The failure to provide separation services between VFR and IFR traffic is
the way the system has been run since day one. The rules haven't been
changed to account for increases in aircraft speed and traffic density. VFR
altitude encoders, while not meeting the standards of IFR systems designed
for reduced separation environments, still have to meet FAA standards. Any
lack of accuracy should be reflected in the separation provide to the IFR
traffic.

Mike Schumann

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
news:hF8bk.213$9W.210@trndny04...
Mike Schumann wrote:
According to the guys at our local TRACON, when they have IFR traffic
heading directly towards a mode C equipped VFR target, they issue a
traffic advisory to the IFR traffic, but do NOT make an adjustment to the
IFR traffic's flight path. They rely on the IFR pilot to visually see
and avoid the VFR traffic.

In my opinion, this is crazy. We all know how difficult it is to see and
avoid traffic visually. The FAA's rules need to change. They should be
providing separation between all IFR traffic and any other known target.

Did they explain why they used this procedure? One possibility is that
encoders used for VFR are not required to meet the same calibration
standards as encoders used for IFR, and if they are not in contact with
the VFR traffic, they can't confirm the altitude matches the encoder
output. Without knowing the altitude accurately, perhaps they are unable
to vector the IFR traffic safely around it, and must rely on "looking out
the window".

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **