A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Riddle me this, pilots



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old August 21st 03, 06:15 PM
Peter Duniho
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote in message ...
You'd have proof that he was in IMC only if he had collided with the guy

at
7000 in IMC.


How would that provide proof that the collision took place in IMC?


Are you asking how the collision occuring in IMC would prove that the
collision took place in IMC?

Sounds like a "if a tree falls in the forest with no one near enough to hear
it" sort of question...


Ads
  #102  
Old August 21st 03, 09:02 PM
Newps
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Chip Jones wrote:


I totally agree, but it requires that you recognize the situation and have
time to deal with it. In my airspace I simply don't have the time to vector
every IFR around potential VFR traffic because I am too busy slinging IFR's
around IFR's or providing other IFR services. The avoidance of the alert to
begin with is indeed better for all concerned IMO, but it is not always
possible because of workload.


Lucky for me I've got nothing but time.

  #103  
Old August 21st 03, 09:04 PM
Newps
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The problem is you spent $200 on an encoder 10 years ago and expect it
to work for a lifetime. You very rarely if ever see a bad mode C on an
airliner.

Roy Smith wrote:

wrote:

"unverified" Mode C.



When a Mode C readout is wrong, where is the problem? Is the encoder
producing bad data? Is the data path between the encoder and the
xponder corrupting the data? Is the xpdonder corrupting the data? Is
the RF pulse from the xponder being corrupted? Is the receiver not
decoding it right?


  #104  
Old August 21st 03, 09:11 PM
Newps
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Peter Duniho wrote:


As far as I know, the language used in the controller's handbook allows
altitude changes any time a controller is supposed to vector an airplane.
It would be a significant change, and would add even more complexity to the
handbook, to call out this particular case as a situation where the
controller is permitted to providing heading guidance but not altitude.


A controller owns a chunk of airspace. As long as I meet the separation
standards I can do whatever I need to with you.



The main reason that TCAS doesn't cause accidents today is that it's used in
a way that is unlikely to cause accidents. Airplanes that are in IMC are
being positively controlled by ATC, and the TCAS should only provide a
warning when ATC has made an egregious error. That doesn't happen very
often. Furthermore, the airplanes involved are both under radar control, so
even though the TCAS doesn't know it, the Mode C *has* been verified.
Airplanes that are in VMC, whether under positive control by ATC or not,
have the ability to use the TCAS to help them *spot traffic*, rather than
just blindly trust the TCAS to tell them what to do. The pilots can then
make a course adjustment as appropriate, based on *what they see*.


TCAS is most useful in class D type tower situations. These are where
you are most likely to have the spam cans flying around with unverified
mode C. If the TCAS gives an RA the airliner must take the action
suggested. Places like Orange County and Pontiac come to mind. Lots
and lots of VFR targets

  #105  
Old August 22nd 03, 12:15 AM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message ...

That's your opinion.


That's my observation.


  #106  
Old August 22nd 03, 12:18 AM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Newps" wrote in message
news:[email protected]

A controller owns a chunk of airspace. As long as I meet the separation
standards I can do whatever I need to with you.


The controller can do only what is consistent with FAAO 7110.65.


  #107  
Old August 22nd 03, 12:19 AM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message ...

How would that provide proof that the collision took place in IMC?


Because the guy at 7000 stated he was in IMC.


  #108  
Old August 22nd 03, 12:41 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Peter Duniho wrote:

wrote in message ...
That is exactly what a TCAS RA does, and it relies on "unverified" Mode C.


As I mentioned, this is not as safe as people (i.e. you) would like to
think.


It has already saved a few friends of mine, in one case IFR vs. IFR in the
flight levels. Perhaps it is not as safe as it could be, but it's a lot safer
than not having it at all. Same goes for GPWS and EGPWS.

  #109  
Old August 22nd 03, 12:42 AM
Dan Luke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Maule Driver" wrote:
Yep, this kind of Mode C anomoly happens in ZTL airspace too.

That's one
reason we always go with pilot reported altitude over Mode C

readout.

First time I was called on an inaccurate Mode C by ATL, I took it to

the
shop. They said it was OK and serviced it anyway. ATL called me on

it
again but it's fine everywhere else, almost....


I used to have this trouble westbound through Gulfport's airspace all
the time. It never happened anywhere else and two trips to the shop
didn't help.When I replaced the xponder and encoder with more modern
stuff, the problem disappeared.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM


  #110  
Old August 22nd 03, 01:21 AM
G.R. Patterson III
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Newps wrote:

The problem is you spent $200 on an encoder 10 years ago and expect it
to work for a lifetime. You very rarely if ever see a bad mode C on an
airliner.


The implication is that airliners use better transponders and/or associated
equipment. What are they using?

George Patterson
Brute force has an elegance all its own.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 03:26 PM
Bush Pilots Fly-In. South Africa. Bush Air Home Built 0 May 25th 04 06:18 AM
Any Pitts S-1 pilots in this group? Kai Glaesner Aerobatics 4 April 12th 04 12:10 AM
Photographer seeking 2 pilots / warbirds for photo shoot Wings Of Fury Aerobatics 0 February 26th 04 06:59 PM
Pilot's Brains Develop Differently Badwater Bill Home Built 3 August 22nd 03 04:48 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2021 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.