On 20/04/2012 21:37, Simon Hackett wrote:
In the unlikely event you've not all seen it already, here's one way
the outcome could have turned out:
http://jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/007288.html
I will say that while I appreciate its an issue that more than a few
glider pilots seem passionately opposed to for their own reasons, the
notion of regularly operating transponders in gliders is one that I
personally believe would be of active assistance here (I certainly do so).
I think that doing so could directly improve safety in this regard
[noting that the link above indicates the glider concerned had one,
but it wasn't powered up - like all electronics, its far less
effective when its switched off]
I'm not directly arguing for mandating transponders in gliders (and
not specifically seeking to re-start that particular debate).
Rather, I'm just indicating there are significant merits in choosing
to operate a transponder in a glider, because having ATC and TCAS
equipped powered aircraft able to see *you* is definitely a source of
additional alerted avoidance of mid air collisions - whether or not
you have something in your glider that works in the other direction.
I've found that air traffic control is frequently helpful to VFR and
IFR aircraft, in that they will call you up proactively and advise of
the presence of transponder-equipped unidentified traffic in your
vicinity on a pretty routine basis. They're as interested in avoiding
mid air contacts as the rest of us are.
In addition, aircraft like the powered plane I'm fortunate enough to
fly also paints any aircraft with a working transponder on my moving
map... with position, relative altitude, and aural and visual alerting
of nearby traffic. This is becoming very much more common over time,
and increasingly affordable as a retrofit as well (cf. Zaon units, and
the always-nearly-available Power FLARM units).
As for all of the other ways we might become aware of another aircraft
in our vicinity (Mark I eyeball, use of VHF radio, FLARM, hang glider
pilot screaming obscenities after a powered aircraft or glider passes
too close, etc)... having one more way to avoid a collision has to be
a good thing, IMHO.
Anyway - we all do the best we can. And if we keep looking out for
(and looking after) each other, hopefully we can continue to minimise
the chances of such collisions overall.
Last thought I have here is that I reckon it'd be great if CASA (via
the GFA?) was asked about the notion of allocating a generic
transponder code for transponder-equipped gliders to use instead of
1200. That would help ATC to be sure that what they are seeing is a
glider, and hence would help them to inform other traffic more
usefully about the likely tracking characteristics of a glider they
may wish to alert other traffic about.
Regards,
Simon
For all that want to read the report:
http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief2.aspx?ev_id=20060906X01297&ntsbno=LAX06FA277B&akey=2
<http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief2.aspx?ev_id=20060906X01297&ntsbno=LAX06FA277B&akey=2>
And the recommendations:
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2008/a08_10_13.pdf
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2008/a08_14_15.pdf
regards,
Lucas
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
