Traffic Avoidance

[nickduncs84]

The threat of a mid air collision is probably the only thing that really scares me about flying for the simple reason that to some extent it's beyond my control. I've only been doing this for 6 months or so and have already had a couple of head shaking moments and have heard a few stories that are down right scary.

 

I've been watching the post on which frequency to transmit on and the fact that there is any confusion at all is scary. I can't help but wonder why, in this day and age, we are relying on radios and all of their inherent problems to keep us apart. Of course I think proper use of the radio is imperative to preventing accidents, but surely there could be a backup solution beyond looking out the window.

 

So it got me thinking, what are the other options for RA aircraft? All of the commercial solutions can instantly be ruled out due to the cost element alone. Sure you can set up an ADS-B receiver easy enough, but it's not the planes with ADS-B out that I'm really worried about.

 

Does anyone know of any other solution? One thing I can't work out is why Ozrunways or AvPlan can't integrate it into their apps. Every smart phone and most tablets have a data connection and GPS chip. Of course the data won't work in remote areas, but in most of the busy areas, you would get a signal. So why can't Ozrunways /Avplan aggregate and map location data from all active users? I'm guessing that if they did that and were prepared to combine data streams, it would be pretty useful. Especially if they were to release an iPhone/Android version of their app that could be put into 'traffic' mode. That way most people woudn't even need to buy any new equipment...you could have a lightweight, relatively effective little TCAS display by mounting your phone above the panel..it's far from a perfect solution, but then again, neither is the radio.

 

Nick

 

 

[facthunter]

It would have to be reliable. "False" returns/warnings would not be good. The full on ADSB is costly and in congested areas would be subject to clutter. The radios are not used well either. Mid airs are not a good idea and you are correct to be aware of the danger. Nev

 

 

[gareth lacey]

I have had a plane cut across , i was at 1500ft on path to archerfield he was on a very steep climb out, did not see him , he came from under me very close , Rv plane and going very quickly did not answer me on radio ( maybe not on frequency?)

 

that is a scary thing ,i now closely look for planes around me

 

cheers gareth

 

 

[frank marriott]

Even for ADSB to work it has to be turned ON. Many only use the transponder when it is "required" and then turn it off. Some people have a thing about 'big brother' watching what they are doing - for various reasons - I don't subscribe to this view but people are people. Remember there is still plenty of small aircraft without an aviation band radio around - it is not mandatory.

 

 

[nickduncs84]

Yes accuracy is an issue and yes I know some of those big brother types but the vast majority would be in the same boat. That is they will take all the help they can get if it helps keep them alive.

 

I actually think a mobile ap based solution would work well. Accuracy wouldn't be commercial grade, but around ctafs I find the 10 mile call to be the most useful, so don't think being super accurate is that important. Even knowing what quadrant to look in would be a big plus...

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

I think the most important part of having all this electronic equipment to rely on is making sure that the operator is turned on.

 

Best bet is keeping head on swivel and eyes outside the cockpit. Trust no one.

 

 

[DrZoos]

I have a zaon (now out of business) pcas and its brilliant, but its only as reliable as the other persons transponder. It does often alert me to aircraft before i see them which is nice. But it does NOT replace the eyeball. On three occasions i have been too close to other aircraft. Once unavoidable and no device would have helped. But two where the pcas missed them (assume no transponder on/working) and the eyeball picked them up.

 

Yes it would be nice and they do assist. But dont ever for a moment think anything replaces the eyeball.

 

Its safer at height if you do use a device, but that doesnt mean their transponder is on or working. I know a local plane where they have had the transponder tested and i still see this aircraft regularly flying and not on my pcas. Despite every other aircraft showing. I have also flown past one at height and asked if they had a transponder , to find they accidentally had it turned off.

 

And just a week ago a friend of mine was servicing his aircraft to find his transponder antenna had disappeared. So hes been thinking he had one and hasnt for possibly 12 months or 70 hours...

 

So perhaps radar is the only safer option if we are to partially rely on technology.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Anything that gives us even a subconscious sense of protection is a danger.

 

Even calling on CTAF is no guarantee you have been heard by traffic. You can't beat good old see and avoid.

 

Your smartphone ap is still a great idea, Nick; another danger to aircraft which is crying out for some smart ap is power lines.

 

 

[metalman]

Mid airs are a concern, especially if your keen on heading to some airshows and flyins, but, in the realm of aircraft accidents they're not a high cause of crashes , I've had a few moments ,but really if your eyes are outside and your on the right frequency ( and it's not hard , ctaf for a ctaf , area for when your enroute, tune in as you transit to the local freq,,,,simple) the chance of a a mid air are pretty low, your more likely to have an engine out or stall turning final ,statistically speaking.

