The lufthansa pilot (confirmed by the carrier) was apparently flying the Robin from Koblenz on approach to Reichelsheim, in both articles below there is talk that they were still flying at 3000 ft (1km) although another report earlier stated the crash occured at 1200 ft (400 m). Reichelsheim tower was in contact with the Robin.
Strange that you make that comment about traffic advisories, I flew into Koblenz yesterday afternoon and on the way there and back I requested, and received, traffic information from Langen Information. In fact, I have rarely ever been denied traffic information in Germany even on busy VFR weekends.
Not my experience, especially in the last few years. Also, sometimes, they won't actually "deny" the traffic information service, but after inital contact is established, you will not hear from them until reporting leaving the frequency. On other occasions, they do advise you that "traffic information is not possible". That is mostly because FIS sectors (that is, the area one FIS controller needs to manage) have been enlarged ever so more in the last years and decades, to the point that on a nice day with a lot of traffic, all they manage to do is complete inital calls with aircraft calling in and handling those "requests" to leave the frequency.
I find it interesting that the police are discounting poor visibility as the reasons for the crash - sunset was 16:20, the accident happened around 16:10 so the sun was extremely low.
Looking at the distance from the crash site to the airfield, this was around 3NM, the airfield has a circuit height of 1200 feet so for the Robin to reach that height from 3000 feet in that distance, assuming an economical cruise speed of 130 knots, they would need to be sinking at 1300feet per minute to reach the circuit height in time so I would be surprised that the accident happened at that height. However assuming impact height of 1500 feet, with a 200ft/min descent, the Robin would have reached the circuit height in time.
What I don't understand is why the Saratoga was so low, unless the Pilot didn't have any operational GPS available or trust his GPS and decided to fly low under the main Charlie Airspace close to Frankfurt to shorten his route to Aschaffenburg or perhaps he was just following the A45, keeping that on his left and following it direct to Aschaffenburg, staying so low to ensure if he strayed too far to the right of the motorway, he would not stray into the Charlie airspace......
@boscomantico: strange, I must be lucky then.... even yesterday I received three traffic advisories...... and with a lot of dutch pilots wanting to head to (eg) Dahlemer Binz (who they then had to inform was shut due to snow), the airwaves were pretty chaotic at times......
I think people are dramatically over-estimating the value of ATC in preventing collisions outside CAS.
Here in the UK, it is often trained that one should speak to everybody with a radio, but so many people fly non-radio, or with a "listening watch", or are speaking to another unit, that the perceived situational awareness thus obtained is almost entirely illusory.
And that's before you throw in "extras" like some pilots not reporting their position accurately (not always unintentionally!).
It's really hard to spot other aircraft. I've often flown under what the UK currently calls a Traffic Service, with 2 or 3 others, and even with 3-4 pairs of eyes about 90% of reported targets are never spotted.
The only positive thing I notice is that virtually all "altitude unknown" targets (i.e. Mode A, or no TXP) that are spotted turn out to be very low; probably below 1500ft.
Nevertheless I am having an Avidyne 605 TCAS system installed right now (RGV at EGBJ). It's got to be the worst value for money ever but it's got to be effective only once...
Tragic accident. I have to say I value the traffic system on the PA-46 a lot. Obviously only works with transponder equipped aircraft but nonetheless I have "seen" aircraft well before getting a traffic advisory.
And following Peter's point, leaving EGBJ (RGV as well) Saturday afternoon with a low sun and lots of aircraft in the circuit, I was glad to have it.
Very sad...
I have a Zaon PCAS MRX. For a few hunderd bucks you buy yourself an extra pair of eyes.
With this kind of accidents I'm always wondering if it would have made any difference...
Lenthamen: How do you rate the MRX? Most people say it's ok for en route but can be annoying when approaching circuits hence they tend to switch them off......
@boscomantico: strange, I must be lucky then.... even yesterday I received three traffic advisories...... and with a lot of dutch pilots wanting to head to (eg) Dahlemer Binz (who they then had to inform was shut due to snow), the airwaves were pretty chaotic at times......
Some worrying pre-flight planning was indeed shown by the Dutch pilots. Why so many never took the trouble to call DB before departure is a mystery. The airfield is reasonably high n The Netherlands itself was blanketed in snow.
Strangely though on Saturday the usual excellent Langen Info seemed to be giving less traffic avisories than usual
Lenthamen: How do you rate the MRX? Most people say it's ok for en route but can be annoying when approaching circuits hence they tend to switch them off......
It works quite well. I have the alert levels quite high, otherwise it will give a lot of alerts for traffic you'll never see. I use < 2nm range and < 500ft alt diff for an alert.
I do agree that the MRX can be annoying in the vicinity of an airfield. There is usually a lot of traffic flying around, being picked up by the MRX. It also gives alerts for aircraft on the ground. I usually switch it off when entering the circuit.
The MRX only displays range and alt, no direction of conflicting aircraft. I don't find that an issue; the range indication will tell you whether the traffic gets closer or not.
Sometimes I have issues where the MRX sees my own transponder as a threat. It usually goes away by powering off/on the unit. I've read it has to do with the internal altimeter being off. It can be easily corrected, and 'm going to check that next time I go flying.
I always fly with the MRX. It usually detects traffic before I see it. And if I don't see the traffic, and the MRX says its on the same altitude and coming closer, I climb or descent (if possible) to get some separation.
The ZAON version does azimuth as well, but in some installations I have seen (or heard of from people I know) its accuracy varies a great deal.
Amazingly, after all this time, it is still AFAIK the only product that does azimuth.
I spoke to the designer of PowerFLARM last year and suggested to him that if he adds directional Mode C/S detection, he would have a real winner, but he wasn't at all interested.
Currently there is a lot of interest in FLARM, and it has a significant penetration in some communities (gliders especially) but I don't see it going anywhere much until a critical mass is achieved, and IMHO this will never be achieved as long as it remains a box which cannot be permanently installed in a certified aircraft and when it is installed "genuinely temporarily" the result is messy.
Otherwise, an Avidyne TAS 605 is £12k inc VAT...
There are some much cheaper products on the US market, in the $2k-3k range, but when I read up some reviews they were basically rubbish. They used a single antenna and I cannot see how azimuth detection can be done with that, but they claim to do it.
