Thoughts on reducing risk of mid-airs.
Just to be on the safe side, I asked the manufacturer of the glider I fly whether they were legal to fit. The answer was a firm no, they are not on the approved equipment list for the type.
I also asked whether the TRIG TT21 could be added to the approved equipment list, possibly reducing the modification cost. It is under consideration, so there is some hope there.
Six years ago the process of fitting a transponder would have been easy, and a fraction of the cost it is now under EASA (assuming all other technical problems are overcome).
An example of the dead hand of anti-safety of the current regime. There is a glider type used for training where the rear seat is suspended from an adjustable strap to change the height. In a seriously heavy landing, the strap attachment breaks, increasing the spinal injury. UK gliders had a simple mod to detach the strap and adjust the height uning energy-absorbing foam. The replacement type from the same manufacturer has the same arrangement. Under EASA now either you fly unmodified, and risk spinal injury, or pay a design authority a large sum of money to apply for a major modification. The manufacturer refuses to change the arrangement, because that would imply admission that the design is faulty, leading to legal liability. Remind me what the 'S' in EASA is supposed to stand for?
I also asked whether the TRIG TT21 could be added to the approved equipment list, possibly reducing the modification cost. It is under consideration, so there is some hope there.
Six years ago the process of fitting a transponder would have been easy, and a fraction of the cost it is now under EASA (assuming all other technical problems are overcome).
An example of the dead hand of anti-safety of the current regime. There is a glider type used for training where the rear seat is suspended from an adjustable strap to change the height. In a seriously heavy landing, the strap attachment breaks, increasing the spinal injury. UK gliders had a simple mod to detach the strap and adjust the height uning energy-absorbing foam. The replacement type from the same manufacturer has the same arrangement. Under EASA now either you fly unmodified, and risk spinal injury, or pay a design authority a large sum of money to apply for a major modification. The manufacturer refuses to change the arrangement, because that would imply admission that the design is faulty, leading to legal liability. Remind me what the 'S' in EASA is supposed to stand for?
Fitter, I know the type of glider you are refering to in the second part of your post. It's a very fine glider to fly, and we did the mode in the one at our club a long time ago.
BTW what do you fly? PM if you don't want to go public.
BTW what do you fly? PM if you don't want to go public.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Six years ago the process of fitting a transponder would have been easy, and a fraction of the cost it is now under EASA (assuming all other technical problems are overcome).
Life moves on and things change, get on the programme and be proactive, or suffer the consequences.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
englishal, old chap, what are you trying to say?
I've worked with them for years. In the past there were some dodgey old ones, which I only ever came across in two places - inside the fuse of a military bomb, and in offshore equipment deep below the surface of the ocean. But these had big warnings "DO NOT LOAD INTO PASSENGER AIRCRAFT" and you had to treat them with respect and package them up in vermiculite and have graphite fire extringuishers on hand.
Mobile phone type Li batteries are a completely different kettle of fish. Sure bung them on a fire and they will burn, but for them to spontaneously catch fire is a very small chance. Someone will no doubt point to a YouTube video of a laptop battery going up - well these had faults in them. All commercial Li batteries contain short circuit protection and will vent off before catching fire.
As a side note: I was once working up at the Royal Navy Armaments Depot at Beith in Scotland. They took me up to the burning ground to burn off some old (dodgey type) Li batteries...great fun... but you had to literally set fire to the batteries for them to really get going.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“Sigh....I'm trying to say Lithium batteries are perfectly safe, that is all, and to say that they can't be used in a glider is an excuse.”
I am sure you are right, the batteries are perfectly safe, but why is it that you consider the glider types to be using it as an excuse? If you have an aircraft and you fit a part which you are not allowed to fit, have an accident (nothing to do with the part) and then came on the forum complaining that your insurance has not paid out you would be slated. If EASA say you cannot fit Lithium batteries to gliders then you do not fit them.
