Traffic Avoidance

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

It's the one you don't see that will get you; and of course the well-known fact that an aircraft on a collision course with you does not move in your field of view - which defeats one of the major mechanisms by which we see a threat - movement. What an effective traffic overlay will do (or what a FLARM does) is - it shows you where to look.

 

The problem with radio as the principal tool (on instruments or in controlled airspace) is that one's "audio" channel takes up too big a proportion of one's attention - and it's a single channel with an abysmal data rate. A traffic overlay on a moving map display is a much more effective way to transfer data. It will also show you the "hun in the sun" that you otherwise would not see.

 

 

[facthunter]

I agree with most of what you say, IGNITION, but using statistics can have the effect of reducing peoples perceived need to be alert and keep a good lookout ALWAYS.

 

In many years of flying I have never got close to spinning in in a good or bad aeroplane, because I'm fully trained in that sort of thing and take my flying very seriously.

 

I have had many close calls with other traffic, and unfortunately I don't feel I have total control over that at all. It's an un resolved serious problem. Use good sense and all your resources (like passengers on the lookout aircraft positioning .).. etc. Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

I thought that the main cause of fatalities was stupid decisions. Somewhere I have seen a breakdown of statistics and loss of control featured high, but it was exceeded by stupid decisions, some of which sometimes result in loss of control

 

 

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

I agree with most of what you say, IGNITION, but using statistics can have the effect of reducing peoples perceived need to be alert and keep a good lookout ALWAYS.In many years of flying I have never got close to spinning in in a good or bad aeroplane, because I'm fully trained in that sort of thing and take my flying very seriously.

I have had many close calls with other traffic, and unfortunately I don't feel I have total control over that at all. It's an un resolved serious problem. Use good sense and all your resources (like passengers on the lookout aircraft positioning .).. etc. Nev

That's my experience, also. The thing that worries me the most when I'm flying a slow aircraft, is being run-down from astern by some drongo who is not keeping an adequate lookout, because he's flying something fast and is behind the aircraft. That's exactly what happened in the infamous San Diego collision.

 

 

[Bevan]

The Zaon was a great unit and they had a new version which did mode-C and ADSB. We just began adding support for it in AvPlan when we found the company making them had disappeared. (When I tried to order a test unit).

 

Given it is a dead product we aren't going to add support for it now unfortunately, and I don't know of anyone making a similar unit. I will be over in Florida at Sun n Fun week after next so I will search for someone doing such a box and let you all know if I am successful.

 

Bevan..

 

 

[pmccarthy]

I overflow Tocumwal yesterday at 6500 about 5pm and passed close to the rising air from a big burn- off. Saw nothing, but then heard a glider say he was thermaling over the fire at a similar height. I was watching the smoky area carefully to make sure I stayed out of it but didn't see him.

 

 

[facthunter]

Something may come along that is a good unit but ...It will have to be used correctly and you will need to be trained on it, (Like TCAS and GPWS Ground proximity) While you are occupied inside you are NOT looking OUTSIDE. I had a B707 cross the runway at the threshold and force a go round when I was at 200 feet at Mascot ( and HE had been told to hold short of the runway, which wasn't necessary as you need a clearance to enter anyhow,). Nev

 

 

[Aldo]

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

Nick

With the short time you have been flying I'm not surprised that you find it difficult, spatial awareness and orientation is something that takes a lot of practice especially when you have to decipher it from a radio call (and nine times out of ten the clown on the other end mumbles so fast that you have no idea what has been said anyway).

 

The best way that I find is to have a radio that you can monitor more than 1 frequency on, depending on where you are flying and the distances between CTAF's I will always monitor the CTAF from at least 30 miles out and have the area frequency on the primary channel. This allows me to build up a picture in my head of all the traffic in the vicinity and their expected times of arrival at the destination. If available I will always have the Transponder on 1200 so radar is able to see me if inside their range. I also write down the call signs of any aircraft that is likely to be within 5 minutes of my ETA. If the other aircraft are IFR and their track or arrival time is close to mine I will call centre and advise them of my position/track and ETA for the destination, they will generally pass this information on to the IFR aircraft, if not the other aircraft should hear your position and intention report on the area frequency anyway.

