Anti-collision warnings
Once again a thread on RAS has polarised neatly into
two camps

Argument 1.

The mark 1 eyeball and the USB (Universal Standard
Brain) are the best!

Train them and the problem is solved.

Argument 2

Statistics show the above equipment is outdated for
present needs it needs replacing or providing with
some assistance.

OK.

Accept that at present theory 1 is the best we have
come up with so far and that change is needed.

The challenge is now how to assist the brain solve
the problem. Individuals are not the probelm, it is
everyone else out there who is trying to get you. Remember
it is the aircraft you do not see that gets you!

So all we need is a simple instrument that meets the
following criteria.

1. It will detect at least 40 gliders in close proximity.
2. Plus those within a 5 nautical mile range.
3. Work out their relative positions.
4. Assess the collision threat of each and every one.
5. Feed the information to the pilot of each glider
in a readable format that can be assessed within the
bat of an eyelid.
6. Develop the instrument with little financial assistance
from within the movement.
7. Ensure every glider has the equipment fitted.
8. Ensure the equipment works with very little power
consumption.
9. Ensure that the cost is no more that a launch fee.
10. Make fitting compulsary to ALL aircraft flying
in uncontrolled airspace.

No one who fits any form of instrument to his glider
can be accused of being anti progress. BUT until the
above problems are more than half solved the practicalities
of a succesfull anti collision device are low.

In he mean time I return to argument 1. At present
this is the best we have!

If technology comes up with a reliable assistant this
must be good until then WE MUST ensure that our pilots
are trained on the dangers that lurk out there.


Dave