On predicting in flight collisions

[MattP]

I use the stratux as well and awesome for adsb and not sucking the iPad battery for gps. Be aware though post Covid raspberry pi’s are unobtainium and selling well above rrp, so one of the retail solutions might actually be better value now days.

[Ian]

Does the Stratux provide an ADS-B out option?

Having a system which doesn't provide an out is pretty limited especially if lots of people start using it.

 

[Tasmag]

 

4 hours ago, Ian said:

Does the Stratux provide an ADS-B out option?

Having a system which doesn't provide an out is pretty limited especially if lots of people start using it.

 

No, only in unfortunately.

[MattP]

18 hours ago, Tasmag said:

 

No, only in unfortunately.

Yeah it's in only. It's useful if the aircraft you're flying has adsb out but not in. That's the situation I'm in and it's great to get situational awareness given in telling everyone else where I am.

[Garfly]

 

 

 

[Ian]

The short outtake from the video.

There are a lot of unknowns associated with the impact.

Two aircraft collided, one joining downwind, the other doing circuits with a crosswind join and turning downwind. One was a high wing, the other a low wing.

Both Aircraft were fitted with ADS-B.

One of the pilots didn't like the FAA knowing where he was an would often switch the ADSB off. This was a view that he frequently shared with his associates.

 

Whether activating his ADS-B could have saved his life is unknown.

 

[Thruster88]

5 hours ago, Ian said:

 

 

Whether activating his ADS-B could have saved his life is unknown.

 

5 year old C206 would most likely have had adsb in traffic on the garmin screens.

[Garfly]

5 hours ago, Thruster88 said:

5 year old C206 would most likely have had adsb in traffic on the garmin screens.

Yes, Juan explains (c. 04:40) that the Cessna PIC told him they'd tried to find the Swift on the ADSB-IN screen when they couldn't locate it by looking outside. Juan's hypothesis involves the classic high-wing/low-wing mutual occlusion scenario.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 25 by Garfly

[Flightrite]

Whilst ADSB is an additional tool for SA it’s not the be all end all. The application/installation of so much attention getting gadgets now available these days to GA has had a negative impact as well, that’s keeping the eyes inside way too much! See and be seen using the eyeball Mk2 still works well providing everyone sharing the airspace does the right thing and remains vigilant. too many cowboys fly amongst us!

[Garfly]

6 hours ago, Flightrite said:

Whilst ADSB is an additional tool for SA it’s not the be all end all. The application/installation of so much attention getting gadgets now available these days to GA has had a negative impact as well, that’s keeping the eyes inside way too much! See and be seen using the eyeball Mk2 still works well providing everyone sharing the airspace does the right thing and remains vigilant. too many cowboys fly amongst us!

Absolutely.  No tool covers all the angles, including (and maybe in the case above, especially) the Mk2 eyeball.

 

But then, the ATSB has been warning for decades against excessive faith in the human eye, in the sky (even in the absence of aerial cowboys) :

 

see_and_avoid_report_print copy 2.pdf

 

But sure, fixating on any one SA source (inside or out) isn't good; we have to learn to use new awareness tools intelligently.

 

As has been said before, safe driving calls for skilfully splitting one's attention between three mirrors and the view out front. You'd come to grief quick-smart fixating on just one of your mirrors. But who'd willingly go out on the highway without those multi-view gadgets attached?   

 

Anyway, it'd be illegal and I reckon soon it'll be the same to fly any flying machine without ADSB (for similar reasons).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 26 by Garfly

[Garfly]

18 hours ago, Moneybox said:

 

Excuse my ignorance, is my transponder ADSB?

 

King KT-76A Manual.pdf.crdownload 497.88 kB · 2 downloads

 

Obviously not because I've just watched this video explaining Transponders including ADSB.

 

 

Yeah, yours is a Mode A/C transponder, Moneybox.

 

advisory-circular-91-23-ads-b-enhancing-situational-awareness.pdf

 

This CASA Advisory Circular (updated a year back) is pretty informative and shows the regulator's current thinking about ADSB gear for the VFR mob.

 

A possibly relevant bit:

 

"4.4      About Mode A/C Transponders 

Mode A/C transponders are obsolete technology that have been replaced or are in the process of being replaced in most parts of the world by Mode S transponder technology. 

Australia already requires IFR aircraft to have a Mode S transponder as an essential component of ADS-B OUT equipment. For VFR aircraft, there are circumstances where a Mode S transponder is required, specifically: 

• for operations at major capital city aerodromes 
• for aircraft manufactured on or after 6 February 2014 
• where a VFR aircraft is modified by having its transponder installation replaced. 

 

Aircraft owners who continue to use an older Mode A/C transponder should be aware that older transponders may appear to function correctly and be able to pass routine pressure altitude encoder testing, yet be unserviceable because no longer meets the full performance requirements. For example, CAO 100.5 and airworthiness directive (AD) AD/RAD/47 identifies that transponders using electron tube technology (such as cavity oscillators) may suffer from reply pulse anomalies as the components age. The CAO or AD (as applicable) requires periodic testing for such anomalies and, if detected, requires repair or replacement. 

