Any pireps for PCAS MRX collision avoidance system?

On Jun 3, 2:34 pm, Mutts wrote:
Crossposting over to soaring...

worth 500 clams?..............http://www.zaonflight.com/content/view/2/13/

Some have commented that the lack of bearing info is a limitation,
others not so much.

Anyone with lots of experience using this unit or similar, thoughts?

Thanks!

On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 19:18:47 -0400, "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea
Hawk at wow way d0t com wrote:



"Mutts" wrote in message
.. .

worth 500 clams?..............

http://www.zaonflight.com/content/view/2/13/

Ax over on r.a.soaring - they seem to be more popular over there.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I have never flown with a TCAS, but I would think that relative
altitude and range should be enough help you see and avoid. But I do
have a question about these units. Do they work when there is no radar
facility nearby, or you are below the radar altitude?

On Jun 3, 2:41 pm, Andrew Sarangan wrote:
I have never flown with a TCAS, but I would think that relative
altitude and range should be enough help you see and avoid. But I do
have a question about these units. Do they work when there is no radar
facility nearby, or you are below the radar altitude?

The unit is passive, so relies on the other aircraft's transponder to
be replying to an interrogation. In Colorado, fairly low over the
mountains, one will be below radar coverage, so a VFR airplane with
transponder will not be interrogated, snd so will not be seen by the
MRX.

I have a few flights now with one of these and find that it does what
it's supposed to do. And that is give me a "heads up" when there is a
transponder nearby. At a glider contest, it will be constantly
reporting the towplanes as they drop off gliders nearby. Near a busy
GA airport, it will likely be the same. It will identify and tell you
about each new target within a few miles, so will reinforce your scan.

It's not a panacea, but just another tool to help me avoid getting run
down by a transponder equipped aircraft that may be flying "heads
down".

-Tom

In article om,
5Z wrote:

On Jun 3, 2:41 pm, Andrew Sarangan wrote:
I have never flown with a TCAS, but I would think that relative
altitude and range should be enough help you see and avoid. But I do
have a question about these units. Do they work when there is no radar
facility nearby, or you are below the radar altitude?

The unit is passive, so relies on the other aircraft's transponder to
be replying to an interrogation. In Colorado, fairly low over the
mountains, one will be below radar coverage, so a VFR airplane with
transponder will not be interrogated, snd so will not be seen by the
MRX.

The unit won't see other transponders, unless the other transponder is
interrogated by a TCAS-equipped aircraft.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

The unit won't see other transponders, unless the other transponder is
interrogated by a TCAS-equipped aircraft.


Correct except for the last 4 words. ATC radar also intrerrogats
transponders.

Tony V.
http://home.comcast.net/~verhulst/SOARING

In article ,
Tony Verhulst wrote:

The unit won't see other transponders, unless the other transponder is
interrogated by a TCAS-equipped aircraft.


Correct except for the last 4 words. ATC radar also intrerrogats
transponders.

Note that I was responding to a poster discussing what happens
when you are below radar coverage.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

Bob Noel wrote:


Note that I was responding to a poster discussing what happens
when you are below radar coverage.


Missed that. Thanks for the correction.

Tony

Andrew,

Do they work when there is no radar
facility nearby, or you are below the radar altitude?


Your targets must be hit by radar (or an active TCAS from an airliner),
not yourself. If that doesn't happen, the units don't work. How much
traffic will there be in such areas?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

On Jun 4, 11:24 am, Thomas Borchert
wrote:
Andrew,

Do they work when there is no radar
facility nearby, or you are below the radar altitude?

Your targets must be hit by radar (or an active TCAS from an airliner),
not yourself. If that doesn't happen, the units don't work. How much
traffic will there be in such areas?


Since mid-air collisions occur near traffic patterns at low altitudes
this is where I would want the system to be most responsive. It seems
as if the opposite is true. Identifiying airplanes at cruise altitudes
might make someone feel better, but they are rarely a hazard. It would
be nice if there were a passive system that does not rely on a
transponder, like a laser radar.

