Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

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

Rwy20 wrote:

They did, from the AFIS agent of Speyer. But yes, the German Flugleiter system is clearly detrimental to safety as opposed to CTAF because it discourages pilots from sorting out such issues directly between each other.

I always thought that this ‘Flugleiter’ or AFIS system was dangerous, as it somehow lulls you into thinking there’s actually ATC in the tower cab, while in reality it’s just some guy with a hendheld. CTAF is – while not perfect – lightyears better. Especially in a situation like this, where everyone involved knew the airfield and the area well. It becomes a bit trickier if you are unfamiliar with the area and don’t know the local landmarks, but even that is usually sorted out easily. Here in the US (and also in Spain, I lived there for a while) you sort it out air-to-air. Much safer.

172driver, I have to agree. But here’s a question: is there an EASA or NAA rule which prohibits airborne pilots from speaking directly to each other on an AFIS channel?

As I understand the rules, an AFISO has no “jurisdiction” over traffic which is airside of a runway holding point. He can offer information, but if for one reason or another he’s not able to make a positive contribution to organising and expediting the flow of airborne and runway traffic, can we politely ask him to shut up and mind his own manoeuvring area?

Glenswinton, SW Scotland, United Kingdom

But here’s a question: is there an EASA or NAA rule which prohibits airborne pilots from speaking directly to each other on an AFIS channel?

It’s very common to do so. You don’t have to tell the Flugleiter to shut up, most of these guys are no idiots, but try to do their best within the limits of this stupid system. My base is only ten minutes to the north of the accident site and I instruct there so I know the area quite well. Talking to other traffic in the pattern directly is the norm. However, this will often be in German, but anyway, in the case of the accident all four were German nativ speakers.

EDFM (Mannheim), Germany

alioth wrote:

That’s a hell of an accusation.

It is but that is what it looks like in our region here. Yea, they will react the same way as you do now if faced with this comment, but so how is it that alone in the ZRH TMA there have been quite a few incidents where some good ole boys from South Germany ended up in close proximity to airliners approaching ZRH? Yes, they do get infringements from bozos flying across the CTR from airplanes as well, but at least they carry transponders and usually are detected. Gliders are totally invisible without transponders. This may be fine in the boonies where there is nothing going on, but it is not ok when CAS is in immediate vicinity.

Apart, when the Mode S discussion started here years ago, how many people I talked to objected to this because now their callsign was always visible to ATC and they were scared to get caught infringing airspace? And you can bet that the number of folks who have been busted since Mode S came along has gone up exponentially as opposed to a simple 7000 A/C squawk before….

alioth wrote:

It’s very expensive to add something to a light aircraft that can show you where a transponder is: PowerFLARM is the most affordable option but it can only tell you that a transponder is near, not the range and direction – and if you’ve got PowerFLARM, you’re seeing a glider’s FLARM output anyway.

Yes. Power Flarm will give you the simple information that a transponder equipped airplane is nearby and it’s altitude difference to yours. That allows at least a vertical avoidance, which is a heck of a lot better than nothing. Power Flarm at the moment is the best variant for this, clearly, as it shows all participants who have something running.

Airliners however do not have Flarm receivers, therefore gliders are a huge issue there.

Apart, Power Flarm costs close to 2500 Euros and all flarm appliances require some sort of power. So how do people use them in gliders if they have no power?

And a Trigg TT21 Transponder which would be ideal for gliders currrently costs something like 1200 Euros…. so likely the folks who fly old gliders will not have money for Flarm either…

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

Emir wrote:

Without any offense, with such attitude you should definitely avoid entering the cockpit. If you’re overwhelmed with such feeling (and you expressed it on several occasions) then you pose a threat in cockpit. Risk awareness in one thing but being self-confident is necessary for exercising PIC privileges.

When I came back to flying in 2009 I had no such thoughts at all. In the mean time however, I have seen a LOT of accidents with VERY competent people loosing their lifes of which 10 were people I knew or knew off and now 3 were people I knew closely. The FI of the Arrow we are talking about here was about as experienced as anyone can get. He has been a FI for GA for decades parallel to a career as an airline pilot, was the CFI for a rather large flight group and the guy running their airfield and this does not prevent him from ending up dead in a collision at an airport I’ve been many times at.

