Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Another mid air in Germany: Cirrus SR20 vs UL at EDTY

chflyer wrote:

The discipline is very high and drilled into the students from day one

All very well but all that is needed is one guy from somewhere else who has not been drilled and has the same discipline.

I agree, technology is not the final answer to this, but as MK1 eyeball has failed so many times in recent years, it has also been proven that it alone does not prevail.

chflyer wrote:

Adding technology could possibly even result in an increase in accidents due to less look-out, especially if everyone isn’t on the same page technology-wise.

That is exactly what the concern with unofficial traffic protocols such as FLARM is. What is needed is for everyone flying being on the same page, starting with drones up to a spaceship whenever they are within ICAO airspace. Everything else is asking for more trouble than it solves.

LSZH, Switzerland

Unfortunately there are as many different uncertified electronic conspicuity devices as there are forum threads about them… I think, outside specific narrow communities, very few people use them. And the certified installations won’t show most/any of them so people using them are invisible to the most modern aircraft.

2 days ago I did a right orbit on early downwind because I had traffic on TCAS, same level and very close, position not announced (or not announced anywhere near that position)… basically he was doing a crosswind join but way too far out. I think a very similar scenario to one of the Shoreham mid-airs a few years ago.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Mooney_Driver wrote:

All very well but all that is needed is one guy from somewhere else who has not been drilled and has the same discipline.

Which just confirms that good airmanship needs to emphasized everywhere. One undisciplined pilot can wreck havoc everywhere he/she goes, but that isn’t a reason to not insist on good practice with all pilots during basic training, flight reviews, hangar talk, forums, aso. Safety starts with basics of which this is one.

LSZK, Switzerland

chflyer wrote:

Which just confirms that good airmanship needs to emphasized everywhere.

Absolutely.

I think that in the wake of several midairs now in recent years (Birrfeld, Lommis, Speyer and now this one) a lot of people have gotten the message too.

Peter wrote:

2 days ago I did a right orbit on early downwind because I had traffic on TCAS, same level and very close, position not announced (or not announced anywhere near that position)…

Peter, the only way you can be almost sure to get away from ANY traffic is by changing altitude! Even TCAS does not do horizontal avoidance, the reason for that is that it won’t work in most cases. Today with most avoidance applications they can give you a HINT which direction to watch but they can NOT give an exact azimuth unless both planes have ADS-B. So the only way to really get out of a traffics way when you are not sure of it’s position is to climb or descend out of his way.

This is a situation I have had where there is a Mode C transponder 800 ft below me, no directional information. In such a case, I’d try to keep at least 500 ft (better 1000 ft) differential altitude.

Here you have someone 300 ft above you climbing and to your 10 o’clock according to PF. The only thing which is reasonably sure is that he is 300 ft above, so descending 200 ft and see what the display does is not a bad start. If he is really climbing, you will have increased vertical separation, if he is descending then PF will correct the arrow latest when he has lost 100 ft delta. Of course at the same time look out for him, but if you can’t see him, your best course of action is to keep the altitude difference going.

I do try to keep at least 500 ft vertical sep to any target I don’t immediately see, with a preferrence of 1000 ft.

LSZH, Switzerland

True, although airlines have that as a SOP for different reasons. I get azimuth to within about 20-30 degrees which makes it pretty clear which way to turn. But that is a £12k active system… Also if somebody is rapidly climbing or descending, you may not want to outclimb them or outdescend them. I’ve had a glider climb under me at +1000fpm, near Shoreham… luckily he had Mode C.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

I get azimuth to within about 20-30 degrees which makes it pretty clear which way to turn. But that is a £12k active system…

you get a azimuth with even mode A/C? Wow.

TCAS will never give left/right resolution advisories but only up/down. That is why the airliners have this procedure. I find that azimuth nonwithstanding, it works quite well with Powerflarm too, for the very reason that it is the one criteria which puts distance between you and him rather fast. I mostly get range rings anyhow (altitude only) and Flarm Targets in the mountains. ADS-B targets usually stay well outside alert range.

LSZH, Switzerland

you get a azimuth with even mode A/C? Wow.

That is normal for active TAS.

TCAS will never give left/right resolution advisories but only up/down

It is true that the Resolution Advisories are only up/down, but the traffic is displayed for the pilots in the same way as on mine, so airline pilots can see the azimuth also.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

airline pilots can see the azimuth also.

So why do you think that they strictly only avoid up or down unless they have visual contact?

LSZH, Switzerland

Airline SOP

Maybe @chrisparker will have an explanation.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

According to the TCAS manufacturer the azimuth of the conflicting traffic is not reliable – therefor the SOP of diverting vertically is a must. And it is easy when you have trained it in the simulator. And one must follow the TCAS resolution advisory even if a human controller tells you something different … see DHL midair collision NW Friedrichshafen in 2002. The TCAS in both aircraft work together (coordinate) without the controller on the ground knowing which way.
In all my flying I never saw an improper azimuth of traffic ahead but I’m convinced that the vertical resolution is the only way. Otherwise a turning radius away from traffic in the horizontal plane would be very difficult to estimate.

EDxx, Germany
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top