Since the cost of repairing a transponder by replacing its cavity oscillator is significant, the cost-effective solution is likely to be replacement transponder. In this case, a Mode S transponder is the logical choice. "

 

 

Also, a search of this site will turn up heaps of (locally oriented) discussion on transponders and "conspicuity devices" such as SkyEcho2s 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 26 by Garfly

[Ian]

ADSB is a tool which provides additional information on suitably equipt aircraft in the vicinity.

 

Being proud of the fact that you switch ADS-B off is the same category as being proud of not wearing a seatbelt, or of not wearing a helmet when riding a motorbike or being able to drive home after having a skinful.

 

The see and avoid report is a pretty blunt assessment of the efficacy of the approach.

 

I tend to agree with the likelihood of ADS-B becoming a mandatory requirement at some point in the future if the price of in and out continues to drop.

 

That being said ASD-B is a flawed technology from a protocol point of view.

[spacesailor]

But our stupid bureaucracy , 

Tells us to watch the speedometre All the time .

Big fines for taking your eyes off that clock .

spacesailor

[Ian]

15 hours ago, spacesailor said:

But our stupid bureaucracy , 

Tells us to watch the speedometre All the time .

Big fines for taking your eyes off that clock .

spacesailor

 

Personally I'd like to see the highway/freeway speed limit lifted to 160kmh for electric vehicles with automate safety features and a demonstrated low highway accident rate.

This would make electric cars more useful.

 

I would note that state government are fighting the release of their accident data. I suspect that this is because the areas where they raise the most revenue from speeding to keep us safe are not the areas where accidents occur.

 

https://www.drive.com.au/news/urgent-call-secret-crash-data-shared-toll-rises/

[skippydiesel]

10 minutes ago, Ian said:

 

Personally I'd like to see the highway/freeway speed limit lifted to 160kmh for electric vehicles with automate safety features and a demonstrated low highway accident rate.

This would make electric cars more useful.

 

I would note that state government are fighting the release of their accident data. I suspect that this is because the areas where they raise the most revenue from speeding to keep us safe are not the areas where accidents occur.

 

https://www.drive.com.au/news/urgent-call-secret-crash-data-shared-toll-rises/

I agree that some "highway/freeway speed limit" should be raised.

 

Our appalling road accident statistics are all about extraordinarily bad driving culture.

 

CULTURE in this context covers:

• Lack of adherence to/knowledge of road rules
• Poor driver courtesy.
• Low levels of driver skill.
• Brainwashed driver population who believe that speed is the only significant factor in accidents.
• Too low a pass "bar" for new drivers.
• Lack of driver review testing (until you are in your dotage). 
• With the exception of speed/substance/seatbelts/phones (mostly done by automated camera) -poor policing of road rules and driver behaviour.
• Failure to tailor the punishment to the crime.
• Inconsistent/illogical speed limits.
• Inconsistent/illogical road signage.
• Way too many "authorities" who make local rules, inconsistent with wider State/Federal rules & even common sense.
• Bad road design.
• Stupid politicians who, despite all the evidence to the contrary, waste public money on ineffectual anti speeding campaigns and never address the primary cause of road accidents -extraordinarily bad driving culture. 

Your "vehicles with automate safety features" are a crutch for the  incompetent and do little for non urban/highway driving safety.

 

One day (hopefully after I have departed) we will have fully automated road vehicles - it will be illegal to controle a vehicle, on the public road and the accident rate will fall to almost "0"!😈

[spacesailor]

We have had ' driver assist. ' Since we got married .

Back Seat Driver  Assistance .

LoL

spacesailor

Edited September 27 by spacesailor
A I changed word

[Ian]

1 hour ago, skippydiesel said:

CULTURE in this context covers:

• Lack of adherence to/knowledge of road rules
• Poor driver courtesy.
• Low levels of driver skill.
• Brainwashed driver population who believe that speed is the only significant factor in accidents.
• Too low a pass "bar" for new drivers.
• Lack of driver review testing (until you are in your dotage). 
• With the exception of speed/substance/seatbelts/phones (mostly done by automated camera) -poor policing of road rules and driver behaviour.
• Failure to tailor the punishment to the crime.
• Inconsistent/illogical speed limits.
• Inconsistent/illogical road signage.
• Way too many "authorities" who make local rules, inconsistent with wider State/Federal rules & even common sense.
• Bad road design.
• Stupid politicians who, despite all the evidence to the contrary, waste public money on ineffectual anti speeding campaigns and never address the primary cause of road accidents -extraordinarily bad driving culture. 

Your "vehicles with automate safety features" are a crutch for the  incompetent and do little for non urban/highway driving safety.

Technology can make for better drivers. Just as technology can make for better pilots.

My experience is that there are poorly trained drivers. There are also drivers who are so old they're no longer competent to drive.

If a computer can drive a car better than a person let the computer drive.

Similarly I'd like to see planes largely automated allowing someone with limited skill to fly, it would improve the infrastructure and quality of life of many many people.

 

 

[skippydiesel]

"Technology can make for better drivers. Just as technology can make for better pilots."

 

Technology is a two edged sword - Rarely does it make for "better" operators. Most often it allows for lower skilled operators to do the job, sort of.