All you can do is try to convince EASA. A few changes to regulations and you would increase the number of gliders that could fit transponders. Changes to the regs for Micros to allow them to fit transponders (by increased MEW) have been under discussion since 2005. If the changes are approved between 1000 and 2000 micros will be able to fit a transponder and most want to. To the best of my knowledge the CAA are still saying no. If you are offering to help the BGA prove to EASA that the batteries are perfectly safe I am sure your offer would be gratefully accepted.
Rod1
I am sure you are right, the batteries are perfectly safe, but why is it that you consider the glider types to be using it as an excuse? If you have an aircraft and you fit a part which you are not allowed to fit, have an accident (nothing to do with the part) and then came on the forum complaining that your insurance has not paid out you would be slated. If EASA say you cannot fit Lithium batteries to gliders then you do not fit them.
All you can do is try to convince EASA. A few changes to regulations and you would increase the number of gliders that could fit transponders. Changes to the regs for Micros to allow them to fit transponders (by increased MEW) have been under discussion since 2005. If the changes are approved between 1000 and 2000 micros will be able to fit a transponder and most want to. To the best of my knowledge the CAA are still saying no. If you are offering to help the BGA prove to EASA that the batteries are perfectly safe I am sure your offer would be gratefully accepted.Rod1
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fitter2
EASA? The issue I have is I dont understand why you dont do something about it?
To your credit (and I mean the gliding fraternity) you have a very strong association that represents you. You have the ability to lobby effectively.
.. .. and yet I dont see you doing so. Ultimately the fate of EASA is in our hands. We as pilots have the ability, if we really make enough fuss, to force change.
I was so annoyed about the challenge to the IMC rating that without a great deal of effort I started to stir up a veritable hornets nest. I believe that if push had come to shove, we could and would have got our way, because it was the right way. Perhaps we still will. Anyway, at the moment I am leaving that matter to AOPA who say they have our interests at heart and are best able to achieve the "right" result. We shall see.
You have the advantaged of a far more powerful player that the rest of us - if you really wanted to solve a few of these problems the gliding fraternity would make it clear the current regulatory framework is unfit for purpose - infact by the sound of it, positively dangerous, and force change - it is not that hard.
If you do nothing - as another sage so eloquently put it on here before he got banned - you will only have yourself to blame!
Maybe a far too simplistic impression but when everyone campaigned against mode S it seems to me it was a totally negative campaign. No one said now if you agree to the following changes we will come on board. It was more a matter of finding every which way to avoid mode S. It was effective, but it also was pretty hypocrytical.
Again simplistically, if you lot explained to EASA you want to fit transponders and have a workable formula for doing so and will hold them responsible for the next mid air if they fail to put in place a regime that enable you to comply you may well either get your day before the European Court of Human Rights or at least a column or two in the Sun!! The one thing the press loves is anything that would seem to make air travel safer.
EASA? The issue I have is I dont understand why you dont do something about it?
To your credit (and I mean the gliding fraternity) you have a very strong association that represents you. You have the ability to lobby effectively.
.. .. and yet I dont see you doing so. Ultimately the fate of EASA is in our hands. We as pilots have the ability, if we really make enough fuss, to force change.
I was so annoyed about the challenge to the IMC rating that without a great deal of effort I started to stir up a veritable hornets nest. I believe that if push had come to shove, we could and would have got our way, because it was the right way. Perhaps we still will. Anyway, at the moment I am leaving that matter to AOPA who say they have our interests at heart and are best able to achieve the "right" result. We shall see.
You have the advantaged of a far more powerful player that the rest of us - if you really wanted to solve a few of these problems the gliding fraternity would make it clear the current regulatory framework is unfit for purpose - infact by the sound of it, positively dangerous, and force change - it is not that hard.
If you do nothing - as another sage so eloquently put it on here before he got banned - you will only have yourself to blame!