On Jun 4, 7:31 pm, Andrew Sarangan wrote:
On Jun 4, 11:24 am, Thomas Borchert
wrote:

Andrew,

Do they work when there is no radar
facility nearby, or you are below the radar altitude?

Your targets must be hit by radar (or an active TCAS from an airliner),
not yourself. If that doesn't happen, the units don't work. How much
traffic will there be in such areas?

Since mid-air collisions occur near traffic patterns at low altitudes
this is where I would want the system to be most responsive. It seems
as if the opposite is true. Identifiying airplanes at cruise altitudes
might make someone feel better, but they are rarely a hazard. It would
be nice if there were a passive system that does not rely on a
transponder, like a laser radar.

We don't need to dream about exotic technology, the stuff available
today does the job well enough to be very useful. Wherever you are
flying you are very likely to be being painted by TCAS, civil SSR
radar or military radar or TCAD (i.e. "TCAS lite" systems now being
sold for GA aircraft, not many of these flying yet but it seems quite
a lot of the $400k or so popular GA aircraft get sold with these
systems). I see my transponder being interrogated and my MRX PCAS
working out in the boondocks of the CA/NV great basin, down in valleys
in central CA well away from SSR radar etc. where likely interrogation
sources are airline traffic TCAS.

This topic keeps coming up again and again, and unfortunately r.a.s
seem to be write only, a search of the archives will turn up lots of
dicusssion on PCAS. The bottom line is that PCAS works suprisingly.
But it relies on transponder equipped aircraft so obviously won't work
between gliders that are not transponder equipped. The issue here is
getting your flying buddies to install tranponders not worrying about
wether those tranponders are likely to be painted by radar or TCAS,
etc. they very likely will. Zaon Flight systems keeps trying to
educate people about this, look at the coverage maps at
http://www.zaonflight.com/content/view/22/10/ as a starting point.

The adoption pattern that I've seen for PCAS is one pilot at a glider
port buys one and once people see that it works all of a sudden lots
of pilots have them. I'm not suprised people are pessimistic that
these little toys work, but they do work remarkably well, try to find
somebody in your area who has one and get their feedback on it or even
better borrow it and go flying.

PCAS *is* capable of working at low altitudes including in remote
areas, however I might disagree that the major danger of mid-air
collisions are at "low altitudes". Certainly not the glider-heavy iron
collisions that I am concerned about as a strategic threat to our
sport. And we could argue about what low altitude means, but around
places like Reno, or San Jose airspace where I fly the real danger
points for collisions that I worry about are some victor airways and
associated traffic into and out of VORs and approach/departure routes
or heavy iron, particuary that traffic transitioning down from class A
airspace and very very busy in the cockpit and certainly not
expecting a glider sitting there just below class A... just like the
Minden area Hawker/ASG-29 collision.

BTW Transponders, keep coming up as well on r.a.s, they also work
remarkably well - just ask anybody who flies with a transpoder near
these areas and actually listens to or talks to approach control.
Modern transponders don't have a high drain/exotic battery
requirements (some PDAs/GPSs can be worse), might take a little work
to install, there are really not difficult problems with antenna
location etc. etc. Yes they cost money to buy and install and that can
be a serious barrier -- everything else is addressable or just an
excuse. Once you fly with a transponder in high traffic areas (like
near Reno as JJ said) you suddenly wake up to ATC vectoring heavy iron
around you, being seen by TCAS, etc. a whole scary world many people
are oblivious to. If your shooting patterns miles from anywhere I
don't care if you have a transponder, but if you are flying around,
under or over major airspace then you are taking more of a risk and I
get very worried about the damage to our sport when a glider collides
with a commercial aircraft. (yep my main concern is about protecting
the sport not protecting glider pilots from an individual mid-air,
that's secondary - and on average we are probably more of a danager to
ourselves through stall/spin accidents or lack of pre-flight/positive
control checks than mid-air collisions.).

Darryl Ramm
6DX

I find it also effective in alerting for glider traffic nearby, if the
glider is transponder equiped and the transponder is on. Now that more
pilots are flying with PCAS it is even more important to keep your
transponder on in remote areas such as the White Mountains.
Transponders are still interogated in these areas and will alert PCAS
equiped gliders to your presence.

