanks for all the comments. I was off line getting my IFR rating. Yea!
:O

If you had to take immediate evasive action when seeing the aircraft, TIS-B is not nearly as effective or useful as it should be. Furthermore, it appears likely that your lookout was not nearly as good as it should have been. I think my earlier comments are entirely vindicated.

Better than colliding and bodies falling from the sky though.

Human Factors and Performance are the limiting factors in aviation. "What is that over there, is it a plane or a window reflecting the sun 20 miles away? I can't quite make out which way it is going, oh shi............." 300 mph closing speed is 5 miles per minute. Maybe easy to see another aeroplane at 1 mile, but this is 12 seconds before impact at those speeds.

Easy to criticise someone else in hindsight sat in front a computer screen.

I've had several "traffic alerts" in my time, one was hidden behind the wing of our Cessna, the other was climing underneath us in a Cessna and we were descending into an airport in a low wing. How is one meant to see those without xray vision?

By improving your lookout technique, by using situational awareness, by being aware of where aircraft may be hiding, by manoeuvring to take a look at all those "hidden" areas.

Above all, by not relying on any TCAS system to give you warning. It won't if the other aircraft is not squawking, because it's not switched on, or the aircraft is not transponder-equipped. The only way is to keep looking out, and being aware of human physiology as regards vision, and ensuring your lookout is good technique.

Any time you get lazy and start relying on equipment in the aircraft you have surrendered control of your life. Sorry, but I like to be in control of my own destiny, and have no intention of being another mid-air statistic because I didn't look out.

You do as you wish, but I wouldn't like to be related to anyone who happens to get in your way.

yes yes yes, it is so easy in your black and white world.

So you are on an IFR flight plan in VMC, you have been given a descent and are under radar control. You are complying with ATC instructions, looking out, scanning with two sets of eyes onboard, there is nothing to see unless you start Lazy-8ing your way around the sky (which might p*ss off the controller). Suddenly "traffic alert, pop up traffic right below you, climbing, stop descent now, turn right 270 expedite"........

Now imagine the same scenario (which happened to me) with TIS onboard. You'd get a traffic alert showing the aircraft position on the screen at the same time as the controller saw it, adding an extra level of information. Even without the controller, disaster could be averted.

Now imagine it with no "technology" to help....

Your scenario is a nonsense.

We're talking about VFR, in uncontrolled airspace.

You're talking about controlled arspace - why would there suddenly be popup traffic in controlled airspace? Please get a grip.

And no, it's not easy. It's called airmanship. You have to work at it. Millions of pilots do. Why can't you?

In answer to Captain Stable/gasax, on military aircraft squawking at low level, speaking as a Mil pilot.

FJ aircraft usually have their squawk and mode C verified upon departure from the Aerodrome. Usually on the departures frequency. On entering low level (i,e, below 2000ft MSD for FJ), all aircraft squawk a specific "low level" squawk, unless participating in a particular excercise, where another squawk may be allocated. In short, all low level military FJ aircraft squawk.

Hope that clarifies things!

Cheers.

No it is not nonsense,it happened to me!!!

VFR and IFR have nothing to do with it.

Pop up traffic happened because the climbing aircraft came out of a radar shadow. Just happened to have been blocked from our visual iew due to aircaft structure.

I know you profess to be a very experienced pilot (as per your previous posts) and have lots of experience flying with TCAS, and other technology, but you do show a complete lack of knowledge on some fronts.......Makes one wonder if Walter Mitty has entered the room....

englishal, VFR and IFR and the difference between them have evertyhing to do with it, particularly if you are under active radar control within controlled airspace. As you were under active radar control (as I read your post), and you got avoidance advice from the controller, what's your problem? Why are you so averse to admitting that there is a danger of becoming complacent with loads of "kit" on board?

Prof Plum, thanks for your input. I know what is supposed to happen. Believe me, it doesn't always happen that way.

SoCal, the rules are effectively the same here for Class E Airspace - but there isn't much of it!

It is quite possible to be flying IFR under a radar service OCAS infact I have done so in the high teens down the east side of the UK in business jets and turboprops from Newcastle to the London area.

The same goes on areas to the west. As such pop up traffic is a possibility but you are not going to get much popping up at FL180 :) certainly not the 150s and usual spam cans.

hence flying high OCAS has to reduce collision risk but at some point you have to come down and then you are mixing it with every type of flying machine available :(

Anything which will make you feel safe such as TCAS or even a shute system on a cirrus will make you feel complacent but OCAS BEWARE! with TCAS

Had the rude awakening of counting from the ground 11 hangliders floating around the cloudbases in wales at about 2500 feet while driving my car.

