Gliders and Transponders......again.

On Jan 22, 11:35*am, wrote:
On Jan 19, 4:24*pm, Martin Gregorie



wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 10:06:40 -0800, Darryl Ramm wrote:
I know nothing about UK airspace (besides being stuck in it for far too
much time as a passenger holding over Heathrow), but it sounds like the
existing separation of airliner and jets in UK airspace is a key point
you folks should be arguing.

Yes, agreed. The public will be with us on noise grounds if the commuter
airlines get their way and start flying direct routes through class G
airspace - this is something they can't do at present, but the CAA's
transponder consultation seems designed to let them do it.

And again only one of the transponder aircraft needs to be talking to
ATC/radar facilities or have PCAS or higher. *I don't know PCAS (and
higher-end systems) adoption in low-end GA aircraft in the UK, but in
the USA it seems pretty high (purely an anecdotal impression). I've
asked before but could not get adoption numbers for the USA.

I've not seen figures either, but the GA density is probably lower here..
There are flying schools on either side of our club field and there's no
doubt that our weekend movements vastly outnumber both of theirs.

In the Libelle you might be able to make up a mount for a Zaon MRX under
the opaque areas of the front of the canopy.

There's less space there than you might imagine. The panel is inset no
more than 65mm (2.5"), so an end-on cigarette pack would not fit under in
font of the panel while anything thicker would start to hide the top row
instruments.

It might be canted over parallel to the surface,

It would have to be. If it was in the center it would interfere with the
canopy lock. On the other hand, the antenna is probably not an issue - a
remote one could be mounted above the instrument tray that forms the
front of the panel. My GPS antenna is mounted there and gets an excellent
view of the sky.

I wouldn't want anything much bigger than a MH flowmeter on the cockpit
wall in front of me: lets just say the cockpit is 'snug'.

--
martin@ * | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org * * * |

The proponents of transponders in gliders should study a recent
Transportation Safety Board of Canada investigation report into a
tragic mid-air collision between a Cessna 182 and a Cessa near Toronto
in August 2006. Three people died in the collision. The full
investigation report is available on the TSB web site athttp://www.tsb.gc..ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/2006/a06o0206/a06o...

The TSB report states: "Both aeroplanes were operating in accordance
with visual flight rules in Class E airspace....Both aeroplanes were
equipped with functioning transponders. C-GCHN was also equipped with
a traffic information service (TIS) system that can provide a display
of nearby aircraft using information provided by ground-based radar;
this service is not available in Canada."

A transponder can reduce the risk of collision with Traffic Collision
Advisory System (TCAS) equipped aircraft, i.e. mostly air transport
category aircraft. Maybe that reduction in risk is worth the cost in
some places.

However, as this accident shows, simply installing a transponder gives
no guarantee against collision with non-TCAS equipped aircraft.

Ian Grant
Ottawa Canada

"simply installing a transponder gives no guarantee against collision
with non-TCAS equipped aircraft."

We'll I don't recall anybody claiming that there are any collision
avoidance guarantees anywhere. And how transponders *can* help reduce
collision risks with non-TCAS etc. equipped traffic has been discussed
in this thread already.

So let's go over this again. Can a transponder help with traffic
avoidance even if the involved aircraft don't have TCAS -- very
clearly yes -- A transponder equipped aircraft under control (or in
communications with) a radar facility can be provided avoidance
information or traffic information by that facility. Those of us who
fly in high traffic areas see and hear these ttaffic advisories all
the time. In addtion there are alternatives to TCAS available,
starting with Zaon MRX type PCAS systems, up through the active
interrogation Avidyne and other systems, right through to full on
TCAS. Since it seems neither aircraft in this fatal crash were in
touch with a radar facility, maybe lives could have been saved by one
of the aircraft having a $500 Zaon MRX. I assume the families of the
three people killed would have wished that at least one person had at
least believed enough in PCAS technology to be using one. At some
point somebody had spent $10k or so to have TIS in one aircraft, even
it it was not supported by any SSR facility near where they were
flying. There are no guarentees in life, or death, and who knows for
sure if the PCAS would have avoided this accident but at an amortized
cost per death of $170 or so in hindsight is seems a tragically cheap
insurance.

