Thoughts on reducing risk of mid-airs.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wasnt going to post again but just like Pace I take exception to your misrepresenting my comments.
I believe gliders in IMC should be required to carry transpoders. That has nothing to do with flying in VMC.
I believe gliders in IMC should be required to carry transpoders. That has nothing to do with flying in VMC.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to correct one thing from Pace, I have not flown a glider solo for many years, so would not consider myself to be a glider man. However, I do not want to bump into one. Having been involved in “aircraft interoperability” consultations one and two (mode s) and fitted several transponders to aircraft under the LAA system, some with very limited electrics I do have a good knowledge of the problems.
I will be flying with Chris’s FLARM in the very near future. I was hoping to fly up to Mull today for a long weekend with Mrs Rod1, but 30kn winds over the lakes put us off!
Rod1
I will be flying with Chris’s FLARM in the very near future. I was hoping to fly up to Mull today for a long weekend with Mrs Rod1, but 30kn winds over the lakes put us off!
Rod1
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re- Li-Poly batteries.....the technology is well-established in the model helicopter field, where flight-times of 10 minutes of wild 3-d,hurling ~ 6 lb of battery and machine around the sky is commonplace.
The prices are nowhere near as outlandish as those i've seen bandied about....fully automatic balancing-chargers are available at reasonable prices as well.
Re-Insurance.....in the UK,at least, we have the "unfair contract-terms act" basically, if your "unapproved " mod. or addition did not materially affect the claim,or the basis of it, the insurer couldn't argue and refuse to pay.....already well-proven in other fields- in the motor-trade,an insurer was trying to evade liability, because an aftermarket branded part had been used..... the claimant threatened to inform the parts company of the libellous slur on the quality and merchantability of their product.....claim settled.
In this instance, you have the slothful dead-hand of "jobsworths" (EASA)to contend with...usually all these outfits are several years behind "real-world" developments. If I was convinced that something WOULD enhance my safety, security and chances of survival, I'd be inclined to have professional appraisal to confirm and then go ahead.....it would be a brave or foolhardy "jobsworth" who prosecuted you for sidestepping their failure to discharge their duty of care to YOU, the person they SHOULD be protecting.
Lambs will always go to the slaughter,fools will always comply blindly with idiotic rules.
Sounds like the Cloggies, like the Frogs, take a pragmatic approach and get on with it. good for them.
The prices are nowhere near as outlandish as those i've seen bandied about....fully automatic balancing-chargers are available at reasonable prices as well.
Re-Insurance.....in the UK,at least, we have the "unfair contract-terms act" basically, if your "unapproved " mod. or addition did not materially affect the claim,or the basis of it, the insurer couldn't argue and refuse to pay.....already well-proven in other fields- in the motor-trade,an insurer was trying to evade liability, because an aftermarket branded part had been used..... the claimant threatened to inform the parts company of the libellous slur on the quality and merchantability of their product.....claim settled.
In this instance, you have the slothful dead-hand of "jobsworths" (EASA)to contend with...usually all these outfits are several years behind "real-world" developments. If I was convinced that something WOULD enhance my safety, security and chances of survival, I'd be inclined to have professional appraisal to confirm and then go ahead.....it would be a brave or foolhardy "jobsworth" who prosecuted you for sidestepping their failure to discharge their duty of care to YOU, the person they SHOULD be protecting.
Lambs will always go to the slaughter,fools will always comply blindly with idiotic rules.
Sounds like the Cloggies, like the Frogs, take a pragmatic approach and get on with it. good for them.
Is the indicator showing the glider you have seen?
With all the suggestions that GA aircraft should carry devices to indicate other traffic, and in particular, gliders; it strikes me that one could easily be misled into believing that the indicator is showing the aircraft you have in sight, rather than the one which is the threat to you. Also if such a device requires you to look at an in-cockpit display, surely then to interpret the information you will be looking in the cockpit at the very time you should be looking out?
BTW, last weekend, whilst approaching the top of a winch launch, I had a much closer inspection of the underside of a biz jet than was comfortable. Although gliding is indicated on the map, the symbol is offset to one side of the airfield for clarity. I just wonder if this could have caused the pilot to believe that winching took place near, rather than at the airfield? Perhaps if there was an arrow from the 'G' symbol pointing to the airfield, it would make it clear that the gliding actually takes place on the airfield?
BTW, last weekend, whilst approaching the top of a winch launch, I had a much closer inspection of the underside of a biz jet than was comfortable. Although gliding is indicated on the map, the symbol is offset to one side of the airfield for clarity. I just wonder if this could have caused the pilot to believe that winching took place near, rather than at the airfield? Perhaps if there was an arrow from the 'G' symbol pointing to the airfield, it would make it clear that the gliding actually takes place on the airfield?
Last edited by Mechta; 21st Sep 2009 at 01:10. Reason: typo
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mechta, if a Flarm or PCAS goes into audible alert mode (for Flarm, I mean not the single bleep that a new contact is detected but the loud continuous bleeping and lights flashing that mean a collision is imminent) the first thing to do, if not already doing it, is to look out ahead and between about 10 and 2 o’clock. If you are approaching a near-head-on collision, you have minimum time to see it and react quickly. Probably the best action if that is the sector of threat is to turn right. On my glider, both PCAS and Flarm are right on top of the instrument coaming so within the field of view anyway.