Ramy

On Jun 4, 9:38 pm, "
wrote:
On Jun 4, 7:31 pm, Andrew Sarangan wrote:





On Jun 4, 11:24 am, Thomas Borchert
wrote:

Andrew,

Do they work when there is no radar
facility nearby, or you are below the radar altitude?

Your targets must be hit by radar (or an active TCAS from an airliner),
not yourself. If that doesn't happen, the units don't work. How much
traffic will there be in such areas?

Since mid-air collisions occur near traffic patterns at low altitudes
this is where I would want the system to be most responsive. It seems
as if the opposite is true. Identifiying airplanes at cruise altitudes
might make someone feel better, but they are rarely a hazard. It would
be nice if there were a passive system that does not rely on a
transponder, like a laser radar.

We don't need to dream about exotic technology, the stuff available
today does the job well enough to be very useful. Wherever you are
flying you are very likely to be being painted by TCAS, civil SSR
radar or military radar or TCAD (i.e. "TCAS lite" systems now being
sold for GA aircraft, not many of these flying yet but it seems quite
a lot of the $400k or so popular GA aircraft get sold with these
systems). I see my transponder being interrogated and my MRX PCAS
working out in the boondocks of the CA/NV great basin, down in valleys
in central CA well away from SSR radar etc. where likely interrogation
sources are airline traffic TCAS.

This topic keeps coming up again and again, and unfortunately r.a.s
seem to be write only, a search of the archives will turn up lots of
dicusssion on PCAS. The bottom line is that PCAS works suprisingly.
But it relies on transponder equipped aircraft so obviously won't work
between gliders that are not transponder equipped. The issue here is
getting your flying buddies to install tranponders not worrying about
wether those tranponders are likely to be painted by radar or TCAS,
etc. they very likely will. Zaon Flight systems keeps trying to
educate people about this, look at the coverage maps athttp://www.zaonflight.com/content/view/22/10/as a starting point.

The adoption pattern that I've seen for PCAS is one pilot at a glider
port buys one and once people see that it works all of a sudden lots
of pilots have them. I'm not suprised people are pessimistic that
these little toys work, but they do work remarkably well, try to find
somebody in your area who has one and get their feedback on it or even
better borrow it and go flying.

PCAS *is* capable of working at low altitudes including in remote
areas, however I might disagree that the major danger of mid-air
collisions are at "low altitudes". Certainly not the glider-heavy iron
collisions that I am concerned about as a strategic threat to our
sport. And we could argue about what low altitude means, but around
places like Reno, or San Jose airspace where I fly the real danger
points for collisions that I worry about are some victor airways and
associated traffic into and out of VORs and approach/departure routes
or heavy iron, particuary that traffic transitioning down from class A
airspace and very very busy in the cockpit and certainly not
expecting a glider sitting there just below class A... just like the
Minden area Hawker/ASG-29 collision.

BTW Transponders, keep coming up as well on r.a.s, they also work
remarkably well - just ask anybody who flies with a transpoder near
these areas and actually listens to or talks to approach control.
Modern transponders don't have a high drain/exotic battery
requirements (some PDAs/GPSs can be worse), might take a little work
to install, there are really not difficult problems with antenna
location etc. etc. Yes they cost money to buy and install and that can
be a serious barrier -- everything else is addressable or just an
excuse. Once you fly with a transponder in high traffic areas (like
near Reno as JJ said) you suddenly wake up to ATC vectoring heavy iron
around you, being seen by TCAS, etc. a whole scary world many people
are oblivious to. If your shooting patterns miles from anywhere I
don't care if you have a transponder, but if you are flying around,
under or over major airspace then you are taking more of a risk and I
get very worried about the damage to our sport when a glider collides
with a commercial aircraft. (yep my main concern is about protecting
the sport not protecting glider pilots from an individual mid-air,
that's secondary - and on average we are probably more of a danager to
ourselves through stall/spin accidents or lack of pre-flight/positive
control checks than mid-air collisions.).

Darryl Ramm
6DX- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -