If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
boulder mid-air
This is precisely the problem! The majority of the public, including
many pilots and apparently the FAA, believe in "See and Avoid" since they can often see other aircrafts either from the ground or when flying. They do not grasp the simple fact that they only see aircrafts which are not in a collision course with them! This, combined with multiple blind spots and the various distractions which are part of the job of piloting an aircraft, makes it a pure luck when someone actually manage to see and avoid. If See and Avoid can be relied on, why do we bother with traffic lights and multiple lanes on the roads? Yet it is much easier to see and avoid on the road due to significantly slower speed and knowing where to look. It is ironic to hear and read about the money and effort which goes into investigating the cause of those accidents, while the answer is simply biological limit of our eyes, and the design of our airplanes. The only reason that aircrafts do not collide with each other all the time is the big sky theory. Unfortunately the sky is not big enough, and we loose many good pilots and passengers to GA midairs every year. The responsibility lies with the FAA bureaucrats and the rule making process, which is so slow that we are still using 50 years old technologies! Imagine if the FAA was run by, say... Apple. We would all be carrying a small $99 (ok maybe $999) gizmo in all our aircrafts, which capable of providing real time warnings for any threat (such as flarm or ADS-B). And for those who claims that this will create complacency or heads down - even if you blind fold all the pilots you will get far less midairs due to the occasional misuse of malfunction of this technology, verses relying on See and Avoid! For a good reading on the subject of see and avoid check http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...s/bca0107c.xml Ramy |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
boulder mid-air
I think that discussing midair is important in general, so please
continue on. However, I think it is also important for everyone including your friends and families to understand that this is basically a collision between two powerplanes, and one of them just happened to be towing a glider. This accident has nothing to do with the safety of this sports. It didn't happen because of the flying characteristics of glider, the visibility of glider in the air, or having or not having transponder or similar equipments. I was wondering why so many initial reports emphasized that the Cirrus ran into the tow rope. Apparently, there is a perception among non pilots that the tow rope is miles-long, thus making it an invisible trap in the air, and the poor Cirrus tripped on it because they couldn't see it. That is very wrong. The tow rope is only a couple hundreds of feet long, and you shouldn't get that close to other aircrafts in the sky anyway. I even see a headline like this. Three killed in glider accident http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...?section=world -Gen |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
boulder mid-air
I think that discussing midair is important in general, so please
continue on. However, I think it is also important for everyone including your friends and families to understand that this is basically a collision between two powerplanes, and one of them just happened to be towing a glider. This accident has nothing to do with the safety of this sports. It didn't happen because of the flying characteristics of glider, the visibility of glider in the air, or having or not having transponder or similar equipments. I was wondering why so many initial reports emphasized that the Cirrus ran into the tow rope. Apparently, there is a perception among non pilots that the tow rope is miles-long, thus making it an invisible trap in the air, and the poor Cirrus tripped on it because they couldn't see it. That is very wrong. The tow rope is only a couple hundreds of feet long, and you shouldn't get that close to other aircrafts in the sky anyway. I even see a headline like this. Three killed in glider accident http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...?section=world -Gen |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
boulder mid-air
On 2/8/2010 1:14 AM, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Mike Schumann wrote: From the description the Cirrus pilot was just not looking and in effect just walked out into the road without looking to see whether a car was coming. I don't want to be insensitive to the family of the Cirrus pilot, but the fault was his and not the fact that glider activity was present. In my experience, many IFR pilots just don't look out for VFR traffic and expect ATC to keep them clear of ALL traffic. Is that stressed enough in IFR training? ( I know this is before any NTSB ruling and is based on hearsay evidence only.) The reality is that other aircraft are difficult to see, even if you know where to look. What is very frustrating is that affordable ADS-B technology exists that could have prevented this accident. Unfortunately commercialization is being delayed by the FAA's obsession with IFR ADS-B applications, while certification standards for low cost VFR devices are on the back burner. And $500 PCAS units have been for sale for several years. I wonder if a PCAS in one or more of the aircraft involved would have averted the accident. - - Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly * "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org The $500 PCAS units don't give you the same situational awareness that you get with ADS-B. It helps, but it doesn't give you any directional data on where the threat is, just range and altitude. The more expensive unit is better, telling you what quadrant the threat is in. An ADS-B unit will tell you within 100 ft where the other planes are. Mike Schumann -- Mike Schumann |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
boulder mid-air
On Feb 8, 1:54*pm, John Smith wrote:
snip BTW, some may argue that passengers wouldn't jump anyway. This has been proven wrong. One ore two years ago, there was a successfull bail out by a passenger after a mid-air in Switzerland. The passenger was 80 years old and it was his first flight... There was also the chap on a air experience flight in a K21 near Dunstable in the UK when the glider was hit by lighting. Both were wearing chutes, both survived. Wish I could find the AAIB report - it has some photos of the recovered wreckage. I gather the p1 & P2 flew togeather again 10 years later, to raise money for charity. I saw the P2's website page which included his description of the accident but it's vanished in the mists of time. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
boulder mid-air
It will be interesting to see what the NTSB comes up with on this one,
Since unlike most mid-airs this one had a pilot witness and two non- pilot witnesses in the front row seat (glider) to observe what happened. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
boulder mid-air
danlj wrote:
And then there's the fact that some of us are essentially invisible to ATC even with a transponder: when we thermal, we're relatively stationary to radar, which then puts us in "coast" mode, and removes our blip from the display. In the USA, the radar will not remove your transponder blip from the screen because you are circling; if the blip is from primary mode radar (no transponder), it may be removed. Radar does know the difference between clutter and a transponder! -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly * "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
boulder mid-air
glidergeek wrote:
On Feb 7, 10:14 pm, Eric Greenwell wrote: Mike Schumann wrote The reality is that other aircraft are difficult to see, even if you know where to look. What is very frustrating is that affordable ADS-B technology exists that could have prevented this accident. Unfortunately commercialization is being delayed by the FAA's obsession with IFR ADS-B applications, while certification standards for low cost VFR devices are on the back burner. And $500 PCAS units have been for sale for several years. I wonder if a PCAS in one or more of the aircraft involved would have averted the accident. Maybe Eric, BUT I've got one that I use in my Cessna 180 (Zoan) and I've watched several planes fly by relatively close with no indication on the unit. I don't trust it. Mine alerts me to some aircraft I don't see. I don't expect it to discover everything, so I do look around, and I carry a transponder, MRX, and a radio. It's a pretty good system for $3000 (eyeballs free). I've been using the eyeballs and a radio for 30 years, the transponder for 8, the MRX for 2. I'm glad I don't have to depend on eyes alone anymore. And I'm still wondering if a PCAS in any or all of the aircraft could have averted the disaster. $500 each would be cheap it would work in that situation. -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly * "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
boulder mid-air
Mike Schumann wrote:
And $500 PCAS units have been for sale for several years. I wonder if a PCAS in one or more of the aircraft involved would have averted the accident. - - The $500 PCAS units don't give you the same situational awareness that you get with ADS-B. It helps, but it doesn't give you any directional data on where the threat is, just range and altitude. The more expensive unit is better, telling you what quadrant the threat is in. An ADS-B unit will tell you within 100 ft where the other planes are. I agree in principle, but the situation is the PCAS units are here, the ADS-B units aren't. I'm looking forward to ADS-B, but in the meantime, there are PCAS units available that will help now. My MRX helps me spot traffic, so I think I'm getting my $450 worth out of it. -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly * "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
boulder mid-air
Eric Greenwell wrote:
And I'm still wondering if a PCAS in any or all of the aircraft could have averted the disaster. $500 each would be cheap it would work in that situation. Just FYI, here's an article discussing the Traffic Avoidance Systems commonly installed on many Cirrus aircraft: http://www.theflightacademy.com/pres...lot_Nov_06.pdf It is possible that the model involved had a TIS - which may not have been helpful in this case. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
boulder mid-air | discus | Soaring | 13 | February 7th 10 04:55 PM |
Boulder Hermosillo, Mx ....... | ~^ beancounter ~^ | Owning | 0 | May 2nd 08 10:29 PM |
Boulder Wave | John H. Campbell | Soaring | 0 | February 23rd 05 05:43 PM |
Boulder wave | David Campbell | Soaring | 0 | December 7th 03 06:23 PM |
Partnership in Denver/ Boulder | Fred Wolf | Owning | 0 | November 4th 03 03:36 AM |