 

The radio your eyes and your ability to visualise the other traffic from the information you hear is your best defence in avoiding a midair.

 

That said I have recently had three near misses.

 

1. Afternoon departure out of Toowoomba FD478 flying doctor inbound from the west heard his inbound call on CTAF spoke with him and advised that my track would take me 6 miles south of Oakey, asked him if he was tracking inbound overhead Oakey to which he responded yes, we passed within 1000 feet horizontally of each other (same altitude) 6 miles south of Oakey (scared the crap out of me)

 

2. Inbound to Roma MJA (chieftan) call at 20 miles 8000 feet on 095 bearing estimating within 2 min of me (I was behind and on 107 bearing) and at 8500 feet, thought ok I'm 2 miles a minute he is 3 miles a minute I'm closer than him but we shouldn't cross paths as we were both tracking for crosswind for 36. Next call from MJA was at 15 miles and I was at 8 miles (something wasn't adding up) how could I have got a minute in front of him and his estimate was still 2 min before me, I called him to confirm he was at 15 miles and he responded yes, I tracked a little further to the south to give myself some room, when I finally saw him we were less than 1000 feet apart same altitude, I called and asked if he had me visual to which he answered no I told him I was at his 9 o'clock, the response was an immediate right turn, I landed No. 2 to him with no further issues.

 

3. Inbound to Miles from the south east, flying doctor (king air) inbound from the west estimating within 2 min of each other, called him and asked his intentions, he said he was tracking to join xwind for 04 (immediate alarm bells) why was a king air tracking from the west with the active runway being 04 tracking to join xwind I eventually saw him ( he never saw me) and we were about 2 miles apart.

 

Lessons: keep your eyes outside and work hard on your spatial visualisation skills. Don't trust anyone to be where they say they are going to be, maintain your lookout.

 

Aldo

 

 

[metalman]

Geez Aldo, two miles apart,,,,you should come for a fly in the Yarra valley ,on a bright sunny day the aeroplanes are like flies at times, if I'm tracking south from Coldstream behind the dandenongs I always go low, the flying schools seem to arrive in the arvo at about the same time ,same hemispherical ,same area, all on descent ,and mostly intelligible ( Chinese or Hindi accents are real hard on the radio),,,,,,,mmmmm two miles would be nice

 

Matty

 

 

[Aldo]

Geez Aldo, two miles apart,,,,you should come for a fly in the Yarra valley ,on a bright sunny day the aeroplanes are like flies at times, if I'm tracking south from Coldstream behind the dandenongs I always go low, the flying schools seem to arrive in the arvo at about the same time ,same hemispherical ,same area, all on descent ,and mostly intelligible ( Chinese or Hindi accents are real hard on the radio),,,,,,,mmmmm two miles would be nice Matty

Matty

Missed the point entirely, 2 miles with 5 miles a minute closing speed is 12 seconds!

 

 

[facthunter]

Aldo, you are dealing with professionals and having trouble. What hope is there for the (UN professionals)? With GPS you are all operating on track. (often the SAME) track. My biggest complaint it the response when asked of another aircraft "what is your position relative to abc?" (aerodrome) The response is usually. NOTHING.. Silence.............I don't think they can work it out. On another occasion it was totally erroneous and it was a marginal vis day, so you are looking where they aren't. A rather undesirable situation.

 

Thinking it is a big sky and you would have to be unlucky to hit someone is not the case. Near misses are all possibles and a sudden larger bad outcome is possible anytime.. The ingredients are there...Nev

 

 

[DWF]

What is this traffic you are on about?

 

Here is SE WA when you make a radio call usually the only response you get is from the AFRU

 

It seems that airspace/the authorities/and population conspire to concentrate OCTA aircraft in inappropriate locations.

