[Tim Dawson]

ADSB because it’s ludicrous that in 2018 all airframes are not currently broadcasting their position so others can avoid them.

That would still leave the market open to many different receivers which could tailor their collision avoidance functionality for their target markets, e.g. gliders in thermals or whatever.

I’d also expect any mandate to come with subsidised equipment.

[Sooty25]

That’s where I rely on the powers that be to decide what is best (ie CAA) - it is not for me to decide - only implement the requirement!

well, if it is down to the CAA and they did mandate, it will all need to be type approved, and if that includes a ADS-B and a TAS display, you've just grounded over half the GA fleet in one sentence. Cost, space, power requirements, waiting list for installers.

No point just transmitting ADSB if nobody can see it and the CAA will never approve an uncertified APP that running on a £60 chinese tablet!

Actually, you then wouldn't need it as there'll be no bugger up there!

[Flyin'Dutch']

If we don't want to be regulated from above then maybe we need to behave as grown-ups and sort it out ourselves, and equip ourselves adequately.

A few more bun -fights on here to work out the standard and all will be fine.



.....or we can use what everyone else is using plus or minus what add-ons are deemed useful

[jasoncuk]

If I can make a small suggestion. Receive whatever the heck you like but broadcast ADS-B plus whatever random protocol you like so you can be seen with modern systems. ADS-B is the future. Flarm, PAW etc is fine but not at the expense of the global standard.

[PaulB]

If I can make a small suggestion. Receive whatever the heck you like but broadcast ADS-B plus whatever random protocol you like so you can be seen with modern systems. ADS-B is the future. Flarm, PAW etc is fine but not at the expense of the global standard.

Wasn’t the likes of PAW developed because it’s hard or expensive or both for some aircraft to transmit ADS-B out ?

[Flyin'Dutch']

Wasn’t the likes of PAW developed because it’s hard or expensive or both for some aircraft to transmit ADS-B out ?

It is not technically hard but slightly* more expensive to transmit ADS-with SIL=1 vs no ADS-B out.

*entirely subjective - it is, about 2 hours flying in a spam can, 1/2 hour helicoptering, 4 hours micro lighting, a couple of decent meals, 1 week depreciation of a Tesla, 4 weeks motoring in a banger, more expensive**

**that is comparing the most oft discussed portable options; for fitted installations it depends on what installation is you have and what you want. Permit aeroplanes and happy with SIL=0 costs as little as a length of wire and some connecting time by oneself. For certified aeroplanes it is more expensive - hence the interest in portable units.

[Sooty25]

It is also technically difficult to install in some aircraft. I've looked at one of ours and to install any of the ADS-B units available, with either require removal of fuselage fabric, or the installer being lowered head first into the cockpit, from the hangar roof!

Oddly, neither appeal!

[malcolmfrost]

Looking at the Skyecho 2 it looks like a very good solution, portable, battery powered ADSB in/out but no FLARM. It is still an expense £400+ that many won’t see a value in, until they have an incident like mine!
Lee has said that he hears of many stories like it, but people wont publicise them because they are scared of adverse comments on forums. Maybe if we had a thread for EC incidents where no comments were allowed people would realise that there is value in being seen!

[mo0g]

There is another market for these devices out there - those of us who rent. I bought PAW because it was literally better than nothing, and I thought the additional cost of a unit was worth it. It is mine, I can take it to whichever club I go to, and into whichever aircraft I fly, it is my personal EC.

If club aircraft had it, or better, I obviously wouldnt need to bother.

In that context comparisons with 'better' EC are rather irrelevant, the option for me was like a single point harness seatbelt in a car, or nothing. If someone on a driving forum said their basic seatbelt harness (possibly) saved their lives, I doubt there would be people criticising that seatbelt and saying they should have a 4 point harness as it is safER.

Also, telling me the EXTRA cost of upgrading my PAW solution to something else is 'only' a couple of hours rental, when I only fly on average 1 hour per month you are actually telling me it is reasonable to upgrade by perfectly working, perfectly suitable PAW at 'only' a cost of 1/6th of my annual flying budget. Even if I flew 112 hours per year, I would rather spend another 2 hours flying than waste it on another personal EC solution.

Statistically I am probably more likely to be killed driving my car in those 2 hours I would have otherwise been flying around with 'only' PAW, than have a midair with 'only' PAW.

I would also suggest that those of us who bought PAW are of the more conscientious and safety conscious pilots in the UK currently, yet the way some speak we are accidents waiting to happen.

[kanga]

...

Those flying without two way communications with anyone are only a slightly greater threat to you than you are to the guy whose two-way communication is with a different unit.

..

.. and this is one of the great aggravator issues in UK, IMHO. In many GA-friendly nations, when between last contact with departure airfield and first with arrival one, it is utterly obvious in each bit of airspace to whom one may, and arguably should if radio equipped, be talking. That service will have been provided by or through the auspices of central government. Everyone in that area not talking to an airfield will be on that frequency. The service provider will let the next service provider on your route when and where to expect you, with all your details, so they do not have to be repeated. Some of us can even remember when this sort of service was commonplace in UK, even though the people on the ground had different employers, eg in '70s.

What now bedevils the UK scene is the ideological hostility to central government having any part in this, and the management of the private providers having an understandable reluctance to expect to provide any more service and therefore any more employee time and numbers than are needed to serve their immediate paying clients. There are, of course, exceptions, for which I was always grateful.

[nbayliff]

assuming no changing headings it would have passed a mile or more behind him, not ' slightly close'

I think you missed the fact that they were on a reciprocal course at the same height heading straight towards each other before Malcolm turned right and descended whereupon he had time to take the screenshot.

Malcolm, can you just stay on track a little longer and get the proper screenshot, so we can all see the imminent risk to life and limb better.
(A joke, I might be booked after you...)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dave W]

Maybe if we had a thread ... where no comments were allowed ...

I like the idea, but I see a flaw in the plan.

[Miscellaneous]

700ft vertical separation and close enough to make the news.

Maybe this incident requires the collective input of the Flyer Forumites to get to the bottom of the errors, or at least to let the authorities know their worries are ill founded with 700ft separation.

Or maybe they'd rather exonerate @malcolmfrost ?

[neilmurg]

ADSB because it’s ludicrous that in 2018 all airframes are not currently broadcasting their position so others can avoid them.

That would be nice, but is quite a leap. AFAIK, in the US they want everyone to use ADS-B/UAT as a replacement technology to Radar/SSR. I presume they're staffing/equipping their ATC to use it. They're only mandating GA to transmit, not receive, so they're not engaged in GA having personal benefit from the technology.
Meanwhile, I fly light aircraft largely outside controlled airspace in the UK. PAw/ADS-B/Skyecho etc give me the option of enhanced situational awareness for little cost, that's a win, if I think it's something I'd benefit from.
I am aware that the risk of mid air collision is statistically unlikely, and not the greatest risk I face, so I'm not fanatical about it. But a cheap win is a cheap win right?

[Paul_Sengupta]

this incident

I was flying over Norfolk once at not much more than 1000ft when a pair of C130s passed underneath me. A long way underneath me. Probably 700ft underneath me.