Maybe a far too simplistic impression but when everyone campaigned against mode S it seems to me it was a totally negative campaign. No one said now if you agree to the following changes we will come on board. It was more a matter of finding every which way to avoid mode S. It was effective, but it also was pretty hypocrytical.
Again simplistically, if you lot explained to EASA you want to fit transponders and have a workable formula for doing so and will hold them responsible for the next mid air if they fail to put in place a regime that enable you to comply you may well either get your day before the European Court of Human Rights or at least a column or two in the Sun!! The one thing the press loves is anything that would seem to make air travel safer.
Fuji, none of us here (so far as I know) are involved with the BGA other than as members through our clubs. None of us are on any committees they have, none of us can comment one what dialogues they might or might not be having with EASA.
We are commenting on what we can - the status quo.
So please stop making assumptions about what discussions the BGA might (or might not) be involved in with the EASA.
And, none of us have any intention of risking any insurance claim by being non-compliant with the rules as they are at present. I can imagine the howls of anguish from you if you had a claim against someone who turned out to be uninsured through making the sort of unapproved change you are suggesting many of us do. We wouldn't hear the last of it.
We are commenting on what we can - the status quo.
So please stop making assumptions about what discussions the BGA might (or might not) be involved in with the EASA.
And, none of us have any intention of risking any insurance claim by being non-compliant with the rules as they are at present. I can imagine the howls of anguish from you if you had a claim against someone who turned out to be uninsured through making the sort of unapproved change you are suggesting many of us do. We wouldn't hear the last of it.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sure you are right, the batteries are perfectly safe, but why is it that you consider the glider types to be using it as an excuse?
We have Mods in CofA aeroplane. If I want to do something that was not originally done to my aeroplane, I can get a Mod to do it....If I want to hardwire a PCAS into my Intercom for example, I could get a minor mod to be able to do it. It may cost me a fee and be a bit more hassle than "just doing it" but it is not impossible.
Surely then if Giding types wanted to fit a certain bit of kit they can do it the same was seeing as they fall under CofA's....Unlike our permit brethren who can do whatever the heck they like so long as the inspector (who is probably an old drinking buddy) is happy. With the weight of a BGA behind them it'd be easy to get approval for certain things which would blanket most of the UK gliding fleet.
Anyway that is my frustration, the "Can't do" attitude of UK GA - whether it be gliding, or powered. In the USA for example I bet most glider pilots would be saying "durrrr, why wouldn't you have a transponder? I don't get what you are arguing about?"....
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuji, none of us here (so far as I know) are involved with the BGA other than as members through our clubs.
How can you so passionately defend the staus quo on the one hand and yet be so dispassionate about doing anything about it.
I have to agree with Englishal, it is looking more like one excuse after another.
Anyway I give up.
You have certainly lost one supporter of your hobby in me, if your views are really representative of the rest of you.
I certainly will not be shedding a tear when EASA come down very heavily. I hope you are as passionate about staying well away from clouds for reasons of insurance and apathy given that legally you are banned from being in them or near them.
I also hope you will at least have the compassion to shed a tear for the pilot in the next aircraft you run into whilst wringing your hands that if only you could have done something about it of course you would.
Good luck!
Final, final word - the next time I go up in a glider at least you can be certain it will only be if it IS fitted with a transponder.
Arghhhh!!!!!
Rod1 wrote:
That is the time it takes to get changes to EASA. In the time it will take to get to be allowed to fit transponders to more gliders, and use LiPo batteries, there could be more middairs if people ignore Flarm and PCAS -not to mention the free things like using the radio, reading the chart, checking the weather forecast and so on.
Rod1 is actively investigating solutions which are available now, work now, and aren't tied up in the red tape of EASA.
Why on earth (if safety is so important to you) are you continuing to peddle solutions which due to EASA cannot be implemented for most gliders for the foreseable future? One would think you are simply wanting to beat aircraft without transponders out of the air regardless of what else is available and possible.