 

[Level restrictions, designated tracking points, inhospitable terrain and often poor visibility/weather.]

 

The Mark I eyeball is still the best and most reliable short range traffic detection device - but it has its (significant) limitations and for most of us does not work well beyond 2 - 3 miles - which does not give much time to take avoiding action.

 

Use your radio (on the appropriate frequency). Alerted see and avoid is significantly more effective than just looking out.

 

Maintain situational awareness - figure out where the other traffic is in relation to your position and track.

 

I am not in favour of devices that require you to divert your attention to inside the cockpit when in areas of potentially high traffic density.

 

Look out and Live!

 

 

[rgmwa]

I wonder if the average pilot could give an accurate position report anyway. How many of us can reliably estimate their distance from any particular landmark when asked, just by looking out the window or quickly glancing at a map. Not everybody has a GPS display. I might tell you I'm 8 miles away, but in all honesty it could quite easily be 7, 9 or worse, so whatever I say keep a sharp lookout in the general direction that I seem to be coming from, and I'll try and do the same.

 

rgmwa

 

 

[facthunter]

You don't need an accurate position. Just knowing the direction ( bearing NE SW EAST etc) FROM the field would help, and their tracking intentions. I don't believe it is covered enough in the training. If you don't know where you are in a circuit and what the runway designators mean, it is questionable whether you should be allowed to be there. You just can't dumb these things down and not have consequences. Nev

 

 

[metalman]

MattyMissed the point entirely, 2 miles with 5 miles a minute closing speed is 12 seconds!

Nope ,I was attempting a sort of humour, I won't give up either , I'll just try harder for you, here's a smilie so you know I'm not annoyed

 

 

[rgmwa]

Agreed Nev. I'm not suggesting for a minute that you should be flying if you don't have basic situational awareness or know reasonably well where you are at all times in relation to your destination and the correct circuit procedures etc. What I was getting at is that accurately estimating distances visually is a skill that takes practice, and that most of us who fly recreationally are probably not that good at it. From Aldo's comments, some professionals may not be that good at it either.

 

rgmwa

 

 

[nickduncs84]

Seems like I'm not the only one who thinks the current system isn't good enough.

 

To those who say you're more likely to spin/stall so focus on training, statistically you're right, but my point is that I will be focusing on the training, because I'm aware of the risk and it's within my control. Not the same with traffic avoidance.

 

To those that say the eyeball is best, that may be true at the moment, but my point remains that if this really is the case, then I think there is plenty of room for improvement. Doesn't matter how good a look out you keep, there are plenty of factors working against you if you're relying on your eyes.

 

So my original point remains. Two planes with transponders should be able to avoid each other, but why is there such a lack of focus on everything else?

 

It seems to me that from a technology standpoint there is this belief (and maybe regulation?) that it has to be perfect. But the radio work and eyeballs are certainly not perfect.

 

So my question is, when you fly do you have a switched on iPhone or android in your pocket? If you do, then without having to spend any money on any additional equipment, you have a device that can transmit your location to within 50m or so horizontally and 250m or so vertically. Sure it wouldn't work in areas with no mobile service, but like I said, why does it need to be perfect? If the perfect solution costs $10k and prevents 95% of RA flyers using it and an imperfect solution costs $50 and allows 95% of RA flyers to have traffic info in 90% of the airspace we use, then I know which one I'd find more useful.

 

Bevan maybe you can shed some light on why this isn't out there at the moment? Is it because the RA market isn't big enough for this to be an important feature in Avplan? Or are there technical reasons? Or both? From a technical perspective, the only real limitation I can see is that in order for it to work, the data would need to be aggregated independently with access then granted to Avplan, ozrunways, etc.

 

Nick

 

 

[Bevan]

If you do, then without having to spend any money on any additional equipment, you have a device that can transmit your location to within 50m or so horizontally and 250m or so vertically.

