Why isn't TCAS required for all aircraft?
11-19-2009, 08:00 PM
#51
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Posts: 51
Originally Posted by Senior Skipper
Tangentially related to our discussion, perhaps the A380 has a "fully automated" system
LOL
EASA certifies new "Autopilot/Flight Director" TCAS mode for A380
"Moreover, with this new AP/FD TCAS mode activated, when a TCAS "Resolution Advisory" (RA) is received, the pilot no longer needs to disengage the autopilot or Flight Director before conducting the TCAS manoeuvres. Rather, the autopilot can now automatically conduct the correct TCAS manoeuvre, to position the aircraft clear of any potential traffic conflict."
LOLEASA certifies new "Autopilot/Flight Director" TCAS mode for A380
"Moreover, with this new AP/FD TCAS mode activated, when a TCAS "Resolution Advisory" (RA) is received, the pilot no longer needs to disengage the autopilot or Flight Director before conducting the TCAS manoeuvres. Rather, the autopilot can now automatically conduct the correct TCAS manoeuvre, to position the aircraft clear of any potential traffic conflict."
Learn something new everyday.
I can just imagine how many additional "WTH?" moments this is going to create in flying the bus.
11-19-2009, 08:15 PM
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: the correct seat
Posts: 1,422
Originally Posted by flyingchicken
Well I'll be damned...
Learn something new everyday.
I can just imagine how many additional "WTH?" moments this is going to create in flying the bus.
Learn something new everyday.
I can just imagine how many additional "WTH?" moments this is going to create in flying the bus.
11-19-2009, 09:04 PM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: Left seat
Posts: 189
Originally Posted by flyingchicken
Only if "safety" is the "primary" goal in aviation.
For me, it is sometimes, but not always.
For me, it is sometimes, but not always.
11-20-2009, 05:50 AM
#56
Flying Farmer
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Turbo-props' and John Deere's
Posts: 3,160
Originally Posted by Hacker15e
It all becomes clear now.
Anyways, the quick and dirty
ADS-B: GPS derived system, I do feel it's the future of it all. They tested this in Alaska with good results. Allows coverage regardless of terrain and facilities. Has an "out" and "in" potential. The "out" is going to come first, where all aircraft tranmit their positions "out" to the satelites, and ATC watches you. The "in" function will provide the aircraft to recieve traffic data, and potentially unlimited types of other data. The possiblity of recieving your clearance through the ADS-B is very high. Now the bad part is, you will always be watched regardless if you are VFR/IFR. So technically speaking the Gov't has a perfect Big Brother scenario here IMO.
TCAS: Your aircraft must be equipped with the system. For it to work, the other aircraft must be equipped with a Transponder. If it's not Mode-C, it'll still interegate it, but you won't get an altitude difference. Mode-C and -S will give you a difference in Altitude so the pilot can tell how high/low the other aircraft is, and whether they are climbing or descending. TCAS-II gives you the Resolution Advisory's(RA's). These are in almost all airliner operations, and large corp planes. If the TCAS system can't see the other aircrafts transponder antenna, it won't work!
TIS: You must be equipped with a Mode-S transponder, and be within a service volume for it to work. The ground radar hits a target, recieves, knows where you are at, then displays the traffic in guesstimation to your position on your MFD/GPS traffic page. It's an "ok" system, but honestly it's a big crap shoot on accuracy.(I've seen traffic at 1 o'clock, and displayed at 9 o'clock.
My final statement and I'm done here. Please, in the future ask a broad question and try to learn about something before you go making the claims that you have without a working knowledge of a system, the costs associated with implementation of that system, and it's alternatives.
I like helping people out, but you were going way out on a limb here, and obviously the guys that have been flying professionally for years have had the counter arguement going strong. I can tell you're a sponge for information, just make sure it's the right information, and not just because it was the first thing you heard from "someone."
Good luck on continuing your training and becoming a CFI. You will learn twice as much teaching as where you are today.
11-20-2009, 10:19 AM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: Reclined
Posts: 2,168
Originally Posted by Senior Skipper
This year alone, I can think of 2 mid-air collisions. The recent collision in NY, and the two training flights that collided in Florida earlier in the year. Why is TCAS not required for ALL aircraft? In this day and age, there is no reason for 2 planes to collide. Why are we still dependent on the "see and avoid" technique when it is proven to be ineffective?
When this topic comes up, the argument I typically hear is "TCAS is expensive for my private aircraft". This may well be true, but if you can afford to own an aircraft, you can likely afford to spend a few thousand dollars protecting your life and your property from damage in a collision.
I'd also submit that TIS is not an acceptable substitute, as traffic data is not available everywhere, and it depends on ground based information. TCAS is self-contained, and works everywhere.
How many more people need to die before the ICAO / FAA mandate this rule? What do other pilots think?
When this topic comes up, the argument I typically hear is "TCAS is expensive for my private aircraft". This may well be true, but if you can afford to own an aircraft, you can likely afford to spend a few thousand dollars protecting your life and your property from damage in a collision.
I'd also submit that TIS is not an acceptable substitute, as traffic data is not available everywhere, and it depends on ground based information. TCAS is self-contained, and works everywhere.
How many more people need to die before the ICAO / FAA mandate this rule? What do other pilots think?
2nd, ADS-B will also not do much more in terms of traffic that the current TIS systems
Last and most important... it isn't a few thousand dollars for TCAS. The TCAS systems are priced from a low of $40,000 to a high of over 100k.... and in many cases that's more than the cost of buying a small GA plane.....
See and avoid has worked well since 1903, there are also fewer planes (both commerical and private) flying now than ever before in recent history, the problems we are having is a bunch of new pilot raised on flying the video game displays, and they never learned good visual scan skills... but they can fly a flight director better than I can play space invaders.
11-20-2009, 10:20 AM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: Reclined
Posts: 2,168
Originally Posted by shdw
Let me throw a number up here, 50,000. For that amount you can get a large number of used aircraft that are more then sufficient for a private pilot. Now for a mode S transponder you are looking at 5,000 new and a Garmin 430 for it to be useful is 10,000 new. Installation of the two is likely another one to two thousand. A total cost of 17,000 or 34 percent of the cost of the aircraft. If you purchase it all used you might be able to get away with 6 to 7 thousand. If you are ok with just using a Garmin 496 mounted in the aircraft you can get away with 3 to 4 thousand, still 8 percent.
The point is, it is quite a big chunk of money, especially for people using a 15,000 dollar 152 where 4k is ~25 percent.
That said, I agree and think it should be mandated. But I can see why they don't. A great number of people would be extremely ****ed about having to drop 4k because the government said so, especially with the current economic standing.
Great idea though.
The point is, it is quite a big chunk of money, especially for people using a 15,000 dollar 152 where 4k is ~25 percent.
That said, I agree and think it should be mandated. But I can see why they don't. A great number of people would be extremely ****ed about having to drop 4k because the government said so, especially with the current economic standing.
Great idea though.You are talking about putting in a TIS system, the OP was saying TIS isn't enough, each plane should have full TCAS
11-20-2009, 10:26 AM
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: Reclined
Posts: 2,168
Originally Posted by flyingchicken
Would you apply the same argument to banning all VFR flying then? Just think, if we get rid of all these little airplanes buzzing around with no flight plans, leaving only IFR flying under positive radar control, how much safer would the skies be?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