I would have trusted any of the 10 folks I lost recently with my life and the life of my family! Yet, they all perished in initially unexplainable accidents. And in two cases where the reports are known by now made mistakes which I thought pilots of such experience and character totally incapable of.

I don’t know how you guys cope with the loss of highly competent pilots you know, me, I don’t have to nerve to think that I am any better than these folks who have for decades flown thousands of safe flying hours only to be killed in absolutely stupid and avoidable accidents.

So how do I compare to them, with my measly 500 hrs and low currency? I do feel confident in my flying but accidents like this one really make me question how to continue.

Last Edited by Mooney_Driver at 27 Jan 07:04
LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

So how do people use them in gliders if they have no power?

A battery, whose weight is about the same as the normal day to day variation in the weight of the pilot.

I don’t know how you guys cope with the loss of highly competent pilots you know,

I think the way to do this is to look at the situations which “got them” and avoid them. I am sure I would not live long if I spent my flying hours flying circuits around Shoreham, and flying around my bit of the UK at 1500ft. So I fly as high as possible, and it’s immediately obvious there is almost no traffic at 3000ft or higher. Under the LTMA one has to fly at 2400ft, but a “further out” route which might add 5 mins to the flight allows 3400, 4400, 5400ft which are much better. Also after departure I get out of there really quick, departing well out over the sea from a 20 departure which is good because most people don’t like flying over the sea and do an early turn. On arrival, if I hear there are 5 in the circuit I come back in 15 mins; trying to fit in with 5 others, some doing 60kt, some being less than accurate about their position, is a mug’s game. They are mostly renting by the hour, say £200/hr, so are really keen to get back.

An FI, OTOH, can do little to control his/her exposure.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter, we have been there before, traditional transponders will not be adopted by the gliding community. I mean some people do install transponders in their ships but it’s only a very small minority, say jus as small as the %of piston GA planes equipped with active traffic system.
Flarm in spite of being a closed and proprietary system has been pushed by local gliding federations and what’s really worrying CAAs to he point of being de facto standard equipment in some parts of Europe. But in general I would say that it’s installed in less than 50 percent of airworthy gliders – this is my biased opinion.

Last Edited by Robin_253 at 27 Jan 08:01

Some % of UK gliders do carry Mode C when flying cross country. That’s exactly what I would do if I was gliding.

I have no idea what the % is but have come across them, sometimes as an airprox… Also I don’t know what % of gliding is cross country.

The problem with FLARM is that there is no way to display the traffic on a panel mounted device, and few pilots want to be looking at an Ipad or whatever for traffic. At the very least you want audio traffic warnings to be routed to the aircraft intercom (can be done with a bluetooth link). If there was a simple FLARM receiver which could be connected (legally, or illegally if it is something the owner can do without having to get an avionics shop involved) then I am sure all the high-end GA would install it.

However the accident in this thread is not really relevant to FLARM as per my post #04.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Robin_253 wrote:

Peter, we have been there before, traditional transponders will not be adopted by the gliding community

Well, what would have happened to us if we had refused Mode S or 8.33? That is right, we would get grounded.

So what makes them so different??? Regulators are talking of even demanding transponders for drones and the chance to survive a collision with one of those is a bit higher. Can’t afford it? Well bully for them. We all also have to see how we can afford the upgrades we have to do. And in the current climate I would not be surprised if the local CAA’s would even sweeten the deal for them.

Robin_253 wrote:

But in general I would say that it’s installed in less than 50 percent of airworthy gliders – this is my biased opinion.

In most of them here.

The problem is that a pure flarm is only useful to detect other FLARMs, which means you can’t see airliners or others which have Mode C/S. Power Flarm does. I guess that at the moment makes it the only device which can show all known traffic as long as it’s willing to show itself.

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

Emir wrote:

Regarding the topic, I didn’t understand whether both aircrafts were in VMC or one appeared from the clouds.

According to the METARs, the cloud base was 4500 feet or higher. Both aircraft were in the traffic circuit, so they must have been in VMC.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top