And why, if safety is so important to you, do you give the impression that transponders are the be-all and end-all of safety? There was a fatal midair earlier this year involving two powered aircraft which launched from the same site (so should have known each other was in the air) both of which were fitted with transponders and both of which should (because of their joint OP) have been squawking.
There have also been middairs (and ground collisions) between transponding aircraft using ATC.
Transponders, Flarm, PCAS, ADS-B are all AIDS in Class G, not cure-alls. As Mary has posted several times, LOOKOUT LOOKOUT LOOKOUT. Unfortunately the visibility from a create many GA craft is lamentable and the designers should be condemed for making them that way. I agree there are a number of human factors making a really good lookup hard to do, but that is why lookup need practise, and also why I'm sure there is a huge difference between the best and worst of us.
As to why be a BGA member - if one belongs to a BGA club one is a member, end of. And there are very few places to fly gliders that are not BGA clubs.
Rod1 wrote:
Changes to the regs for Micros to allow them to fit transponders (by increased MEW) have been under discussion since 2005.
Rod1 is actively investigating solutions which are available now, work now, and aren't tied up in the red tape of EASA.
Why on earth (if safety is so important to you) are you continuing to peddle solutions which due to EASA cannot be implemented for most gliders for the foreseable future? One would think you are simply wanting to beat aircraft without transponders out of the air regardless of what else is available and possible.
And why, if safety is so important to you, do you give the impression that transponders are the be-all and end-all of safety? There was a fatal midair earlier this year involving two powered aircraft which launched from the same site (so should have known each other was in the air) both of which were fitted with transponders and both of which should (because of their joint OP) have been squawking.
There have also been middairs (and ground collisions) between transponding aircraft using ATC.
Transponders, Flarm, PCAS, ADS-B are all AIDS in Class G, not cure-alls. As Mary has posted several times, LOOKOUT LOOKOUT LOOKOUT. Unfortunately the visibility from a create many GA craft is lamentable and the designers should be condemed for making them that way. I agree there are a number of human factors making a really good lookup hard to do, but that is why lookup need practise, and also why I'm sure there is a huge difference between the best and worst of us.
As to why be a BGA member - if one belongs to a BGA club one is a member, end of. And there are very few places to fly gliders that are not BGA clubs.
Hi Fuji
Insist it's fitted with FLARM too, that is much more likely to help.
And you are much more likely to find one, than a transponder equipped one.
Or the pilot that runs into me because he wasn't looking out, and couldn't be bothered to fit a £400 FLARM?
Final, final word - the next time I go up in a glider at least you can be certain it will only be if it IS fitted with a transponder.
And you are much more likely to find one, than a transponder equipped one.
I also hope you will at least have the compassion to shed a tear for the pilot in the next aircraft you run into whilst wringing your hands that if only you could have done something about it of course you would.
Last edited by Fitter2; 19th Jun 2009 at 13:25.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shouldn't the BGA then lobby EASA? I bet of the BGA actively talked with EASA about having txpdrs fitted then EASA would make an excemption in no time. Or perhaps most of the BGA memebers do not want transponders? What is the BGA view on transponders (out of interest)?
I am investigating FLARM, and I understand they maybe be working on a "black box" FLARM for powered aircraft which can utilise existing GPS's and displays....so it should be significantly cheaper. I'll buy one as soon as one appears on the market.
I am investigating FLARM, and I understand they maybe be working on a "black box" FLARM for powered aircraft which can utilise existing GPS's and displays....so it should be significantly cheaper. I'll buy one as soon as one appears on the market.
Hi Englishal
You can have one of these now for £1000 inc VAT, nominally portable so no installation charge. (No, I have no commercial involvement).
Is that too expensve? Surely not, Pace wants me to spend about six times that to fit Mode S.
You can have one of these now for £1000 inc VAT, nominally portable so no installation charge. (No, I have no commercial involvement).