Now back to where this thread started, I think the concern from the op-
ed piece seemed to be more focused on private jets and airliners but
it lost the thread along the way. Maybe I'm projecting too much on
that, because that, and the damage that a collision with large numbr
of fatalities would do to soaring, is where my concern is. That
traffic, with high percentage of TCAS installations, especially in the
large iron, is going to be well warned of transponder equipped
gliders. And those fast moving TCAS-II equipped jets are much better
handled to avoid a transponder equipped glider than the glider is to
avoid them. So while I'm happy to keep correcting incorrect claims
like the "need TCAS" above I really don't care about the risk to
individual glider pilots in mid-air collisions. It's your choice to
install a PCAS or not, but if you fly in or near high-traffic areas
with airlines/jets please help reduce the risk of a disaster and
install and use a transponder.

BTW the Canadian report does go over soem goo issues with "see and
avoid". But it is a little bizarre as it widely mentions things like
ADS-B, glider transponder exemptions and even FLARM but does not
mention PCAS or similar systems.

Darryl

At 20:29 22 January 2009, Eric Greenwell wrote:

Proponent's biggest worry is a glider collision with a *TCAS equipped*
aircraft, because of the potential loss of hundreds of lives and the
devastating effect it would have on soaring. That's why I installed a
transponder over 5 years ago.

I'm not a big fan of transponders in gliders, mainly because I fly such
cheap equipment. But this is the argument that resonates the most with
me, and is making me reconsider the whole question.

Jim Beckman

kd6veb wrote:
Hi Gang
Without belaboring it I think it has been said enough times that
currently there is no single fool proof way to guaranty avoiding mid
airs. Having an operating transponder, without argument, will diminish
your chance of a mid air since both ATC and aircraft with TCAS or PCAS
will see you. You may not see them and that is why in my world,
without argument, you should also have, at the minimum, a PCAS so that
you will see another aircraft with an operating transponder. A Zaon
PCAS can be had for only $500 - a trivial amount when it comes to
safety. I don't know why we are still discussing these issues -
transponders and PCAS are mandatory safety devices in my world. I
can't think of a reason why anyone would think otherwise.

And, where I fly in southeastern Washington state, you don't even need
to have either to benefit from transponder technology. Just contact the
area's Approach Control - Free! - and they are happy to alert other
aircraft they are talking to about your location. Often, they can track
your primary target and warn YOU of approaching aircraft that are not
talking to ATC.

After 5 years of not seeing an airliner, light jet, or even a big twin
near me, the transponder seems like cheap insurance. I've had the MRX
for only two years, and it's pretty good at catching the Cessna types,
which I still see now and then.

This stuff works.

--
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

From this side of the pond (UK) I think there are few pilots who don't
support measures to reduce the risk of mid-airs.

What we pretty much agree on is that it is unreasonable for the men in
suits to mandate the installation of expensive, heavy, power hungry,
outdated (nearly) equipment in our gliders to fix a problem many think is
invented by the suits to justify technology to enable a covert agenda to
the benefit of CAT and UAVs who could pay for it but are not being asked
to.

Cheaper, better, low power technology is here now and in the pipeline that
can do this better and can be fitted easily in gliders.

Jim

ps: I'll bet that, on average, those that have transponders and PCAS look
out less.

kd6veb wrote:
I don't know why we are still discussing these issues -
transponders and PCAS are mandatory safety devices in my world. I
can't think of a reason why anyone would think otherwise.
Dave

One reason I worry about is that some people who would have them
installed start to depend on them to "alert" them of other traffic
rather than looking for traffic visually. A similar example of
something that happened to me once...I was in my Aeronca Chief (powered
aircraft, NO radio) on (extended) base leg of the approach. A guy in a
(faster) aircraft was about a mile out on final (after going way down on
downwind, giving him a about 3 miles of final approach). With my slow
Chief, he should have been down and clear of the runway before I even
turned final. All of a sudden, he makes a left turn and is heading
straight for me. Assuming he sees me, I turn to the right and descend,
assuming he would go right and pull up (I went down because I could
change altitude faster than pulling up). I cleared the area (WAY clear
of this guy), watch him land from afar and then came in to land. I go
up to him and asked him if he saw me and why he made that turn right at
me. His answer..."Nope didn't see you. Were you on the radio? I made
a missed approach and at uncontrolled airports, turns are made to the
left." I then explained that he should have continued down the runway,
climb and rejoin the pattern on crosswind leg and that not all aircraft
have radios (or electrical systems to support them). To me, it was
apparent that if he didn't hear anybody call in on the radio, there was
nobody else there.