Three disappeared for short spells into the clouds which is really a scary thought

Pace

Oh dear :}

I'm not complacent, believe me! A mid air is my biggest fear. I was simply pointing out the failures of "see and avoid" - Sometimes you "just can't see them". No doubt with a bit of extra kit onboard one has a better chance of "seeing them" , as with having a radar service, before they become part of your airframe. Why don't you seem to get it, and seem to think that all people fly around with their heads glued to the screens?! I use the screens / radar service to complement a god lookout, but you cannot possibly say that a good lookout is infallible either. It is if you SEE them but for some reason people may "just not see them". If it were then all the recent collisions I can remember would never have happened.

Ok, so you're not complacent, nobody ever is complacent, and there's no danger whatsoever of anyone ever becoming complacent?

Captain Stable

It is a fact of life that the safer you make something the more layed back people become about hurting themselves.

The old joke about sticking explosives on each corner of a car and how much more aware drivers would be :)

We have all these gismos which can make you feel more secure so someone who thinks " I have got TCAS, I have got FLARM, I have got good radar coverage is more likely to be comfortable with his head glued to the charts, books or internal workings than someone who has nothing.

In someways the more abundant use of auropilots or wing levelers is encouraging pilots to be passengers with the aircraft carrying them around the sky while they chat or even do the crossword on long sectors (Yes quite a common pastime)
I often wonder how much the autopilot used on VFR machines contributes to collisions by detaching pilots from what they should be doing IE flying and seeing where they are going? Just imagine how car accidents would increase if the driver could let go of the controls and allow an autopilot to drive his car. Imagine the detachement and boredom that would arise?

There are danger areas where the vertical or horizontal airspace is limited and a multitude of flying machines are packed. What is the answer? All you can do is to encourage pilots to look out especially in those collision danger areas. Yes use aids, give your passengers a game of spot the aircraft :) and fly at levels others arent likely to choose like 1750 feet instead of 2000 feet or 2500 feet instead of 2400 feet aound London ;) Otherwise mandate every flying object to have a working transponder.

Pace

englishal:

You are never going to win with this guy. This is the man who can throw every toy known to man out of his pram when idiots like me call "Finals" instead of "Final".

Then suddenly we are told that he knows absolutely everything about TCAS and talks about calling "TCAS Climb" when those of us who really know about these things are well aware that the call nowadays is "Resolution Advisory".

Save your breath; it is hard to argue with the perfect.

It appears that Captain Stable's biggest contribution to human wisdom seems to be in the Jet Blast forum.

But, anyway, on the topic: nearly all UK midairs have been at or below 1000ft. It is readily obvious that by the time one climbs through 2000ft there is much less traffic. At 3000ft there is almost none.

There are simply much bigger issues to worry about in flying.

The vast majority of traffic (reported by TCAS or a radar service) is never spotted; the Mk1 eyeball does not work very well at all. It's a fallacy, upheld by the Kremlin Old Guard since WW1.

And since a target on a genuine collision trajectory is a stationary point in your field of view (straight line trajectories assumed) you won't see him until too late.

The exception is when in the vicinity of an airfield, e.g. when landing. Then, TCAS is not very useful due to the possibly high # of alerts, and one has to look out as much as possible. Sometimes there is a real risk; e.g. if flying into Wellesbourne or Stapleford on a sunny Sunday preceeded by weeks of poor weather. Not a lot one can do about these cases - other than not fly to "free for all" airfields known for poor pilot behaviour when they are obviously going to be busy as hell.

Can you point me to the source statistics for this observation (genuinely interested and would be keen to take a look at them).

Am beginning to wonder then if the midairs cited previously as being mainly below 1000' also happen to be in the vicinity of an airfield? Again a pointer to the data would be handy.

GPN01

You dont need statistics to tell you that :ugh: Anyway we all know statistics can paint any picture you want.

Any place where aircraft are contained in a tight space has to increase the chances of a midair. The more aircraft, the tighter the space the more collisions. Its as simple as that.

Pace

Merely my reading of accident reports. I do not recall seeing a formal midair breakdown.

I think all of the last 10 years' midairs (UK; about 1 per year) were below 1000ft, then we got one at 1800ft, and the last big one (the 4-person + 1-person fatal when doing an ILS calibration flight when hit from the side by somebody) is not yet classified but prob90 below 1000ft too due to the nature of the flight.

It is also readily apparent when flying.

