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 » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Glider near miss with Airliner (emergency climb) near Chicago yesterday?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old September 28th 17, 01:31 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tom BravoMike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 111
Default Glider near miss with Airliner (emergency climb) near Chicago yesterday?

Break, break! ... Let's change the subject: It was a very hot weather in the Midwest last few days, wasn't it?

(...)
You are an utter idiot.


Ads
  #32  
Old September 28th 17, 01:53 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default Glider near miss with Airliner (emergency climb) near Chicago yesterday?

On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 12:30:16 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
I just listened to this news on a major news network and pseudo confirmed it he http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1374687

The newsperson actually said, "Why didn't this glider have a transponder, why wasn't this glider talking to someone, how is this possible…" live on the air.

I continue to believe that the sailplane community needs to fully adopt ADSB and transponders whenever outside of 3 miles of the airport (for basic training). Getting an exemption was a big mistake. Sailplane flying cross country, near major airspace, or at high altitudes should absolutely have ADSB and/or 250 watt transponders.

The awful scenario we are all worried about IS going to happen eventually.. Its simply a matter of: A) was the gliding community pro safety or B) was the gliding community defiant and trying to wiggle out of safety and make special exceptions for itself.

When IT happens, the result will be unfortunate if we are still on the B path, as we are now…




On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 12:30:16 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
I just listened to this news on a major news network and pseudo confirmed it he http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1374687

The newsperson actually said, "Why didn't this glider have a transponder, why wasn't this glider talking to someone, how is this possible…" live on the air.

I continue to believe that the sailplane community needs to fully adopt ADSB and transponders whenever outside of 3 miles of the airport (for basic training). Getting an exemption was a big mistake. Sailplane flying cross country, near major airspace, or at high altitudes should absolutely have ADSB and/or 250 watt transponders.

The awful scenario we are all worried about IS going to happen eventually.. Its simply a matter of: A) was the gliding community pro safety or B) was the gliding community defiant and trying to wiggle out of safety and make special exceptions for itself.

When IT happens, the result will be unfortunate if we are still on the B path, as we are now…




On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 12:30:16 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
I just listened to this news on a major news network and pseudo confirmed it he http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1374687

The newsperson actually said, "Why didn't this glider have a transponder, why wasn't this glider talking to someone, how is this possible…" live on the air.

I continue to believe that the sailplane community needs to fully adopt ADSB and transponders whenever outside of 3 miles of the airport (for basic training). Getting an exemption was a big mistake. Sailplane flying cross country, near major airspace, or at high altitudes should absolutely have ADSB and/or 250 watt transponders.

The awful scenario we are all worried about IS going to happen eventually.. Its simply a matter of: A) was the gliding community pro safety or B) was the gliding community defiant and trying to wiggle out of safety and make special exceptions for itself.

When IT happens, the result will be unfortunate if we are still on the B path, as we are now…


Did anyone happen to notice that this pilot was registered in NL, according to OLC. Not an excuse or reason, I can see some "foreigner" visiting and 'drifts' into or near Class B airspace outside of ORD. Not being local may not have realized his error. He may still not have realized it as of today, unless the FAA has been knocking at his door or the owners door.

I had an AA MD-88 about run me over about 10 to 15 miles from DAY at 4000-4500 feet agl. What happened to the inverted wedding cake parameters?
  #33  
Old September 28th 17, 02:20 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 53
Default Glider near miss with Airliner (emergency climb) near Chicago yesterday?

The least costly way I know of alerting others is purchasing a transponder, about the same price as a radio.

It looks to me like this gold plated system's cost is about 4x the cost of a radio, and that makes me grumpy. (Or perhaps it could be ARG (Age Related Grumpy, or both.) ;-)

I'm also grumpy because this is about 10% the cost of the glider. If the airlines, with more political clout, had to pay 10% for ADSB, ADSB would be much different.

But my grumps aside, this thread is actually useful because it made me think that except for battery issues, my reasons for grumpy are no more compelling than the rest of the GA community. These days, the battery issues are not so bad. For a glider with lithium, a 4 hour flight is a no brainer. I can see 6 or 8 without much trouble. 12 may be a head scratcher, but hey, I'm an engineer and if I get to where I need it, I bet I can figure out a way.