Scott

Scott makes a very good point. Some of our club 2 seater gliders are fitted
with Flarm units. A few weeks ago I very nearly had a mid-air collision
because I was looking for a contact showing on my right hand side (which
could have been several kilometres away) and failed to spot a non-Flarm
equipped glider converging from the left, until it was almost too late.
The technology was actually a distraction from keeping a good scanning
lookout!

Derek Copelaand

At 11:34 23 January 2009, Scott wrote:
kd6veb wrote:
I don't know why we are still discussing these issues -
transponders and PCAS are mandatory safety devices in my world. I
can't think of a reason why anyone would think otherwise.
Dave

One reason I worry about is that some people who would have them
installed start to depend on them to "alert" them of other traffic
rather than looking for traffic visually. A similar example of
something that happened to me once...I was in my Aeronca Chief (powered
aircraft, NO radio) on (extended) base leg of the approach. A guy in a
(faster) aircraft was about a mile out on final (after going way down on

downwind, giving him a about 3 miles of final approach). With my slow
Chief, he should have been down and clear of the runway before I even
turned final. All of a sudden, he makes a left turn and is heading
straight for me. Assuming he sees me, I turn to the right and descend,
assuming he would go right and pull up (I went down because I could
change altitude faster than pulling up). I cleared the area (WAY clear
of this guy), watch him land from afar and then came in to land. I go
up to him and asked him if he saw me and why he made that turn right at
me. His answer..."Nope didn't see you. Were you on the radio? I made

a missed approach and at uncontrolled airports, turns are made to the
left." I then explained that he should have continued down the runway,

climb and rejoin the pattern on crosswind leg and that not all aircraft
have radios (or electrical systems to support them). To me, it was
apparent that if he didn't hear anybody call in on the radio, there was

nobody else there.

Scott

I'll bet, on average, that people that have a PCAS look out MORE than
those that don't have one. The reason is feedback. When you don't have
a PCAS you scan, but mostly you don't find anything. Lacking positive
feedback (a reward), your scan degrades. When a PCAS alerts during
your scan, you naturally increase your visual lookout until you find
the target. This is reward based training, and over time you learn to
look harder and better.

-John

On Jan 23, 3:30 am, Jim White wrote:
ps: I'll bet that, on average, those that have transponders and PCAS look
out less.

Scott wrote:
kd6veb wrote:
I don't know why we are still discussing these issues -
transponders and PCAS are mandatory safety devices in my world. I
can't think of a reason why anyone would think otherwise.
Dave

One reason I worry about is that some people who would have them
installed start to depend on them to "alert" them of other traffic
rather than looking for traffic visually. A similar example of
something that happened to me once...I was in my Aeronca Chief (powered
aircraft, NO radio) on (extended) base leg of the approach. A guy in a
(faster) aircraft was about a mile out on final (after going way down on
downwind, giving him a about 3 miles of final approach). With my slow
Chief, he should have been down and clear of the runway before I even
turned final. All of a sudden, he makes a left turn and is heading
straight for me. Assuming he sees me, I turn to the right and descend,
assuming he would go right and pull up (I went down because I could
change altitude faster than pulling up). I cleared the area (WAY clear
of this guy), watch him land from afar and then came in to land. I go
up to him and asked him if he saw me and why he made that turn right at
me. His answer..."Nope didn't see you. Were you on the radio? I made
a missed approach and at uncontrolled airports, turns are made to the
left." I then explained that he should have continued down the runway,
climb and rejoin the pattern on crosswind leg and that not all aircraft
have radios (or electrical systems to support them). To me, it was
apparent that if he didn't hear anybody call in on the radio, there was
nobody else there.

