Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 9
#1618654
Dave W wrote:
Regarding MAC involving uninvolved parties, I disagree: It takes two to tango. Did I hit him, or did he hit me? Actually, we are both involved.



I disagree with your 'disagree'. It's a bit more complicated than that. F'rinstance, a helicopter being rammed from behind by a faster aircraft. You can hardly say the helicopter had any say in the choice of dance.
gaznav liked this
User avatar
By defcribed
#1618663
I don't think it's as black and white as some of the "why wouldn't you spend the cost of 1-2hrs flying on safety?" brigade make out.

It's not a simple binary choice with very clear implications like refusing to buy a motorcycle helmet. It is not a case of spend and be significantly safer by a quantifiable margin or don't spend and take a massive risk.

I'm not exactly poor (though certainly not rich by aviation standards) and if I wanted to then I could spend the £200 or so that PAW costs right now, without having to think about how it affected my finances.

But there are various reasons that I don't:

- I'm just not keen on another 'take it with me' device in the cockpit, especially one that involves cables, battery packs and antennae. This reason is partly also why I've not yet used a GoPro or similar in the aeroplane. I'm about the flying, not about festooning the aircraft with extra electronic boxes and fiddling with them.

- The traffic that really gets my pulse racing "in your 11 o'clock, range of one mile, crossing left to right, no height information" already isn't carrying/using a transponder, so how likely are they to adopt any new system that isn't mandated and make themselves visible? And yes, I know that this traffic is almost invariably at very low level and therefore no threat at all, but it still gets my pulse racing.

- I'm not keen on the non-directional warnings. If I get a piece of kit telling me I have something, somewhere, within 2 miles (or whatever range) then how long should I spend looking for it? And to the exclusion of what else? Should I search the sky until I find it, no matter what, changing direction and height as required? At least when a controller calls traffic and I don't spot it, I can ask for an update and the controller usually helpfully informs me that it has past behind or turned away and I can forget about it, or tells me that we continue to converge and I can then change heading/height as a precaution. At what point with one of these range warnings do you just shrug your shoulders, accept that you're not going to spot it and hope you don't hit it?

- Generally, I'm just not an early adopter with technology. I like to watch and wait and see what happens, see what emerges as the most logical solution to the problem - if indeed one is required. Despite trying to be as cautious as I can in this respect, my life to date is strewn with impulsive purchases that I wish I'd not made, or at least wish I'd not rushed into.

For the moment, my traffic avoidance strategy involves a good lookout, taking a traffic service whenever I can get one, avoiding known areas of intense glider activity, and avoiding most powered light GA by (where possible) flying above 4,000ft rather than in the 1,500-3,000ft range so beloved of the PPL training establishment.
Last edited by defcribed on Mon Jun 18, 2018 2:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By defcribed
#1618669
Maxthelion wrote:Yep, there's a still a few in the 'What's the point in EC unless everybody is using it' brigade.

My mother was the same with CD players.


Urgh. Because those who would/are using it are no problem for me anyway. What usually happens is that the radar unit I'm working calls them as traffic a couple of thousand feet below me (based on their mode C or S), and I acknowledge and then forget about them shortly afterwards.

The traffic that gets me worried is negative transponder and almost invariably not working the radar unit. PAW isn't going to help me here.

But my primary reason at the moment is still the first one I listed. I don't want to fill the cockpit with extra boxes that I have to carry around with me, set up and fiddle with.

Additionally, does anyone still use a CD player?
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1618672
Dave

I think the interest in EC/MAC avoidance can be understood from the Notion that itmes 1-7 are felt to be in 'our control'as pilots and we can make a decision/Display behaviour which 'ensures' we don't become victims of those.

A MAC is a different issue altogether over which we know/think we have less Control.
gaznav liked this
User avatar
By Dave W
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1618674
Yes, I'm sure. But that's a fallacy, isn't it?

The psychology behind the differing opinions is - as psychology always is - going to be interesting; the point of my posts is to try and suggest that the issue of mandation needs viewing in the round, not MAC in isolation.
By Maxthelion
#1618681
Given that delivery by drone is becoming more and more realistic, and that ADSB-out will become necessary in order for these things to avoid us, perhaps the government could charge the likes of Amazon for the privilege of a drone delivery licence at a rate sufficient to pay for us all to have ADSB kit? Dave could still decline to hook it up to his GPS or his intercom, but the rest of us could be electronically visible to both the drones and each other, at no financial cost to ourselves.
cockney steve liked this
User avatar
By nallen
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1618683
Maxthelion wrote:Given that delivery by drone is becoming more and more realistic, and that ADSB-out will become necessary in order for these things to avoid us …


Already started in Switzerland for medical supplies, using … FLARM: https://flarm.com/commercial-bvlos-drone-service-uses-flarm-for-traffic-avoidance/
User avatar
By Dave W
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1618684
Maxthelion wrote: Dave could still decline to hook it up to his GPS or his intercom....


