Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
#1844252
Cub wrote:Maybe it shouldn’t be a reshaped ATZ but perhaps a similar shaped ADS-B mandatory TMZ? ;-)


How many more TMZ's would you suggest. To go alongside the current shambles we currently have.
Would there be consultation, other than the lip service that we currently have?

An earlier contributor mentioned that PAW introduced yet another system, it did when there was NO other intelligently priced option available in the UK, when did SE appear in the UK?
I remember clearly a man from the CAA holding up his mobile phone ,(NOT smart phone), at a pilot's briefing telling the audience that the expected MLAT device would be about the size of the phone and at a reasonable price. Nothing happened because the tech did not exist nor the funding to go with it.
This is what happens on may occasions when it is left to market forces, don't mix too well with government policies.

PS
We did end up with a device about the size of his phone, but not the expected one.
flybymike liked this
#1844265
Are there any stats out there for:

Year..........number of actual GA mid air collisions .........GA flights that took place that year

1985
2000
2019

As much as I would rather have EC than not, I suspect the amount of tedious conversation on here and in the aviation press is very much out of proportion to the actual reduction in mid air collisions.
A4 Pacific, flybymike liked this
#1844269
@map5623

when did SE appear in the UK?


I think I bought my SkyEcho 1 in 2017, if I recall correctly? There had been an ATT-20B available in 2016, which also complied to CAP1391.

I remember clearly a man from the CAA holding up his mobile phone ,(NOT smart phone), at a pilot's briefing telling the audience that the expected MLAT device would be about the size of the phone and at a reasonable price. Nothing happened because the tech did not exist nor the funding to go with it.


That was an LPAT device - Low Power ADS-B Transceiver and f.u.n.k.e. did make one in 2016 but it worked out to be very expensive if I recall correctly - the best part of £1,000.

I think that Pilot Aware was 2015, with their ‘Classic’, and the ‘Rosetta’ came in 2018? I seem to remember that they were 6-12 months ahead of SkyEcho1 and SkyEcho2, as I was trying to decide whether to go for a LPAT, FLARM or PAW at the same time.

So, hopefully that helps fill in a few blanks.
#1844279
SteveX wrote:Are there any stats out there for:

Year..........number of actual GA mid air collisions .........GA flights that took place that year

1985
2000
2019

As much as I would rather have EC than not, I suspect the amount of tedious conversation on here and in the aviation press is very much out of proportion to the actual reduction in mid air collisions.


I don’t know the exact number, but here are some from each year:

1985: Dassault Falcon 50 and Piper Cherokee collided in New Jersey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_Teterboro_collision

2000: Zlin and Cessna 172P collided over Illinois: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Zion ... _collision

2019: Fuji FA-200-180 Aero Subaru, G-HAMI and Cessna 172R Skyhawk, G-BXGV Mid-air collision, Near Henley-on-Thames, Oxfordshire, 23 June 2019. https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib-in ... awk-g-bxgv

If you just want UK stats then you should probably trawl the UK AAIB database here: https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports

Some years are better than others, but on average there are 1-2 MACs in a normal year across the GA spectrum (light aircraft, gliders, microlights, paragliders, paramotors, etc...etc...).

[edit] - new update for you

1985 in the UK: 5 Apr 85, 2x gliders at Portmoak Glider Site. 26 May 85, 2x microlights at Woburn. 7 Sep 85, 2x gliders near Rattlesden. 10 Nov 85, a PA28 and C152 near Cambridge. This was the last one: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... _01-86.pdf

2000 in the UK: 19 Apr 00, C150 and Yak at North Weald. 31 May 00, 2x PA28 at Oxford. 30 Jun 00, PA18 and glider at Lasham Glider Site. 10 Sep 00, 2x gliders at Sackville Farm Glider Site. 8 Oct 00, Piper L-21 and glider at Bembridge. This was the worst one: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... 500463.pdf

2019 in the UK: I only know of the Fuji and C172R already noted. I’m sure there will be more.
Last edited by gaznav on Sat May 01, 2021 9:56 pm, edited 3 times in total.
#1844289
Hollman wrote:MAC reduction between manned aircraft might not be the real driver. Maybe it’s about making us visible to drone traffic and freeing them from the 400’ limit, amongst others. There might not be much of it about right now, but common EC would be an enabler for the touted expansion.


As I've posted on previous discussions, drones seem to be the driving force. Mid airs are very rare for piloted aircraft.

For drones, I think that air to air reception is least important. The processing power to manage drone flight paths and integrate them with other traffic requires kit that's too heavy to carry on board.

So my prediction is that drones will primarily rely on air to ground communication - the research funding is going on that, not on autonomous on board systems. Common EC wouldnt matter for that if all EC transmissions can be received and processed, and Atom shows that can work.

For the EC which piloted aircraft carry, the main requirement will be reception by these drone control networks. I'd expect the networks to transmit something back, but the current target is for drones to avoid, rather than piloted aircraft.

I suspect the long term answer will look like Atom, but with lots of (expensive) certification.
Rob P, exfirepro liked this
#1844293
@profchrisreed Now that's interesting - I'm surprised that drones might be dependent on an air-ground network for avoidance. I bow to your technical background, but I would have thought that the processing power of ARM chips for instance was more than enough to resolve air-air avoidance challenges. If they are dependent on an air-ground network, then they will obviously need a fail-safe mode.
#1844299
@profchrisreed

Mid airs are very rare for piloted aircraft.


In the 43 years since 1975 in the UK:

202 aircraft were involved in 101 collisions, 43 of which involved 83 fatalities.