It's easier for me to understand the pilot that thinks everyone has a
radio and uses it, than the pilot that doesn't carry a $200 handheld in
his Aeronca for the times he lands at an airport.

Scott, I've some bad news for you: what you fear is already here. Almost
all of us expect pilots to have and use a radio near an airport. Even
the cowboy ultralight guys I know have radios.

If it's the money that stops you from using a radio, tell us how much
you are willing to spend on a radio. I'm sure we can get up a collection
to make up the difference between that and a shiny new handheld.

--
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

On Jan 23, 8:18*am, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Scott wrote:
kd6veb wrote:
I don't know why we are still discussing these issues -
transponders and PCAS are mandatory safety devices in my world. I
can't think of a reason why anyone would think otherwise.
Dave

One reason I worry about is that some people who would have them
installed start to depend on them to "alert" them of other traffic
rather than looking for traffic visually. *A similar example of
something that happened to me once...I was in my Aeronca Chief (powered
aircraft, NO radio) on (extended) base leg of the approach. *A guy in a
(faster) aircraft was about a mile out on final (after going way down on
downwind, giving him a about 3 miles of final approach). *With my slow
Chief, he should have been down and clear of the runway before I even
turned final. *All of a sudden, he makes a left turn and is heading
straight for me. *Assuming he sees me, I turn to the right and descend,
assuming he would go right and pull up (I went down because I could
change altitude faster than pulling up). *I cleared the area (WAY clear
of this guy), watch him land from afar and then came in to land. *I go
up to him and asked him if he saw me and why he made that turn right at
me. *His answer..."Nope didn't see you. *Were you on the radio? *I made
a missed approach and at uncontrolled airports, turns are made to the
left." *I then explained that he should have continued down the runway,
climb and rejoin the pattern on crosswind leg and that not all aircraft
have radios (or electrical systems to support them). *To me, it was
apparent that if he didn't hear anybody call in on the radio, there was
nobody else there.

It's easier for me to understand the pilot that thinks everyone has a
radio and uses it, than the pilot that doesn't carry a $200 handheld in
his Aeronca for the times he lands at an airport.

Scott, I've some bad news for you: what you fear is already here. Almost
all of us expect pilots to have and use a radio near an airport. Even
the cowboy ultralight guys I know have radios.

If it's the money that stops you from using a radio, tell us how much
you are willing to spend on a radio. I'm sure we can get up a collection
to make up the difference between that and a shiny new handheld.

--
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" atwww.motorglider.org- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I have to agree on that. I used to own an Aeronca Chief and had it
based at a controlled airport. There was no problem at all with using
a hand held radio, external antenna, and headphones and yoke mounted
PTT switch. Also used a similar setup in a J3 before that.

Andy

Eric Greenwell wrote:



It's easier for me to understand the pilot that thinks everyone has a
radio and uses it, than the pilot that doesn't carry a $200 handheld in
his Aeronca for the times he lands at an airport.

Scott, I've some bad news for you: what you fear is already here. Almost
all of us expect pilots to have and use a radio near an airport. Even
the cowboy ultralight guys I know have radios.

If it's the money that stops you from using a radio, tell us how much
you are willing to spend on a radio. I'm sure we can get up a collection
to make up the difference between that and a shiny new handheld.

The radio cost wasn't the issue for me. I had unshielded Eisemann
magnetos. I had a handheld (Icom A-21 Nav/Com) (and still do and USE it
in my Corben). I tested it once with a towered airport and all they got
was ignition noise hash. Now you're getting into BIG bucks to get
shielded mags and harnesses and STC, etc. I maintain my question...why
didn't the guy see me when I was at his 12 )'Clock and about a half a
mile after he made the turn toward me. My Chief was Aeronca Yellow with
Maroon stripe. I should have filled his windshield about the same as he
filled mine. I guess we were even...he expected to hear me and I
expected him to see me.

I had him in sight before I got in the pattern and followed his progress
throughout the pattern. He did surprise me with the left turn, but I
was able to react with enough time to get out of HIS way. His admission
that he NEVER saw me was what disturbed me. I am NOT anti-radio or
anti-transponder. I just worry that people rely on them WAY too much
and let their guard down for that 30 seconds that can lead up to a mid-air.

Scott