In other words, I'm to the state where I think there should not be a glider exemption for gliders flying where airlines are likely to be. I think this even though it will cost me a small fortune to buy a system which is way more complicated that is necessary for the task at hand.

I say this because I don't see any other reliable way to provide separation between my cross country butt and an airline. An interesting question is are there other reasonable, reliable separation rules which might work for non-cross country flights?

Perhaps if within a published distance (5nm?) of a glider symbol on the chart and below cloudbase, other traffic won't depend on electronic means for traffic separation. Such a compromise is bad because it raises the bar for cross country, but at least it might provide a safe glider exemption for how many gliders are actually used. (Some GA might benefit from the same separation plan?)


  #34  
Old September 28th 17, 02:28 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,131
Default Glider near miss with Airliner (emergency climb) near Chicago yesterday?

On Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 5:53:39 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 12:30:16 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
I just listened to this news on a major news network and pseudo confirmed it he http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1374687

The newsperson actually said, "Why didn't this glider have a transponder, why wasn't this glider talking to someone, how is this possible…" live on the air.

I continue to believe that the sailplane community needs to fully adopt ADSB and transponders whenever outside of 3 miles of the airport (for basic training). Getting an exemption was a big mistake. Sailplane flying cross country, near major airspace, or at high altitudes should absolutely have ADSB and/or 250 watt transponders.

The awful scenario we are all worried about IS going to happen eventually. Its simply a matter of: A) was the gliding community pro safety or B) was the gliding community defiant and trying to wiggle out of safety and make special exceptions for itself.

When IT happens, the result will be unfortunate if we are still on the B path, as we are now…




On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 12:30:16 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
I just listened to this news on a major news network and pseudo confirmed it he http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1374687

The newsperson actually said, "Why didn't this glider have a transponder, why wasn't this glider talking to someone, how is this possible…" live on the air.

I continue to believe that the sailplane community needs to fully adopt ADSB and transponders whenever outside of 3 miles of the airport (for basic training). Getting an exemption was a big mistake. Sailplane flying cross country, near major airspace, or at high altitudes should absolutely have ADSB and/or 250 watt transponders.

The awful scenario we are all worried about IS going to happen eventually. Its simply a matter of: A) was the gliding community pro safety or B) was the gliding community defiant and trying to wiggle out of safety and make special exceptions for itself.

When IT happens, the result will be unfortunate if we are still on the B path, as we are now…




On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 12:30:16 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
I just listened to this news on a major news network and pseudo confirmed it he http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1374687

The newsperson actually said, "Why didn't this glider have a transponder, why wasn't this glider talking to someone, how is this possible…" live on the air.

I continue to believe that the sailplane community needs to fully adopt ADSB and transponders whenever outside of 3 miles of the airport (for basic training). Getting an exemption was a big mistake. Sailplane flying cross country, near major airspace, or at high altitudes should absolutely have ADSB and/or 250 watt transponders.

The awful scenario we are all worried about IS going to happen eventually. Its simply a matter of: A) was the gliding community pro safety or B) was the gliding community defiant and trying to wiggle out of safety and make special exceptions for itself.

When IT happens, the result will be unfortunate if we are still on the B path, as we are now…


Did anyone happen to notice that this pilot was registered in NL, according to OLC. Not an excuse or reason, I can see some "foreigner" visiting and 'drifts' into or near Class B airspace outside of ORD. Not being local may not have realized his error. He may still not have realized it as of today, unless the FAA has been knocking at his door or the owners door.

I had an AA MD-88 about run me over about 10 to 15 miles from DAY at 4000-4500 feet agl. What happened to the inverted wedding cake parameters?


Do you have a transponder? Any idea if a TCAS RA was triggered from that incident?

--

In this case the pilot is experienced in the USA, and flying a US registered glider. OLC registration stuff will not have anything to do with this, and just wanted to try to clarify that issue now. (And I have no idea if the glider even actually has a transponder or not, I don't want to leap to any assumptions about what actually happened, we will know all over time.) The best thing right now is everybody is OK.

And to avoid any other confusion, this has nothing to do with drifting into or near Class B airspace, this incident occurred about 54 nm from O'Hare airport. 24 nm from the edge of the Mode C veil, and a bit under 20 nm for so from the edge of Class B. The overall glider flight was away from that Class B airspace not towards it. The reason for pointing out this again, is so we recognize how much traffic including fast jets and airliners are operating in Class E airspace, as you clearly are with your wedding cake concern..

