Rescue helicopter collides with PA 28 near Karlsruhe (and electronic conspicuity)

Timothy wrote:

As this accident seems to be happening too, too often (we had a very similar accident in the UK very recently, with equally experienced pilots) maybe we, as an industry, need to put our qualms aside and our hands in our pockets and embrace ADS-B out and in wholeheartedly.

Amen to that

Mooney_Driver wrote:

They both were in contact with Speyer Info, the last communication with the Arrow was “I don’t see any helicopter” So apparently they were given traffic information.

So why were they not given vectors? Whenever this type of situation happens here, ATC will issue a heading or other instruction (slow down, climb, whatever).

172driver wrote:

So why were they not given vectors? Whenever this type of situation happens here, ATC will issue a heading or other instruction (slow down, climb, whatever).

Since when can VFR traffic get deconfliction services outside controlled airspace, in the circuit of an untowered airfield???

MedEwok wrote:

Speyer INFO is an AFIS unit (Flugleiter) and thus cannot issue vectors. They could not necessarily see both or in fact either aircraft.

That answers that:

Steve6443 wrote:

Since when can VFR traffic get deconfliction services outside controlled airspace, in the circuit of an untowered airfield???

Timothy wrote:

As this accident seems to be happening too, too often (we had a very similar accident in the UK very recently, with equally experienced pilots) maybe we, as an industry, need to put our qualms aside and our hands in our pockets and embrace ADS-B out and in wholeheartedly.

Arne wrote:

For once the industry could be pushing at the regulator to implement life-saving technology and not the other way around.

To be fair, the UK CAA and NATS are investing a lot of time and money into this.

Timothy wrote:

As this accident seems to be happening too, too often (we had a very similar accident in the UK very recently, with equally experienced pilots) maybe we, as an industry, need to put our qualms aside and our hands in our pockets and embrace ADS-B out and in wholeheartedly.

It is a problem with this. In the US, they have it for years using ADSB broadcasting of weather and traffic. In Europe, this apparently does not work the same way as the frequency band used in the US is used for something else or so I have heard? Maybe someone here knows more about this.

That is why we have a rather weird situation here in Europe, where EASA did not address this problem (as opposed to the FAA, who give their data to be used) there are several commercial initiatives for this. The most popular is FLARM, which has been developed for gliders primarily. However, Flarm is not an officially sanctioned format, even though several CAA´s seem to like it a lot and it has been used for SAR purposes when looking for lost gliders or so. That gives the situation that there is a popular cost efficient format, but it is not useable to see all traffic.

In order to see most traffic, you need a device which can see airliners, any kind of GA plane as well as gliders, who predominatly use FLARM. So in reality today, you need a receiver for ADSB, Transponder modes A and C as well as Flarm. The only one which can do this right now to my knowledge is PowerFlarm, which since a few years have a certified variant which can display onto most EFIS devices.

I personally have installed a PowerFlarm device in my airplane. I can see the airliners and ADSB-Out equipped airplanes very well indeed. With the installed antennas on top and bottom of the airplane, I can also see gliders who use Flarm and they can see me. I found this to be a rather good solution.

ADSB targets display with azimuth and a delta altitude figure. Mode C only (both for Mode S or A transponders) show as a range ring with a delta alt figure and Flarm signals show again with direction and delta Alt. Presently I think it is the best of all possibilities in central Europe.

There is another thing I need to say in reply to the same quote. As it has nothing to do with technological colision avoidance, I put it in another message.

This accident is really shocking for the fact that ALL participants were highly experienced and trained individuals.

The crew of the helicopter were doing a type transition training, the instructor being vastly experienced in the area as he was stationed nearby, the trainee for such a position definitly was no greenhorn either.

The crew of the Arrow consisted of a PPL pilot doing his CPL training. He had been flying for more than 10 years before that and been a new father since a year or so, like myself too. The Instructor was a highly experienced retired airline pilot whom I knew very well from that function flying A340´s for a top brand carrier. Next to that, he had been a FI for GA pilots almost all his flying life, being the CFI as well as multiple other functions of a flight school near Basle plus a FI for VFR, IFR, CPL and as far as I know also an Instructor on the Airbus he used to fly.

The whole scene in Switzerland is totally shocked by this accident. This FI knew about the collision risk very much and used to be known to teach strict vigilance to his many pupils. Yet they did not see the helicopter and the copter did not see them.

I have no idea what could have caused this. Both crews knew Speyer well, the rescue copter crew like the back of their hands and the FI on the Arrow had been there countless times, as most people out of Switzerland use Speyer as a convenient customs airfield. Hopefully some kind of information will develop.

And Timothy is VERY right, this does happen way too often to very experienced people. In the recent 12 months I´ve lost 3 highly experienced pilots to freak accidents I never thought would happen to anyone, let alone them. This makes me think very much about whether I should really continue flying with a small daughter to take care of.

Plus, there will be more drones in the air every day. In good or bad hands.It is time for ADS-B for all. There are reasonably priced solutions.