 

Concentrate on learning to see other aircraft, not always easy, and learn to handle your aircraft well( including the coms) and you'll enjoy a long association with aviation,

 

Matty

 

 

[cscotthendry]

Having a transponder in YOUR aircraft and using it is also good insurance when used with the area frequency. I have been called a couple of times about conflicting traffic. The controllers always ask me to "ident" when I respond to a call and that gives them (and me) a positive indication if one of the aircraft in conflict is actually me. As long as you keep your situational awareness, a call on the radio like "Unidentified traffic 4 miles northwest of kilcoy at 4,600', you have traffic ......" will get your attention.

 

 

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

The only other system of which I am aware is FLARM - which is mandatory for participation in gliding competitions, and is fast becoming universal amongst the gliding fraternity world-wide. But like anything else, it relies on everybody else having one, and all of them being serviceable. If you sit on the ground and listen to the aircraft radio traffic, you will gradually get a mental picture of the air being full of flying metal, missing each other by metres. Fortunately, the truth is not like that (mostly) - the atmosphere is quite a large volume and you rarely see another aircraft, except in the circuit area.

 

ADSB will eventually paint the traffic as an overlay on everybody's moving map; but it's early days yet; people like OZRUNWAYS etc are just thinking about it now, and it won't be anything like universal for at least another decade - and even then, there will be the odd aircraft that isn't transmitting. So you have to keep your eyes open, and learn how to scan properly - which is not as simple as it seems.

 

As a glider tug pilot, operating in the vicinity of gliders all the time, I learned to look for the shadows on the ground if the sun was bright and high in the sky. You find your own shadow and watch for any others near it. Doesn't work much above 1500 feet, though. The radio is useful in the vicinity of a circuit area, and also near choke points, like Brooklyn Bridge on the Sydney northern lane, or any VFR reporting point near controlled airspace. Not much use in the middle of nowhere, however, and I've had a couple of close encounters where you simply would not expect to see another aircraft - so there's no substitute for keeping your eyes out of the cockpit.

 

 

[kgwilson]

Having a transponder & flying in controlled airspace is probably the safest given that ATC will always alert you about other aircraft in your vicinity. In GA I flew in as much controlled space as possible but of course this is not possible for RA pilots so we must use what we have got & that is mainly fly to the regs & keep an ever vigilant continuous lookout. If you are still worried about this then don't fly. An over stressed pilot is something not needed up there.

 

 

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

Not relevant to VFR, OCTA - which is by definition, what RAA pilots are confined to unless they have a PPL. In this day & age, it's stupid not to have a transponder, unless you're operating a 95.10 machine in the back of beyond.

 

 

[Guest Nobody]

Ozrunways can show traffic with a raspberry pi and tv dongle.

 

 

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

Ozrunways can show traffic with a raspberry pi and tv dongle.

50 lawyers (50 lawyers at the bottom of Sydney Harbour = a damn good start). But it will only show those aircraft that have ADSB out - and the cost of the GPS unit required for that is still prohibitive.

 

 

[facthunter]

I have always tried to use airspace that others don't. Lots of arrival procedures put aircraft into confined spaces. Don't climb or descend on common tracks, and parallel tracks rather than fly on them. ( when outside CTA).Things that keep your eyes inside the cockpit are distracting. You have to learn to use your eyes correctly as the brain "fills in" blank spaces. Collectively you make your own luck. When flying into the sun you will see bugger all. Nev.

 

 

[Guest Nobody]

50 lawyers (50 lawyers at the bottom of Sydney Harbour = a damn good start). But it will only show those aircraft that have ADSB out - and the cost of the GPS unit required for that is still prohibitive.

Ture. Its a shame that the GPS requirements are so stringient for ABS-b. Imagine if there was a GPS box that cost say $400 and had output to feed the transponder. More people would use it espicatlly in new aircraft and there would be a significant safety benefit. Instead by requireing a TSO IFR GPS it prices everyone out and therefore there is limited traffic with the equipment....

The USA implementation of ADS-b is quite good in this regard in that the non-ads-b traffic that is within radar range is rebroadcast so that they show up on the scresen in the cockpit. Having flown with this system you become aware of how many aircraft you dont see until they get close.

 

 

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

Ture. Its a shame that the GPS requirements are so stringient for ABS-b. Imagine if there was a GPS box that cost say $400 and had output to feed the transponder. More people would use it espicatlly in new aircraft and there would be a significant safety benefit. Instead by requireing a TSO IFR GPS it prices everyone out and therefore there is limited traffic with the equipment....The USA implementation of ADS-b is quite good in this regard in that the non-ads-b traffic that is within radar range is rebroadcast so that they show up on the scresen in the cockpit. Having flown with this system you become aware of how many aircraft you dont see until they get close.

Also, the USA has WAAS - and a WAAS GPS for ADSB is now available under $US 3000 . But Australia does not have WAAS, so we're stuck with the high-cost GPS requirement.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

...When flying into the sun you will see bugger all. Nev.

...which means plan your flight paths and departure times to allow for where that big bright thing is going to be- and keep the screen clean.