Of the 202 aircraft involved:
• 82 were powered aircraft
• 108 were gliders
• 7 were glider tugs
• 5 were military aircraft.

The military aircraft were 2 Tornados, 1 Jaguar, 1 Tucano and 1 A-10.

Of the 82 powered aircraft were involved in 47 collisions resulting in 53 fatalities to the occupants. So that is, on average, more than 1 collision per year and more than 1 person killed a year.

I’m not sure I would call that ‘very rare’? It’s also not so lucky if it happens to be you when, in the main, a technology solution would reduce these significantly. Indeed, one only needs to look at the significant reduction of MACs amongst the gliding community facilitated by FLARM use, to see the benefits.

Source of info: https://www.airspace4all.org/wp-content ... 8-V5-3.pdf
#1844324
Our shareoplane has Mode S, SE2 and Pilotaware.
The SE2 is optimally sighted front and centre. We accept the risk of aircraft hiding behind it.
The Pilotaware is connected to the Audio Panel and uses internal dipoles mounted unobtrusively on the windscreen and remote GPS on the coaming, powered from the aircraft.
We use the PAw for signal reception, 'cos, most signals, best coverage, best setup, we can evaluate it thru' Vector
We use SE2 for Output only, better than nothing but at best only 1/2 the range and 1/2 the coverage of PAw.
We use SD voice to the audio panel, from the PAw input
Ideally we would upgrade Mode S to ADSB and chuck the SE2

I like the SE2, it is better than nothing and a small simple box, fit and forget, also, not very good, but, you did SOMETHING, so a win right?

It's a shame that there isn't a proper discussion about what EC informs GA the best. Because if there was people would buy PAw, spend less, have a more effective system and have ACTIVELY invested in understanding it and be able to check how effective it was.

Instead there's a default to buy SE2, UK only and short range, ADSB lite, not understand if it works and assume that it's 'job done' 'cos you did something.

Did I mention our shareoplane has Mode S, SE2 and Pilotaware? We compare them directly, and after assessing, use the PAw for Skydemon IN
If you're interested in EC, fit PAw. For an easy life and 'I did something, everyone should now avoid me' SE2 might help you sleep better.
exfirepro liked this
#1844325
gaznav wrote:@profchrisreed
Mid airs are very rare for piloted aircraft.
In the 43 years since 1975..........
So it's all pointless fit nothing? Great sales pitch.
Fly with a PAw and marvel at how much you never saw. 'Big sky' works, until it doesn't.
Fit PAw, don't die of ignorance, die 'cos you screwed up, not because he only had Mode S as legally required.
#1844335
There are some massive issues with trying to apply stats to all this:

Just looking at fatal outcomes is a very, very dodgy way of assessing risk

The risk varies massively by operating location and sortie profile.

The risk to individuals varies massively by their flying rate, location and flying role.

Event outcome severity is usually very high, and to multiple parties

Barriers for consequences are very limited - ie survivability measures in aircraft design / operation for this event are virtually nil

The reality is that if you go flying OCAS on an ok weather day in the South of the U.K. there is a definite risk of this event occurring to you during that flight.
#1844375
I'm now waiting for that first mid air where one aircraft (eg pre-WW2 or an all wood no electrics of some sort) has no EC transmitting and the other has everything but the pilot spends his/her life obsessing with all the things they are seeing and spends their life looking at a screen and listening to music through their Bose. All the gear no idea.

Not that it would ever be provable that the latter never spent adequate time looking out.

This whole subject has become some sort of obsession it seems for many, does anyone actually enjoy flying for what it is supposed to be anymore! I'm just picturing.....spend flight looking at screen then trying to spot 'that aircraft' (without instantly dismissing it as a non-threat cos it is 5nm away.......talking on radio to a station that is providing nothing of value whatsoever (others call it a basic service)....stressing about the route....landing and paying £300 to the club.......getting home and honestly believing that was an enjoyable hobby day.
A4 Pacific, flybymike, TopCat and 1 others liked this
#1844378
There are so many mixed messages and confusion in these EC posts, in this one I’m not sure what the OP was trying to convey?

If it is how great the ATOM station is then praise should go to the developers of VRS (Virtual Radar) as this is used to display the traffic, the developers of Dump1090 as this is used to decode ADS-B, Phil at 360Radar as this is used for MLAT, OGN team as this is used for FLARM reception and Pilotaware for marketing all these others work as their ATOM station.

If it is to highlight that they believe the SE2’s ADS-B output is not good, well a PAW ADS-B output is zero. We all know only PAW will see PAW so there is no hope of the Phenom ever seeing a PAW unit.

Really EC should be about making yourself visible so everyone can see you.
Dave W, A4 Pacific, Shoestring Flyer and 4 others liked this
#1844389
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:
HansGruber wrote:Our shareoplane has Mode S, SE2 and Pilotaware.

Why did you bother fitting a SE2?
PAW is wonderful, innit?

Best to leave out the sarcasm, when you are so grossly inaccurate on another thread:
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:A1. - when out of range of a functioning ground station, PAW only sees PAW, nowt more.


Hans Gruber will no doubt have his own reply. In our case, we fitted PAW in the early days as giving us the most awareness of other traffic - which it still does. Recognising that it doesn't give ADS-B Out, and that our Funke TRT800 refuses to, with the rebate we have now fitted SE2, using Out only, as PAW already provides direct (not through a ground station) In, plus so much else.
PaulSS, flybymike, exfirepro liked this
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9