Classic example: Air France Airbus A330, with pitot blockage, lost over the south Atlantic. In short, FIRST due to pitot failure operators/pilots, failure to fly the aircraft and SECOND solve/investigate the problems. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447#:~:text=On 1 June 2009%2C inconsistent,passengers and crew on board.

 

"My experience is that there are poorly trained drivers."

They are in the majority.

 

"There are also drivers who are so old they're no longer competent to drive."

This is pure agism - all drivers ,like pilots, should be subject to regular reviews of their skill/knowledge (compentants). I see crap P plate (young) drivers, every time I go out and yes the occasional geriatric, who should not be behind the wheel BUT there are so many other drivers who can't reverse park, do not know how to use a traffic circle, seem unable to indicate appropriately/if at all, pass another vehicle, merge, keep to the left, etc, etc.

 

"If a computer can drive a car better than a person let the computer drive." 

Agreed - however this is a long way off, for all but urban & freeway driving.

 

"Similarly I'd like to see planes largely automated allowing someone with limited skill to fly,"

See Air France above . Also- for many the challenge, achievement & maintenance of applied skill/knowledge, is what flying is about. It will be a sad sad day when a computer does it all. I hope that I never see this and also that your sentiment, for driving/piloting, is in the minority.

 

 

".......... it would improve the infrastructure and quality of life of many many people."

It will further dumb down an already ovin population.

 

 

[spacesailor]

When that date ' of ( driver less ) autominus cars arrives.

I will get no enjoyment  sitting in a passengers seat ,

'swearing at another media screen ' as I do now to this  ( so-called ) smart television . That asks stupid questions. 

spacesailor

[Ian]

On 27/09/2024 at 1:14 PM, skippydiesel said:

"There are also drivers who are so old they're no longer competent to drive."

This is pure agism - all drivers ,like pilots, should be subject to regular reviews of their skill/knowledge (compentants). I see crap P plate (young) drivers, every time I go out and yes the occasional geriatric, who should not be behind the wheel BUT there are so many other drivers who can't reverse park, do not know how to use a traffic circle, seem unable to indicate appropriately/if at all, pass another vehicle, merge, keep to the left, etc, etc.

Actually it's not agism, it's science. 80 year old drivers accident fatalities are on par with new drivers, and they get worse not better. Ageism is where an unreasonable bias is held against the elderly, in this case it's a reasonable bias.

It's better to spend public resources where they're actually necessary, we've made getting a licence incredibly burdensome for the young, often requiring hundreds of hours of supervised driving. We do SFA on policing the similar decline in driving skills.

The current scheme of getting a doctor to decided if a driver has adequate cognitive skills is frankly woeful.

A computer generated based test which simulated busy traffic which tested reaction times and decision skills would be better.

[Red]

Yes Cognative decline is very real and nobody is wholly immune to it's affect.

In the current UK Driving tests there is a section where you asked to watch a video taken from the drivers viewpoint and you have to click a button every time you see a developing hazard such as someone approaching a crossing or a bicycle about to  manouvre around an obstacle. I think this test should be required to be re-taken at perhaps 70 years old it would catch a lot of unsafe drivers either due mental decline, slow reactions or simply poor eyesight.

How you could transfer this regime to Pilots is perhaps more complex.

 

Edit..on the flipside the standard of driving in youngsters in this country is frankly appalling, though in this case not to do with ability but mainly poor attitude things that are far harder to tackle as they would require changes in society as a whole

Edited September 28 by Red

[skippydiesel]

From my perspective it is ageism. Why? because I am an advocate of periodic (every 5 years?) driver review/test for ALL including so called professionals, like the police (who I often see demonstrating poor driving attitude).

 

If all were tested on a regular basis, then those with health issues (affecting driving from any cause) AND POOR DRIVING SKILLS/KNOWLEDGE ,etc would lose their licence. This, appropriate policing, logical & consistent laws/signs would bring about cultural change and dramatical reduce vehicle accidents.

[onetrack]

Ian, let us know if you still hold the same opinion about ageing drivers capabilities, when you get to 80! 🙂

[spacesailor]

A little bit more ! .

When most drivers get to 10 or 15 years past retirement. 

they automatically slow  their driving , as they are no longer Regimented by the clock .

My son in law , I find to be a terrible driver . Highly strung , explosive temperament,  runs red lights if he 

thinks his luck will hold . Lastly  he will drink & drive.

but he will pass any test you throw at him .

Three of my grand-sons are into fast cars ,

Even raced in Japan last year, invited back for this year .

spacesailor

 

[skippydiesel]

"If you want to pick on drivers I suggest you start with driving instructors who fail to understand or practice the rules of the road"

 

The problem with driving instructors, for that matter any instructor who depends for their living on students passing whatever test.

Naturally the focus on passing the test - this is what bring repeat customers and $$$ in their pockets.

Turning out skilled, knowledgeable, courteous drivers, does not pay the medical bills/school fees.

Do not blame the instructors, blame the system  (governments) which encourages this sort of dumbing down.

Its the governments job to set the standards (no the instructors) - the "bar" is far too low.