If nothing else I hope this incident encourage folks to be aware of what is happening where they fly. Do things like look up locations of navaids, and airways and SID and STAR procedures, maybe have that discussion with ATC staff to get questions answered and open up a dialogue and address any concerns. And use all that to make a decision wether transponder carriage is justified or not.


  #35  
Old September 28th 17, 02:29 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24
Default Glider near miss with Airliner (emergency climb) near Chicago yesterday?

On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 10:30:16 AM UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
I just listened to this news on a major news network and pseudo confirmed it he http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1374687

The newsperson actually said, "Why didn't this glider have a transponder, why wasn't this glider talking to someone, how is this possible…" live on the air.

I continue to believe that the sailplane community needs to fully adopt ADSB and transponders whenever outside of 3 miles of the airport (for basic training). Getting an exemption was a big mistake. Sailplane flying cross country, near major airspace, or at high altitudes should absolutely have ADSB and/or 250 watt transponders.

The awful scenario we are all worried about IS going to happen eventually.. Its simply a matter of: A) was the gliding community pro safety or B) was the gliding community defiant and trying to wiggle out of safety and make special exceptions for itself.

When IT happens, the result will be unfortunate if we are still on the B path, as we are now…


I will adopt ADS-B into my glider when it becomes economical to do so. I cannot justify spending 3-4 thousand dollars on my $12,000 Libelle. Until then I will use the see and avoid method and continue to monitor different frequencies when flying through that particular airspace. Just my thoughts.
  #36  
Old September 28th 17, 02:43 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,131
Default Glider near miss with Airliner (emergency climb) near Chicago yesterday?

On Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 6:20:45 PM UTC-7, wrote:
The least costly way I know of alerting others is purchasing a transponder, about the same price as a radio.


It looks to me like this gold plated system's cost is about 4x the cost of a radio, and that makes me grumpy. (Or perhaps it could be ARG (Age Related Grumpy, or both.) ;-)

I'm also grumpy because this is about 10% the cost of the glider. If the airlines, with more political clout, had to pay 10% for ADSB, ADSB would be much different.

But my grumps aside, this thread is actually useful because it made me think that except for battery issues, my reasons for grumpy are no more compelling than the rest of the GA community. These days, the battery issues are not so bad. For a glider with lithium, a 4 hour flight is a no brainer. I can see 6 or 8 without much trouble. 12 may be a head scratcher, but hey, I'm an engineer and if I get to where I need it, I bet I can figure out a way.

In other words, I'm to the state where I think there should not be a glider exemption for gliders flying where airlines are likely to be. I think this even though it will cost me a small fortune to buy a system which is way more complicated that is necessary for the task at hand.

I say this because I don't see any other reliable way to provide separation between my cross country butt and an airline. An interesting question is are there other reasonable, reliable separation rules which might work for non-cross country flights?

Perhaps if within a published distance (5nm?) of a glider symbol on the chart and below cloudbase, other traffic won't depend on electronic means for traffic separation. Such a compromise is bad because it raises the bar for cross country, but at least it might provide a safe glider exemption for how many gliders are actually used. (Some GA might benefit from the same separation plan?)


Trig TT22 is around $2k plus installation.

I'm thinking most radios are around $1,300 to $1,500 plus installation. A good comparison point BTW since radios are an important safety option.

So I don't agree with 4X for a transponder, maybe closer to 1.5X-2X all up, being aware as well that individual installation costs can always vary signifcantly.

If we have to install 2020 Compliant ADS-B Out then sure, that might be in the 4X range. The silliness there is so much of the safety benefit, certainly vs airliners and fast jets, is obtained with just a transponder. I would hope voluntary use of transponders would help to prevent potential incidents and accidents that are likely to remove both the transponder and ADS-B out exemptions.

If it was not for the possibility of ADS-B Out becoming required in gliders I'd be suggesting pilots who fly in/near busy traffic areas and who want to use a transponder look to pick up cheaper used Mode C units. That may still make sense if you find one cheap, but you won't have a ADS-B Out upgrade path if gliders lose their ADS-B Out exemption.

  #37  
Old September 28th 17, 02:49 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default Glider near miss with Airliner (emergency climb) near Chicago yesterday?

