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?

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.

Ottopilot

It should not be mandated. The FAA should mind thier own business. Pilots should look out the window.

Twin Wasp

"TCAS is self-contained, and works everywhere."

While TCAS works everywhere, it doesn't show all traffic. Remember the other aircraft also has to have a transponder. Believe it or not, there are still some slash X aircraft out there. There are even aircraft with (gasp!) no electrical system.

UAL T38 Phlyer

Skipper:

From what I remember of TCAS refresher training at United, and flying oceanic routes (it's been 7 years), plus my current experience in the T-38, and NACWS in the T-34, it isn't completely self-contained, and doesn't exactly 'work' everywhere.

The TCAS systems I have flown with are either active or passive. They are active when interrogated by a ground-based radar, ie, ATC. In the active mode, TCAS-equipped airplanes will see range and bearing if that aircraft has at least a transponder, and altitude if it has Mode C.

However, in non-radar environments (low altitude below ATC coverage; oceanic routes out of radar range), the TCAS is passive, and only provides range and altitude. I (personally) believe under moderate to agressive maneuvering (high roll-rates and steep bank angles), the TCAS signals may be partially blocked (interrupted) by antenna-shielding (ie, part of your airplane, or the other guy's, blocks the signal from his antenna to yours and vice-versa). As an example, the directional antenna on the T-38 is on top of the aircraft, but the distance antenna is on the belly--at 90 degrees of bank, one antenna or the other is probably not being seen by the other guy's TCAS.

You get the "Oh crap, there's someone within a mile and 300 feet, but it doesn't know where he's coming from," and I find myself scanning frantically in all directions.

A typical ATC radar does a 360-degree sweep every 6 seconds. They sweep clockwise. Next time you can watch a TCAS target from a long distance, look for him...you'll see the display lags reality by about 6 seconds (12 seconds if it missed a sweep due to the aforementioned shielding during maneuvers). I should add that in a multi-ATC radar environment, the time-delay is reduced.

rickair7777

TCAS is far from a cure-all, but it improves the odds, especially near busy major metro areas where Mode C is required due to B airspace.

I suspect we will see it mandated within 5-10 years for controlled airspace...the UAV crowd (big federal agencies) REALLY want to operate UAV's unrestricted in civilian airspace. TCAS would probably be their answer to "see and avoid".

Maybe AOPA can force DoD to subsidize it for us.

GrUpGrDn

I agree with OP somewhat. At the same time we should also purchase brand new cars with technology such as automated braking, lane change radar...for all the drivers in our family, I believe Audi and MB has this technology. As you can see we could not afford this, however if we are all vigilant in our driving, then accidents would probably not occur and we can continue on driving our 1972 Datsun B210.

themctm

Do you honestly have any idea how much a TCAS unit costs? Why stop there? Why not mandate every airplane have a parachute? Why not ejection seats? But then again, flying is getting too dangerous. I think people shouldn't be allowed to fly until they have enough experience. See the slide to stupidity?

MrWalk

For every affluent pilot/owner or successful business that can afford the latest and greatest, there are several that can barely afford older or simpler aircraft. The light aircraft fleet is diverse like sea life too, and many owners prefer or require older or mission-specific types in which installation of the equipment is impractical or impossible even if one could afford it.

It is very tricky to apply new standards across the fleet reasonably fairly. Survival of the personal freedoms and business advantages offered by light aircraft in the U.S. has always required carefully weighing cost, availability, and practicality against the benefits of technological or regulatory additions. Unfortunately, economics and feasibility factor into safety concerns as well as everything else.

I suspect it will be like transponders, GPS, EFIS, etc. As the technology matures and becomes more affordable, it will gradually continue to make its way into the light aircraft fleet and safety will continue to improve incrementally like it always has.

Senior Skipper

I defer to your experience as the more experienced pilot, but respectfully disagree. As I said earlier, the “see and avoid” method is proven unreliable and/or ineffective. I think it’s high time this basic equipment be mandatory.


This is the crux of the problem. In the year 2009, there should not be any /X aircraft.

Thanks for that information. Although I knew that the TCAS bearing information was inaccurate due to the antenna design, I did not know it was supplemented by ground based data. In any event, if all you know about the traffic is that it’s 2nm and 300ft below you, at least you know that you need to climb. Correct me if I’m wrong, but RA’s only give vertical guidance, correct?

Do you have any idea how much the funerals for those tourists in the helicopter cost? Mandating TCAS isn’t a slippery slope at all. We have the technology to save lives, and we should use it. Were nav lights, anti-collision lights, engine gauges etc. always required? I’d guess not, but at some point, somebody in charge realized that they significantly improved safety and thus made it mandatory. You could argue all day that your landing light was sufficient at night, but the FAA still says that you need your nav lights, so you either get them installed, or stick to daytime flying. It’s the same concept really.

I get what you’re saying about cost, but you sometimes have to force people to do things in the interest of their safety and public safety. People are innovative, and even if installation is impractical, I’m sure they’ll find a way if they intend to keep flying.