Bevan maybe you can shed some light on why this isn't out there at the moment? Is it because the RA market isn't big enough for this to be an important feature in Avplan? Or are there technical reasons? Or both? From a technical perspective, the only real limitation I can see is that in order for it to work, the data would need to be aggregated independently with access then granted to Avplan, ozrunways, etc.

Its just not quite so simple. Yes the device has certain transmitters in it (wifi, cellular) but there is only so much you can do without establishing a link using those underlying hardware types. Those link types require some sort of authentication/trust relationships to be established, so you can't just broadcast your position and have it just work.

 

There are some possibilities when you have 3G coverage which we are experimenting with, but it relies on you having 3G coverage.

 

The ideal will be global fitment of ADSB. There are a few local developments in this space which will become public in the coming months which will make this much more achievable than it was before.

 

Bevan..

 

 

[Aldo]

Nope ,I was attempting a sort of humour, I won't give up either , I'll just try harder for you, here's a smilie so you know I'm not annoyed

Matty

Sorry missed the humour

 

Aldo

 

 

[Aldo]

Seems like I'm not the only one who thinks the current system isn't good enough

Nick

 

I applaud your enthusiasm but it's not the system, it's the inept application of the system by the users, the licence or certificate you hold is not relevant either (I've seen plenty of RAA guys that perform way better than GA/commercial guys and obviously vice versa).

 

My advice (for what it's worth and you certainly don't need to take any notice of me, I've only been flying for 27 years and I still learn something from every flight) is learn to fly with the equipment you have, with clock, compass, radio, up to date maps, wiz wheel and correct navigation procedures you should be able to give a pretty accurate position report at any time (+- 1NM) if you can't you haven't done enough training.

 

you have a device that can transmit your location to within 50m or so horizontally and 250m or so vertically.

You may want to check up on the separation requirements!

 

Forget the technology and fly the aeroplane (yes I do use GPS & I pad as this reduces the workload but I can throw both of them out the window and still know where I am within a small margin of error), VFR means visual navigation and we all need to be proficient, if we're not this is when the system fails.

 

Aldo

 

 

[facthunter]

I am pretty sure a lot of this is looked at periodically by the powers, but someone has to put their name on a procedure at some stage, If you are going to change things. ADSB is expensive and there will still be usage problems. Cost training and applicability.. What about clutter in small spaces. How will you specify actions to be taken under all possible situations?. When you are looking at your gadget you are NOT looking outside. How many people really know how to react to a situation where an aircraft looks like it is gong to collide with you? What if the other craft also does something to avoid you which is not correct. TCAS uses closure rates and advises actions It is a pretty sophisticated system for suitably equipped aircraft in the right circumstances. In circuit areas evasive action can easily compromise another aircraft, as an example.

 

The CASA have covered the see and be seen situation many times. No One says it is perfect, but I don't even think that most are treating it seriously. Correct radio procedures compliments the pair of eyes but it is pretty abysmal standard and getting worse. Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

Nick. You ask does it need to be perfect and it may seem logical to use anything that will work. But if it isn't perfect it will give false alarms and we all know that false alarms lead to disregarding the message.

 

 

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

A GPS-based traffic overlay on a moving map IS a form of alerted see-and-avoid - with much more accurate position reporting - and I'd expect the velocity vector of the traffic to be shown as well, so you get some indication of where it's going to be in the next half-minute of so. It will filter out traffic that is not relevant, so you do not have to listen to a lot of irrelevant traffic advisories, to sort out which ones are important. There's a lot less traffic out there now, than there was 20 years ago. Used correctly, it's an aid to visual detection and avoidance, NOT something to keep people's eyes inside.

 

 

[Aldo]

There's a lot less traffic out there now, than there was 20 years ago

Dafydd

 

You're not flying where I am then, the traffic here has increased by a factor of 20 (at least) over the past 12 months and most of it is in the 3 miles a minute plus range.

 

Aldo

 

 

[pmccarthy]

In inland Australia, a lot less GA (+RAA) traffic than there was 40 years ago.