 

 

[Guest Nobody]

Also, the USA has WAAS - and a WAAS GPS for ADSB is now available under $US 3000 . But Australia does not have WAAS, so we're stuck with the high-cost GPS requirement.

but is WAAS really needed for ABS-b for GA/Recreatinal/Glider traffic?

 

 

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

but is WAAS really needed for ABS-b for GA/Recreatinal/Glider traffic?

WAAS - as I understand it - is a form of differential GPS and it allows a much less costly GPS receiver to be used for ADSB-out. Because the U.S.A. has implemented a WAAS system, those lower-cost GPS receivers are allowable there. In Australia, you cannot transmit ADSB-out unless you have an approved RAIM GPS to provide the position data to the required accuracy/reliability. (Would one of the experts in this area please enlarge on this?) Whether that accuracy is actually needed is a separate issue; it's REQUIRED, needed or not. The FLARM system uses a low-cost GPS, I assume on the basis that it's a short-range system and works (I assume) on the assumption that any GPS error will probably affect all GPS receivers in the vicinity equally. My brief experience of it in gliders showed that it worked very well. It may not provide sufficient warning in faster aircraft.

The future of the FLARM system is a matter for conjecture; it's available right now at low cost - and the gliding world has adopted it, so if you want to see any gliders, you'll need a FLARM. One can only suppose it will be rendered obsolete by ads-b in due course, but the simple fact is that the rapid adoption of ads-b has been obstructed by top-heavy bureaucracy.

 

 

[Guest Nobody]

WAAS - as I understand it - is a form of differential GPS and it allows a much less costly GPS receiver to be used for ADSB-out. Because the U.S.A. has implemented a WAAS system, those lower-cost GPS receivers are allowable there. In Australia, you cannot transmit ADSB-out unless you have an approved RAIM GPS to provide the position data to the required accuracy/reliability. (Would one of the experts in this area please enlarge on this?) Whether that accuracy is actually needed is a separate issue; it's REQUIRED, needed or not. The FLARM system uses a low-cost GPS, I assume on the basis that it's a short-range system and works (I assume) on the assumption that any GPS error will probably affect all GPS receivers in the vicinity equally. My brief experience of it in gliders showed that it worked very well. It may not provide sufficient warning in faster aircraft.The future of the FLARM system is a matter for conjecture; it's available right now at low cost - and the gliding world has adopted it, so if you want to see any gliders, you'll need a FLARM. One can only suppose it will be rendered obsolete by ads-b in due course, but the simple fact is that the rapid adoption of ads-b has been obstructed by top-heavy bureaucracy.

To correct/clarify my earlier comment I meant the high cost TSO IFR GPS when I said WAAS.

 

Flarm does have 1 advantage over ADSB in that it is predicting where the glider will be in the furture. This is important when the aircraftare closely spaced like gliders might be in a thermal.

 

 

[Yenn]

I consider the eyeball to be the best tool for avoiding mid airs. Radio can be an utter pain in the you know what, especially at very busy locations. Flying in to the airshow at bundaberg, being a prime example.

 

Over the years I have been flying I have had a few close calls, but usually they are predictable. Near the coast you can expect traffic along the shoreline at anyheight below about 5000' Along major roads or other stand out navigational guides you can expect traffic, A help is to keep the road on your left, as others usually do the same. Approaching airstrips traffic can build up and disappear into the background if you are above it. Keep looking sideways for the plane doing an odd approach. I once had a plane doing a right circuit, with no radio, when I was doing a left circuit. I saw him and ducked under him as I was faster and then landed long to ensure there was no conflict. I had 2000m of runway.

 

While I like to fly high enough to give me a good glide range, I find flying lower will make other traffic stand out against the sky.

 

Having a bubble canopy is a great help and high wing aircraft have a built in disadvantage.

 

 

[metalman]

The mk1 eyeball is a beauty! if I was worried about anything in flying it would be loss of control ,it kills more pilots than it should, if you want to build your confidence and skills I'd be doing an aeros endorsement with some unusual attitude recovery thrown in, it will be more likely to save your a5re than more gadgets in the cockpit,

 

Matty

 

 

[Ignition]

Statistically speaking (in the US at least, but I assume the Australian figures would be similar) you are far more likely to stall/spin a perfectly good aircraft into the ground, than to have a mid-air collision. - http://www.avweb.com/blogs/insider/AVwebInsider_AccidentCause-207911-1.html

 

The best collision avoidance tool really is looking outside, rather than having your head inside fixated on a traffic monitor. As soon as you start having something else inside the cockpit that is designed to prevent something else from happening, you are going to be spending an awful lot of time looking inside monitoring them and while you are looking at them, you aren't flying the plane.

 

Sometimes there can be too many tools, keep it simple, and remember to fly the plane.

 

In saying that, if there were one low cost traffic avoidance tool I'd be looking at adding to the cockpit, it would be something like a Xaon, with a voice alert, that way I am able to keep the eyes outside and still hear an alert. Unfortunately Xaon are out of business now though.