contact terminology?

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...
Mxsmanic wrote:
Dave S writes:


You know nothing of the technical standards regarding TCAS, nor the
operational requirements of using one.


I know that TCAS displays are mediocre in azimuth, and that their
accuracy in
this respect depends hugely on the design of the hardware on the local
aircraft (since it must depend essentially on radar sweeps to determine
azimuth). Distance is more reliable. Altitude depends on the accuracy
of the
remote transponder.


TCAS is not the only traffic display device out there.


What other ones are there, and how do they work?

PLEASE REAL PILOTS: IGNORE WITH THIS PRETEND PILOT HAS TO SAY. HE IS A
GENUINE HAZARD TO AVIATION.

I can just see planes falling out of the sky right after reading one of MX's
posts. I'm more concerned about someone who would think such a thing is
possible.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Dave S writes:

You know nothing of the technical standards regarding TCAS, nor the
operational requirements of using one.

I know that TCAS displays are mediocre in azimuth, and that their accuracy in
this respect depends hugely on the design of the hardware on the local
aircraft (since it must depend essentially on radar sweeps to determine
azimuth). Distance is more reliable. Altitude depends on the accuracy of the
remote transponder.

TCAS is not the only traffic display device out there.

What other ones are there, and how do they work?

Andrew.. I'm not doing your homework for you, so that you can then
pretend to know what you are talking about. And true TCAS does not need
any radar sweeps from ATC to do its job (thats the last freebee to a sim
pilot). If you KNEW what the hell you were talking about you would
understand why.

Again. You dont know. You are guessing. You are giving erroneous advice
that potentially can get someone killed if they follow what you are
saying as accurate.

Does that bother you in the least?

Mike wrote:
"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...

Mxsmanic wrote:

Dave S writes:


You know nothing of the technical standards regarding TCAS, nor the
operational requirements of using one.



I know that TCAS displays are mediocre in azimuth, and that their
accuracy in
this respect depends hugely on the design of the hardware on the local
aircraft (since it must depend essentially on radar sweeps to determine
azimuth). Distance is more reliable. Altitude depends on the
accuracy of the
remote transponder.


TCAS is not the only traffic display device out there.



What other ones are there, and how do they work?


PLEASE REAL PILOTS: IGNORE WITH THIS PRETEND PILOT HAS TO SAY. HE IS
A GENUINE HAZARD TO AVIATION.


I can just see planes falling out of the sky right after reading one of
MX's posts. I'm more concerned about someone who would think such a
thing is possible.

Well, Dave S. sees it as I do.

So, you can be concerned about both Dave and me.

And, who besides you said the Maniac's posting would immediately cause
airplanes to fall out of the sky?

You obviously don't understand how misinformation in aviation is one of
the weak links in the accident chain. Neither does the "simulator" jock.

And, what a laugh to call that piece of **** game a simulator.

Sam Spade writes:

You obviously don't understand how misinformation in aviation is one of
the weak links in the accident chain. Neither does the "simulator" jock.

Nobody learns to fly by reading USENET. No intelligent person ever believes
what he reads on USENET without independent verification.

And, what a laugh to call that piece of **** game a simulator.

Few people with a correctly configured sim call it a game.

Dave S writes:

Andrew.. I'm not doing your homework for you, so that you can then
pretend to know what you are talking about. And true TCAS does not need
any radar sweeps from ATC to do its job (thats the last freebee to a sim
pilot).

Nobody said anything about radar sweeps from ATC.

Transponders interrogated by TCAS do not provide lateral position information,
so this must be inferred by the local TCAS hardware, which in turn implies a
sweeping interrogation of some kind that can correlate azimuth information
with transponder replies or direct radar echoes. Current TCAS II systems do
not provide reliable azimuth information, only general indications of azimuth
that can be considerably off. That's one reason why these systems do not
provide lateral RAs.

Again. You dont know. You are guessing. You are giving erroneous advice
that potentially can get someone killed if they follow what you are
saying as accurate.

No competent pilot takes anything he reads on USENET seriously without
independent verification. Indeed, no intelligent person does that.

Does that bother you in the least?

Since it's your imaginative speculation rather than any kind of real risk, it
doesn't bother me. First, the information I give is not generally inaccurate,
and it won't get anyone killed. Second, only an idiot flies based on what he
reads on USENET alone, and idiots are not likely to survive in any case.

Mxsmanic wrote:

Nobody said anything about radar sweeps from ATC.

Yes... YOU did....

....and idiots are not likely to survive in any case.

You've done quite well do far.

Mxsmanic wrote:


Nobody learns to fly by reading USENET. No intelligent person ever believes
what he reads on USENET without independent verification.


So that somehow is supposed to mean your obnoxious, unwanted, and
INCORRECT assertions are welcome?

Go back to giving medical advice.. im sure the peeps over in that other
usenet village are missing their idiot..

Dave S writes:

So that somehow is supposed to mean your obnoxious, unwanted, and
INCORRECT assertions are welcome?

Your inference is incorrect.

Dave S writes:

Yes... YOU did....

Where?

TCAS uses at least one directional antenna. It is this antenna that provides
azimuth information, independently of any equipment ATC might have. The
directional characteristic required for the antenna provides very low azimuth
resolution, which means that bearing information on the TCAS display is only
approximately accurate, unless the equipment substantially exceeds the minimum
requirements for the system.

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...
Mike wrote:
"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...

Mxsmanic wrote:

Dave S writes:


You know nothing of the technical standards regarding TCAS, nor the
operational requirements of using one.



I know that TCAS displays are mediocre in azimuth, and that their
accuracy in
this respect depends hugely on the design of the hardware on the local
aircraft (since it must depend essentially on radar sweeps to determine
azimuth). Distance is more reliable. Altitude depends on the accuracy
of the
remote transponder.


TCAS is not the only traffic display device out there.



What other ones are there, and how do they work?


PLEASE REAL PILOTS: IGNORE WITH THIS PRETEND PILOT HAS TO SAY. HE IS A
GENUINE HAZARD TO AVIATION.


I can just see planes falling out of the sky right after reading one of
MX's posts. I'm more concerned about someone who would think such a
thing is possible.

Well, Dave S. sees it as I do.

And in this particular thread, MX was right and Dave S had to manufacture a
non-existent quote just to contradict MX and point out that he wasn't some
sort of design engineer when clearly he isn't either.


So, you can be concerned about both Dave and me.

And, who besides you said the Maniac's posting would immediately cause
airplanes to fall out of the sky?

Because you described him as not just a hazard, but a "GENUINE" hazard with
caps added for emphasis on everything. What other inference should one make
from that? Are you now going to try and downplay what you were previously
so adamant about before? The best you can say about your statement is you
grossly exaggerated any threat he might pose and the worst you could say
about mine is I just took your exaggeration one more step to show how
completely ridiculous it was.

You obviously don't understand how misinformation in aviation is one of
the weak links in the accident chain. Neither does the "simulator" jock.

Here's what you don't understand. After reading one or two sentences of an
MX post, anyone with at least a room temperature IQ should be able to figure
out the guy is completely clueless. Now let's assume for a moment they
aren't that smart, but still have enough neurons firing to fly an actual
aircraft even as a student pilot (which is quite a stretch to begin with,
but lets go way out on a limb for the sake of argument). If they choose to
base their decision making skills on what a person with no proven
credentials whatsoever writes on friggin usenet, then they have FAR bigger
problems than MX could ever create. In fact, their chain is made of dental
floss to begin with.


And, what a laugh to call that piece of **** game a simulator.