Exactly and the only practical approach to take. What inside s transponder makes it so expensive? Most of the time in gliding it's that the market is so small, free market principals have no effect.

Dennis
DC
  #38  
Old September 28th 17, 02:54 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,131
Default Glider near miss with Airliner (emergency climb) near Chicago yesterday?

On Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 6:29:12 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 10:30:16 AM UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
I just listened to this news on a major news network and pseudo confirmed it he http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1374687

The newsperson actually said, "Why didn't this glider have a transponder, why wasn't this glider talking to someone, how is this possible…" live on the air.

I continue to believe that the sailplane community needs to fully adopt ADSB and transponders whenever outside of 3 miles of the airport (for basic training). Getting an exemption was a big mistake. Sailplane flying cross country, near major airspace, or at high altitudes should absolutely have ADSB and/or 250 watt transponders.

The awful scenario we are all worried about IS going to happen eventually. Its simply a matter of: A) was the gliding community pro safety or B) was the gliding community defiant and trying to wiggle out of safety and make special exceptions for itself.

When IT happens, the result will be unfortunate if we are still on the B path, as we are now…


I will adopt ADS-B into my glider when it becomes economical to do so. I cannot justify spending 3-4 thousand dollars on my $12,000 Libelle. Until then I will use the see and avoid method and continue to monitor different frequencies when flying through that particular airspace. Just my thoughts.


I'm not sure why you are discussing ADS-B Out and $3k-$4k costs?

Price of a state of the art transponder is ~$2k or so (plus installation, but the altitude encoder is included) for a Trig TT22.

Of course $2k or so is still a significant cost, but lets keep it real and not pile on ADS-B costs when discussing what are really transponder issues.

In an airliner (or many fast jets) vs glider scenario TCAS provides a wonderful traffic awareness and collision avoidance tool to that other aircraft, and only relies in the "threat" aircraft having a transponder (Mode C or S) . ATC also can see and will continue to see gliders equipped with transponders on SSR in critical busy airspaces, especially that Class E airspace hiding airliners and fast jets.

  #39  
Old September 28th 17, 03:46 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 284
Default Glider near miss with Airliner (emergency climb) near Chicago yesterday?

100 years of American soaring how many high speed airplane/glider midairs have there been? There was the bizjet/ASG29 over Minden, any others? Convince the gov't there is a need for transponders in gliders so airliners can avoid us(gliders have the right of way) and I'll tell them how the transponders will be powered by 12 dollar batteries soldered in by amateurs (in a rush before the first tow, ah screw it, no time to solder friends are launching, we'll just twist wires together and tape) lolz.
If the justification is separation with airliners then you need equipment with the same reliability and redundancy of airliners. If you don't have equal equipment it isn't about safety, it is about feelings. And that is gay..
  #40  
Old September 28th 17, 03:49 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
son_of_flubber
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,346
Default Glider near miss with Airliner (emergency climb) near Chicago yesterday?

On Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 9:29:12 PM UTC-4, wrote:

I cannot justify spending 3-4 thousand dollars on my $12,000 Libelle.


I have Trig TT21 in a nice 18 year old medium performance glider. Here's how I justify the cost.

The utility/value of a $2000 transponder is the same whether it is installed in a glider worth $10,000 or $100,000. Amortized over 10 years, it costs me ~$200 a year, a small fraction of what I spend on flying each year. Cost of a mid-air collision is priceless.

If the eventual buyer of my used glider does not want to pay the depreciated value of my transponder, I could pull it out, sell it used, put it in my new ship or put it in a club glider. Or maybe I'll just kiss it goodbye and feel good that the new owner is flying with a transponder.
 




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
Stinson Airliner pics 1 [04/11] - Chicago Municipal Airport - American Airlines - Stinson Model A Tri-Motor.jpg (1/1) Miloch Aviation Photos 0 August 14th 17 02:55 PM
Need to move a glider from Chicago to Los Angeles Maciek Arkuszewski Soaring 14 May 18th 16 11:59 PM
Aug 6th B738 and Glider Near Miss. Frankfurt Karen Soaring 70 October 23rd 10 05:27 AM
Glider-Airliner Near Miss jcarlyle Soaring 0 June 12th 07 04:52 PM
Report on "Old" Glider/airliner midair? Jim Kellett Soaring 5 October 13th 03 02:20 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.