If no threat from nearly head-on, you have a bit more time to do something, so seeing which direction Flarm says the threat is from seems a good idea. It does not mean that there is no other threat, without a Flarm, in some other direction, and your only protection for that is lookout anyway. In my experience, and that of others who have Flarm, it improves your lookout. All the detractors are those with little or no experience of using it.
The cheap PCAS I have does not indicate direction. If it shows reducing distance, and I can’t see anything within the field of view, I have to turn and try to see the threat.
Would you really rather not know if somebody is coming at you from behind? That is the geometry in which the majority of collisions happen, I am told. I have decided I would rather know and be able to do something about it. If others don’t want to, it’s a free country, and they don’t have to. It might be their funeral, as it has been for 3 glider pilots.
Chris N.
If no threat from nearly head-on, you have a bit more time to do something, so seeing which direction Flarm says the threat is from seems a good idea. It does not mean that there is no other threat, without a Flarm, in some other direction, and your only protection for that is lookout anyway. In my experience, and that of others who have Flarm, it improves your lookout. All the detractors are those with little or no experience of using it.
The cheap PCAS I have does not indicate direction. If it shows reducing distance, and I can’t see anything within the field of view, I have to turn and try to see the threat.
Would you really rather not know if somebody is coming at you from behind? That is the geometry in which the majority of collisions happen, I am told. I have decided I would rather know and be able to do something about it. If others don’t want to, it’s a free country, and they don’t have to. It might be their funeral, as it has been for 3 glider pilots.
Chris N.
PowerFlarm works against Mode S + other Flarms + Terrain
This is a reasonable description in English: Glider-Equipment.nl
Price seems to be around 1500 Euros -- perhaps a better deal than a mode S transponder.
Price seems to be around 1500 Euros -- perhaps a better deal than a mode S transponder.
Quote:
Less time 'eyes-in' looking at gucci GPS moving maps.
More time 'eyes-out' looking for threats.
What a fantastic idea. sombody with common sense!
Less time 'eyes-in' looking at gucci GPS moving maps.
More time 'eyes-out' looking for threats.
What a fantastic idea. sombody with common sense!
Neither of the ATC Grobs involved in the recent mid-air had GPS by the way.
Exactly so c5. Sadly, see-and-avoid didn't work on that particular occasion despite the lack of any apparent 'distractions'.
However, its a fairly common theme in GASIL and on here asserting that GPS degrades the lookout when in reality the opposite is the case.
I'm with Rod1 (and others). Technology, combined with the lookout, is the answer.
However, its a fairly common theme in GASIL and on here asserting that GPS degrades the lookout when in reality the opposite is the case.
I'm with Rod1 (and others). Technology, combined with the lookout, is the answer.
I guess the Grob incident refered to is the on in South Wales earlier this year, and I guess we are all waiting to see what the AAIB report on that one has to say.
However, technology is not the whole answer. Not everyone has it, it's highly unlikely that we will reach a time where everyone has it, and it will never sort out plonkers such as the ones who gaily fly over winch-launching glider sites at circuit height and so on. Surely gliders and/or planes on the ground is a bit of a clue? In one case I know about, the offending plane was being flown by two instructors.
Don't get me wrong - technology can and does help - but it never ever will be a complete fix.
However, technology is not the whole answer. Not everyone has it, it's highly unlikely that we will reach a time where everyone has it, and it will never sort out plonkers such as the ones who gaily fly over winch-launching glider sites at circuit height and so on. Surely gliders and/or planes on the ground is a bit of a clue? In one case I know about, the offending plane was being flown by two instructors.
Don't get me wrong - technology can and does help - but it never ever will be a complete fix.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Retford, UK
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm firmly in the GPS camp, properly used they must lead to more time being able to look out.
Did Rod ever publish the article mentioned on PCAS etc?
I've just got a Zaon MRX to experiment with but yet to decide how useful it is in practice. Even though it doesn't show non-transponding traffic I'm hoping it will be at the least a reminder that there are other aircraft around in the vicinity.
Look out is all very well but there are many blind spots and always the geometric fact that the plane on a collision course is the one least likely to attract your attention.
Did Rod ever publish the article mentioned on PCAS etc?
I've just got a Zaon MRX to experiment with but yet to decide how useful it is in practice. Even though it doesn't show non-transponding traffic I'm hoping it will be at the least a reminder that there are other aircraft around in the vicinity.
Look out is all very well but there are many blind spots and always the geometric fact that the plane on a collision course is the one least likely to attract your attention.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“Did Rod ever publish the article mentioned on PCAS etc?”
It was published in the “Summer 2009” edition of Flyer. I have also been giving a series of talks on collision avoidance, including the recent Flyer meet for low hour pilots. If you have a local club that might be interested and you are not too far away, get in touch.
Rod1
It was published in the “Summer 2009” edition of Flyer. I have also been giving a series of talks on collision avoidance, including the recent Flyer meet for low hour pilots. If you have a local club that might be interested and you are not too far away, get in touch.
Rod1
and always the geometric fact that the plane on a collision course is the one least likely to attract your attention.
Mind you:
Running out of fuel
not lowering the gear
seem to get people too!
CG
