Mike Schumann wrote:
I don't know what the right answer is. Here in the US, there is a lot more
power traffic than in Europe. Unless you are flying in contests or in high
glider traffic areas, I suspect that the biggest risk is not other gliders,
but power traffic.

It's very frustrating that the FAA doesn't accelerate the deployment of ADSB
here in the US. Then everyone could focus on developing cost effective
technology that will cover all traffic.

In the mean time, the best investment might be a ballistic recovery chute.

In the Minden collision, the regular parachute worked just fine, and if
he'd had an operating transponder, he'd likely not needed the parachute
at all.

A transponder and a TPAS unit will give you most of what you'd get from
having an ADSB unit in your cockpit, more cheaply than an ADSB unit (or
a ballistic parachute), and you can have it now. Powered traffic is
already flying with transponders, so you don't have to wait for the rest
of the fleet to buy into the idea. ADSB still doesn't protect you from
aircraft that don't have them, and I don't think they will be any
cheaper than a transponder. So, if powered traffic is your concern, I
think there is decent solution.

A ballistic recovery chute has some advantages, of course, but perhaps
not in the typical collision which is usually high enough that a
conscious pilot has time to get out. The problem is they are expensive
to retrofit to most gliders, and then you have an untested system.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

"Transponders in Sailplanes" on the Soaring Safety Foundation website
www.soaringsafety.org/prevention/articles.html

"A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org