Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
By A4 Pacific
#1862662
Genghis the Engineer wrote:
Maybe I’m too cautious, but I don’t rely entirely on EC.


Nor should anybody in VMC, but given that EC now exists, I see no excuses for not making full use of it.

G


Then why not advocate it’s mandation in a common, effective and fully approved format? Even you said:
but I'd put good money on 2/3rds of the aeroplanes I've seen today not having anything.


How is that ‘acceptable’ to you?

Isn’t it currently just a confused mish mash? A Heath Robinson lash up giving a false sense of security?

I agree with MichaelP. A little more airmanship is at least as effective as the current EC dog’s breakfast.
Last edited by A4 Pacific on Tue Aug 03, 2021 10:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Miscellaneous
#1862663
A4 Pacific wrote:Then why not advocate it’s mandation in a common, effective and fully approved format?

Easy to say, more difficult and costly to do. An action I think would reduce the risk of MACs, sure. But by reducing the number flying, rather than reducing the number through detection of other aircraft.
User avatar
By Genghis the Engineer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1862708
A4 Pacific wrote:
Genghis the Engineer wrote:
Maybe I’m too cautious, but I don’t rely entirely on EC.


Nor should anybody in VMC, but given that EC now exists, I see no excuses for not making full use of it.

G


Then why not advocate it’s mandation in a common, effective and fully approved format? Even you said:
but I'd put good money on 2/3rds of the aeroplanes I've seen today not having anything.


How is that ‘acceptable’ to you?

Isn’t it currently just a confused mish mash? A Heath Robinson lash up giving a false sense of security?

I agree with MichaelP. A little more airmanship is at least as effective as the current EC dog’s breakfast.


I do argue for EC being mandated in the aircraft I personally fly. It is a confused mish-mash, and that isn't helpful. We could argue why this is the case, but I think it's undeniable that:-

- Good lookout in VMC is essential, whatever kit you have in the cockpit
- Having EC in the cockpit and working, is better than not having anything.

G
User avatar
By Rob P
#1862714
Agreed.

EC Dog's Breakfast + good airmanship

is always going to beat good airmanship

As long as the warnings are audio and don't rely on a screen.

Rob P
By malcolmfrost
#1862715
Human Factor wrote:
ADIRU777 wrote:There was, however, one non fatal mid-air during my time...


Was this the one which resulted in eyebrow windows on the ex-Hamble Cherokees?

There were actually 2, the first resulted in the eyebrow windows. They were both in the circuit rather than over the Island.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5422ed2b40f0b6134200014b/10-1972_G-AVBI_and_G-AVBD.pdf
By UncleT
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1862770
I recall that on the occasion of the accident covered by that report I was at school in Bursledon, the neighbouring village to Hamble. As the aircraft had come down at the southern edge of our village, we kids were kept in school until our parents arrived to escort us home. None of us were permitted to walk home unaccompanied by an adult in case we tried to go to the crash scene to see what was going on.
User avatar
By akg1486
#1862774
Despite what everyone is being taught about lookout in flight school, I feel pretty confident that the advent of the tablets--while increasing safety in many ways--has caused many GA pilot to look more at the magenta line than out the windows. I catch myself doing that a bit more often than I'd like, but being aware of it is at least the first step.
A4 Pacific liked this
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1862802
Feature crawling is the real danger and it matters not whether that involves looking out of the window at the ground instead of the air or staring at a magenta line.

I find that knowing the autopilot will maintain heading means I only need to check inside every few minutes and then it’s more about engine gauges than nav because a second will tell me whether heading and track are OK thanks to Skydemon and GTN.
User avatar
By Miscellaneous
#1862807
akg1486 wrote:I catch myself doing that a bit more often than I'd like, but being aware of it is at least the first step.

Is the real question not whether you are looking in more than you would like to, but whether you are looking in for shorter periods and less frequently than if you were using a chart?
Rob P, flyingeeza liked this
By Remosflyer
#1862813
UncleT wrote:I recall that on the occasion of the accident covered by that report I was at school in Bursledon, the neighbouring village to Hamble. As the aircraft had come down at the southern edge of our village, we kids were kept in school until our parents arrived to escort us home. None of us were permitted to walk home unaccompanied by an adult in case we tried to go to the crash scene to see what was going on.


I was downwind in the circuit. The only time in 53 years of flying that I’ve heard a ‘Mayday’ - from a UAS Chipmunk pilot who saw it happen. At the time there could be up to 4 parallel movements on the runway, one takeoff and three landings, and up to a dozen in the circuit. The two who died were in my class, the accident and the two empty desks next morning were my first experience of violent death…
User avatar
By akg1486
#1862817
Miscellaneous wrote:
akg1486 wrote:I catch myself doing that a bit more often than I'd like, but being aware of it is at least the first step.

Is the real question not whether you are looking in more than you would like to, but whether you are looking in for shorter periods and less frequently than if you were using a chart?

That may well be the case.
User avatar
By Genghis the Engineer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1862930
All pilots are trained to scan, of-course. Whether that's an instrument scan or a lookout scan, or very often a combination of the two. Fixating on anything, rather than maintaining a competent scan, is always poor.

Of course, that fixation is extremely common, any pilot isn't aware of having been guilty of that at some point, is probably lacking in self awareness. The advent of cockpit tablet devices just added something new to fixate upon.

G
By A4 Pacific
#1863171
Harry.Brown wrote:There is big difference between LOOKOUT and the LOOKOUT WORK CYCLE. Lookout ( from the Tiger Moth era) is a left / right glance that might be useful for crossing the road. The Lookout Work Cycle is a disciplined regular planned lookout procedure, largely unknown to most pilots, to assist aerial collision avoidance.


Clearly not required when one can simply pay for an EC device and you can then forget about any possibility of MAC!
User avatar
By skydriller
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1869313
akg1486 wrote:Despite what everyone is being taught about lookout in flight school, I feel pretty confident that the advent of the tablets--while increasing safety in many ways--has caused many GA pilot to look more at the magenta line than out the windows. I catch myself doing that a bit more often than I'd like, but being aware of it is at least the first step.


But do you spend more time overall looking down at the Tablet? Im willing to bet you dont. Having a tablet running your nav app of choice means knowing exactly where you are when you look at it, and that takes litterally a second or two to look and process. Compare to the time spent checking heading, timing, map to ground and vice-versa etc.

So yeah, I reckon you will look at your tablet more times than you looked at the paper map - cause its so easy to do to check where you are, but you will spend probably a tenth or less of your time on navigation using a moving map app of choice on a tablet.

Regards, SD..
johnm, kanga, Nick liked this
User avatar
By akg1486
#1869323
skydriller wrote:But do you spend more time overall looking down at the Tablet? Im willing to bet you dont.

No, I don't. But I've seen pilots do, in particular when temporarily unsure of their position.