Is that too expensve? Surely not, Pace wants me to spend about six times that to fit Mode S.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now if it also had PCAS built in, it'd be the ideal light GA traffic monitor (or everyone had ADS-B / FLARM). Would certainly be worth it for Airway IFR ops because realistically anyone in the Airways would have Mode-S.
Certainly the technology is there at reasonable cost, and FLARM does look to be the ideal choice for "us" when and IF everyone starts using it. like I said before I have no objection to paying £1000 for something that could possibly save my life - we buy liferafts for more than that but will probably never use them. Likewise with PLB's, lifejackets, parachutes, etc...so £1000 for an integrated traffic system is worth it IMHO. Of course if it can't detect the traffic then it is useless.....
Certainly the technology is there at reasonable cost, and FLARM does look to be the ideal choice for "us" when and IF everyone starts using it. like I said before I have no objection to paying £1000 for something that could possibly save my life - we buy liferafts for more than that but will probably never use them. Likewise with PLB's, lifejackets, parachutes, etc...so £1000 for an integrated traffic system is worth it IMHO. Of course if it can't detect the traffic then it is useless.....
Fitter, it's not just Pace that want us all to spend £6k getting an illegal transponder fitted - there is Fuji as well, and some other folks as well.
You can never, ever rely on being able to use technology to detect all traffic as you can never, ever rely on technology to work all the time.
Give up hope right now then. There will probably never be a time when take-up on something is 100%. Remember it's illegal (generally speaking) to not wear a seatbelt in a car that is fitted with them - people still drive without using them. They also drive when drunk, when using mobiles without hands free kits and so on. There will always be a week link. If you care about safety do what you can, now, instead of hanging back making other people's lack of action an excuse for your own.
FLARM does look to be the ideal choice for "us" when and IF everyone starts using it
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
englishal
Your box already exists, or very close. I am 2300 words into a 3000-word article for the mags on all this. If things go well we may get considerable support for fitting CAS, can increase the fitment in Gliders and light GA and save some lives. Alternatively we can argue about Transponders for the next 10 years until they are scraped and replaced by something much better.
If you want more on FLARM and the next generation of combined CAS send me a PM with your contact details and I would be happy to chat.
Rod1
Your box already exists, or very close. I am 2300 words into a 3000-word article for the mags on all this. If things go well we may get considerable support for fitting CAS, can increase the fitment in Gliders and light GA and save some lives. Alternatively we can argue about Transponders for the next 10 years until they are scraped and replaced by something much better.
If you want more on FLARM and the next generation of combined CAS send me a PM with your contact details and I would be happy to chat.
Rod1
Rod1, are you able to copy your article here? It will take time for it to appear in S&G (I assume you are sending it to them), I'd like to see it PDQ and I'm sure there are others who feel the same.
Thanks.
Thanks.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is that too expensve? Surely not, Pace wants me to spend about six times that to fit Mode S.
Firstly I am not talking about flying VMC in gliders I am talking about probably more advanced glider pilots in clouds in hopefully capable gliders.
To your own admission cloud flying gliders are a small proportion. Most fly VMC albeit near cloud where see and avoid can work.
The basis of my thread also included the lack of Radar services which were available through the military with the so called cost cutting streamlining and the reluctance of more civil units offering a radar service OCAS.
That makes us more alone OCAS and more at threat.
I would hold for ALL aircraft in cloud to have a transponder of one kind regardless of type.
I am still of that opinion although slowly being swayed by some of the glider community like Rod 1 who appear to be trying to find a workable solution.
Regarding my heart bleeding for you having to find some money to cloud fly?
Go finance an IMCR, a CPL, an ATPL, a type ratings like some of us as well as some powered pilots who pay a fortune on their aircraft and yours is chicken feed.
You would not fly a single across the atlantic without immersion suits, life rafts etc with the excuse I cannot afford them!
If you cannot afford to be in something as serious as cloud, IMC where we are all blind then stay out and fly VMC where you belong.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 19th Jun 2009 at 17:17.