Finally, there is a readily apparent correlation between how low people fly and whether they are radiating Mode C. When flying under a radar service, it is simply the case that no matter how hard you look and how hard one's passengers look, most reported targets are never spotted, but those that are reported "level unknown" (i.e. no Mode C transponder) usually turn out to be (when spotted) very low down; apparently around the 500ft-1500ft area. Such a correlation would not suprise me, given the attitudes to transponders (vis the "civil liberties" angle often put across by traditionalists in pilot forums :) ) among those pilots who are not touring much. What this means is that if you are under a radar service, you are much more likely to get a meaningful conflict report/warning (that you can act on) if you fly higher. What this also means is that if everybody was Mode C, the radar controller would not have to make most of the currently-useless reports :)

As to where they happened, this seems to be a mixed picture. Sure some were in the circuit. But others were during variously bizzare circumstances e.g. somebody doing orbiting for photo purposes while hit by an RAF Tornado. I think the "bizzare" ones are easily avoidable.

Yes good idea ;) I realised a few posts ago that Mr Stable is just a wind up merchant who actually doesn't seem to know anything about flying ;)

Hi Pace, I prefer to operate according to fact rather than opinions. That's why I'm keen to read the reports and stats, etc. as it's best to validate some bar room claims based around "obvious" things which, when investigated, aren't. Tighter space = more collisions isn't necessarily true either - I know of nine aircraft often found in very close proximity that don't seem to hit each other!

GPN01

If you are talking about gliders? they do have a high inter glider collision rate.

I have always been sceptical with statistics :rolleyes: start with only you in the sky and all you are ever going to hit is a bird.

Step up from that and the more flying objects within a given space means the more chance of a collision.

Vary the speed of those flying objects and their own unique design ie high wing low wing small windows etc and the chances increase again.

Ok there is always the chance that in the middle of no where you could collide with another aircraft but it has to be the more aircraft in a given space the more chance of a collision.

Pace

Seems the Stable has bolted. What a relief!:D

Look Both Ways Before Crossing the Street
 

The last month, I've spotted two a/c following major highways Eastbound at 4500' shortly before I was about to cross Southbound. contrary to the statistical assumption of the majority of midairs below 1000', I've spotted 3 SEPs, 1 twin, 2 jet airliners and more gliders than I can count in my last 20 flights this year.

Thank you for your opinion.

Just so you know, my total time flying experience is well past four figures. I have commercial licences (CPLs and ATPLs) from four different authorities. I started flying about 35 years ago. I have instructed ab initio students, commercial and IR students, taught type conversions and renewals in both the simulator and the aircraft. I have about 7 different types on my UK ATPL, from SEP/MEP up to 150-tonne jets. I have flown island-hoppers in the Caribbean, night mail, bucket-and-spade holiday charters, scheduled domestic and international airlines, VIP/Corporate passengers, aerial traffic spotting, skydivers, hazardous cargo and police aircraft.

What are your qualifications and experience?

I have not denied anywhere in this thread that the Mk I eyeball has its limitations. You have not admitted that relying on TCAS or TIS-B or other similar systems entails a danger of complacency. It appears that all you can do is resort to insults in an effort to defend poor airmanship.

And then we get silly statements such asThis daft sentence assumes that one can only see a "target" when it is moving across one's field of view. I have news for you - you can see such targets before hitting them - lots of people do.

Pace, excellent post. Sums it up both the problem and a few solutions very well.

Errr, no. I was thinking quite fast moving (jet) aircraft actually. Ok, they're painted in quite high viz markings (bright red in fact) and often trail smoke behind them, but nonetheless...

If you go through the AAIB reports you will see that most mid airs are low down. The last UK one I remember being higher was the 2007 incident which was at 1400 agl 1800 ft amsl. However there have been mid airs in the US at 16000ft (glider / Biz Jet). On a Saturday in summer with good soaring conditions there will be a lot of gliders at 2000 – 10000ft not transponding. Modern 3 X micros are also likely to be at “normal” GA levels.

I do not subscribe to the theory that collision avoidance systems make you complacent. We know that about 50% of the potential threat will not show up on them yet they spot several times the traffic that you pick up with see and avoid. If anything this makes you a lot less complacent.

Rod1

Is this going anywhere?

It just seems to have become a private debate between englishal and captain stable, with nothing new being added, except the length of their... errr... experience.

We've had a lengthier (and more fruitful) discussion between powered & gliding pilots not long ago that covered a similar area and much more besides, and there have been several other threads about eyeball vs. electronics previously.

SD

No it is not going anywhere, and for that reason I am out.:}