No RA in this case (video says so in french at the end).
Thanks for posting that video, Guillaume. Just watched it.
I see a lot of things wrong. Poor terminology on both sides. Why, when AAL62 asked where the other plane was going, ATC told him “Fuertaventura”? That’s like this 
For me, the lesson is that if you see a target which is converging (distance reducing) on a constant bearing, it is better to turn on his inside i.e. AAL62 should have turned left instead of right, because turning right prolonged the conflict. But, according to airline SOPs, they should have only changed altitude, not turned.
The problem, and I have watched a few ATC videos like this (shown with a “do not post on the internet” during ATC presentations) is that the pilot needs balls of steel to follow the SOP.
Did either of the two ever get an RA?
It is almost impossible to make safe horizontal conflict resolution solely with a simple TCAS / TAS system.
This is a video (unfortunately mostly in French, but I think you can understand just by looking at the movie) where a AAL crew does not comply with ATC instructions but rather tries to resolve the “conflict” by looking at their TCAS leading to a loss a speration.
You can see the difference between the AAL crew point of view and the ATC point of view on the video.
This happened when TCAS were introduced in commercial aviation some 20+ years ago.
It bothers me that TCAS still isn’t cheap and ubiquitus in GA, especially with the current advances in electronics. But I suppose RF is as hard as ever, and you still have certification.
I work in the marine technology and I’m similarly bothered with the lack of a marine equivalent to TCAS or transponders altogether. There is AIS, but I don’t think it would be safe to produce resolution advisories from that data, nor from ADS-B.
It’s a difficult situation.
Another way of looking at the change altitude/turn decision is the possibility that the other aircraft has you in sight, and determined that you’re not a risk, so divert their attention elsewhere momentarilly. But then you start a quick turn/climb/descend and create a conflight that didn’t exist and they now miss.
I don’t think there is a correct solution for this.
The hard case is when you see a zero difference in relative altitude
The other plane could be right above or right below.
I reckon turning hard to the left is the best option – because you can see there (IF you are low wing).
Thanks airborne again for the explanation. Makes sense. I will try and get my StratuX unit to display flarm traffic…should be possible.
If stuff is getting very close to you then I think the priority should be a height deconfliction – FLARM will give you an above / below so I would go with that and try and increase the separation. A big (vast?)majority of GA will be below 3000ft and gliders will be up new clodbase, so if I think it’s GA I would go up and if it’s glider down low as a preference.
That video is sobering… underlines the importance of good radio calls. I bet at least one of these two didn’t talk. Sad outcome.
Agree. It’s in the circuit this is dangerous. But nothing that radio and circuit discipline cannot solve.
Here, probably none of them talked. If only one had talked, then the other would know where he was. Then again, both of them could have mistaken the other for being the one doing a low approach, use the wrong frequency etc.
but then again standard avoidance procedure would be to turn right, so what if you are on a collision course head-on and he turns right and you turn left? Maybe more prudent to turn right by default?
That would be true for a head-on situation but I would normally get an earlier warning then. Not the 15nm quoted by Avidyne which is probably never achieved with “light GA” targets but perhaps 2nm. The installation I have has the upper antenna in a bad place for the head-on warning, hence only say 2nm. But 2nm is quite a bit of time…
The situation described here is when something has popped out of nowhere, with no apparent history, and is showing at your position.
I fly with the landing and taxi lights on because they are LED so no price to pay.
I bet at least one of these two didn’t talk
Or mis-reported his position, perhaps hoping to get priority. I see this frequently.