You see, the way these discussions have to work - if they are going to be any value at all - is that you read what I write rather than jump to assumptions based on your own beliefs.

Otherwise they are not discussions, they are a set of posts fired off on permanent transmit.

Dave W wrote:I have a PilotAware, as well as transponder (and soon ADS-B OUT) myself, and I think that my PAW/SD combination is an excellent thing to have ...
gaznav liked this
User avatar
By Rod1
#1618685
Balliol wrote:
Rod1 wrote: In a high traffic environment, traffic detection actually makes matters worse.

Rod1


Don't understand this Rod - what do you mean?


Traffic detection is great in low traffic environments. You are trundling along into sun on a nice day wondering what happened to Penny Benjamin. Your traffic detection system spots an aircraft at your height (+/- 200 ft mode c error) heading in the opposite direction 10 miles away. You turn away or change height and you think the system saved you. It may have, but the stats and the big sky say this sort of collision is very very unlikely.

You are flying into an international fly in, there are 40 aircraft near you, your 5 mile proximity alarm is going off all the time, your screen is a mass of aircraft, you are canceling alarms, trying to make sense of the screen and occasionally looking out of the window. This is when most MAC happen. What you want is a voice in your ear saying, collision imminent, brake right, climb. This is collision avoidance.

Rod1
Mode S, ADS-B out and PAW:)
T67M, nallen, defcribed and 2 others liked this
User avatar
By T67M
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1618687
Dave W wrote:I really don't get this enthusiasm from some quarters with demanding that Electronic Conspicuity is mandated in order to protect against the perceived risk of Mid-Air Collision.

• MAC is Number 8 in the top ten list of fatal accident causes for GA*. There are higher priorities.

[snip]

*The Top 10 Leading Causes of Fatal General Aviation Accidents 2001-2016:
1. Loss of Control Inflight
2. Controlled Flight Into Terrain
3. System Component Failure – Powerplant
4. Fuel Related
5. Unknown or Undetermined
6. System Component Failure – Non-Powerplant
7. Unintended Flight In IMC
8. Midair Collisions
9. Low-Altitude Operations
10. Other


I personally believe strongly in the value of cheap EC as a help in addressing risk 8 (only) of that list. Why did it have to be cheap? Because to help address items 1, 2 and 7 I would have had to pay out for an autopilot, and to help address 3 and 4 I would need an all-pot, all-parameter logging engine monitor. Each of those cost me around £5-10k, and the 8.33kHz radio upgrades cost me around £10k too. To address risk 6 I would need to add a ballistic parachute system, and the cost of that is even more eye watering!

After all that expense, £200 would be all I had left for something at only #8 in the risks list - but for £200 I do get a lot of benefit other than avoiding MAC, such as alerts whilst doing aeros (when lookout is inevitably degraded) that someone might be getting too close for comfort. As has been said before, at that price point, the bang for buck of EC is incredibly high.
User avatar
By defcribed
#1618688
Bring it on, I'm all for some free kit that I can have a go with! My own money, when I'm not sure how useful it'll be to me, is another matter.

At the risk of souding like a luddite, I really don't think delivery by drone on any significant scale is realistic in the foreseeable future. For starters, most customers don't have suitable landing sites. Then consider the limitations on the size, weight and number of items that can be carried. Not every tech trial leads to mass adoption - sometimes it just shows the limits of an idea. I'm still waiting for my flying car and meal in a pill.

The only thing that really excites me about drones is the prospect of one overflying the local clay shooting ground when I'm alone at a distant stand and no-one's watching me ;-)
By Maxthelion
#1618692
Davew, please accept my sincere apologies, I got your posts mixed up with Defcribed's. He's the fellow that mentioned he wasn't keen on EC devices because of the cockpit clutter.

In my defense, I have a bad cold and am not fit to fly, or it seems use a keyboard.
Dave W liked this
User avatar
By defcribed
#1618697
Maxthelion wrote:Davew, please accept my sincere apologies, I got your posts mixed up with Defcribed's. He's the fellow that mentioned he wasn't keen on EC devices because of the cockpit clutter.

In my defense, I have a bad cold and am not fit to fly, or it seems use a keyboard.


Well I'll make the same point as DaveW, that you have to actually read responses and not just jump to the point you think I was trying to make. Otherwise it isn't a discussion, you're just transmitting at me.

I didn't say I wasn't keen on EC devices. I wouldn't be without our Mode-S transponder, and if our group wanted to go down some sort of ADSB/TCAS route then I'd be all for it.

I was making the point that there's no one single reason that prevents me purchasing a PAW at the moment. There are a few smaller reasons which, combined, lead to me saying "not right now."
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 9