Glider Crash - Minden?
Mitch
False?
-EX
Bill Daniels
and: http://www.ktvn.com/dyn_fullnews.asp?area=fullTopStory&storyid=7164
Bill Daniels
"Mitch" <mhuds...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1156819814.3...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Mitch
Humm looks like it's time to be getting that X-ponder and put off the
refinish another year or so.
-EX
asw22...@gmail.com
Challenger 800X with 5 on board on route to Reno from San Diego
collided with an ASG29 around 16,000ft east on Minden on the Pinenut
mountains.
The Jet landed gear up at Carson City the pilot sustaining minor
injuries in the initial impact.
The Glider Pilot bailed and landed ok.
Look at KRNV.com or RGJ.com for more info.
This is not good as there are elections going on in NV right now and
you know some moron politician is going to try to make the skies
safer!!
Later
Al
Ramy Yanetz
if he could not afford one...
> This is not good as there are elections going on in NV right now and
> you know some moron politician is going to try to make the skies
> safer!!
problem with that...
Ramy
<asw22...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1156826186.9...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Stewart Kissel
Update with picture of glider pilot and damaged jet.
DocJim
Can anyone report the conditions at 16,000 feet at the time of the
collision, and the class of airspace?
SAM 303a
I haven't seen anything that suggests that the glider pilot was in any way
at fault. The glider was hit by the jet, not vice versa. Visual rules were
in effect.
Why are we asking what else could the glider pilot do?
Why aren't we asking "what else could the jet pilot have done?"
The jet does not have a greater right to use the skies than the glider.
I'm not arguing against transponders. I am arguing in favor of taking a
stand on the principle that we all have a right to use the skies, subject to
our compliance with the appropriate rules. We should not stand before the
regulators saying "we'll add any gizmo you ask if you'll just let us keep
flying". If anyone was at fault here it was the jet pilot for (pick one or
more of the following) not maintaining a visual scan of traffic, flying too
fast to react to the presence of a glider, not recognizing that the
sectional markings showing a glider port might be significant to how she
operated the aircraft.
"Ramy Yanetz" <rya...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:YLPIg.21540$gY6....@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
gregg...@gmail.com
own advocates will sell us out.
Derek Copeland
Aviation Authority, otherwise known as the 'Campaign
Against Aviation') enforcing the mandatory carriage
of Mode S transponders in all aircraft, which includes
gliders. The basic bit of kit costs about £1600 plus
fitting by an 'approved' organisation and Value Added
Tax (17.5%). In total we estimate this will cost at
least £3000+ per glider, with additional ongoing servicing
and licencing costs. Then there are all the extra batteries
that we will have to carry if we want to fly for more
than about 3 hours, which will have to come out of
our permitted MAUW. The fittings for the extra batteries
may have to have design approval by EASA, which is
another major cost.
Although transponders work perfectly well in IMC conditions,
they are also trying to impose strict VMC conditions
on gliding.
You may have enough money to fit and run a Mode S transponder
Ramy, but many private owners of older sailplanes do
not. An airworthy wooden gliders can be picked up for
£3k or less in the UK. Even for club owned gliders,
this proposal would significantly increase the cost
of flying gliders.
Most collisions involving gliders are with other gliders
in thermals or on ridges, or with GA or military aircraft.
Mode S transponders do little or nothing to address
this problem. Hence we are being asked to pay large
sums of money for protecting Commercial Airliners that
wish to take short cuts through Class G airspace, without
any benefits to us. Speaking personally I would be
less hostile to fitting ADS-B or FLARM systems, which
are cheaper, less power hungry and are of some benefit
to glider pilots in detecting other aircraft. Otherwise
we should expect all pilots to keep a good lookout
when flying in Class G.
Derek Copeland
At 05:00 29 August 2006, Ramy Yanetz wrote:
>A miracle. Did the ASG 29 used a transponder? Assuming
>not, I am wondering
>if he could not afford one...
>> This is not good as there are elections going on in
>>NV right now and
>> you know some moron politician is going to try to
>>make the skies
>> safer!!
>Maybe by enforcing the use of transponders in the Reno
>area? I don't see a
>problem with that...
>
>Ramy
>
> wrote in message
>news:1156826186.9...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> Rumor control here...
>>
>> Challenger 800X with 5 on board on route to Reno from
>>San Diego
>> collided with an ASG29 around 16,000ft east on Minden
>>on the Pinenut
>> mountains.
>>
>> The Jet landed gear up at Carson City the pilot sustaining
>>minor
>> injuries in the initial impact.
>>
>> The Glider Pilot bailed and landed ok.
>>
>> Look at KRNV.com or RGJ.com for more info.
>>
>> This is not good as there are elections going on in
>>NV right now and
>> you know some moron politician is going to try to
>>make the skies
>> safer!!
>>
>> Later
>>
>> Al
>>
>>
>> Mitch wrote:
Ramy
one either ), it is doing nothing to improve safety then mode C,which
should cost around 2K in the US, no more then a flight computer.
I absolutly agree, Flarm or ADS-B are far better, but it may take
another generation until it will be widely implemented, especially in
the US. Meanwhile, at least in the US, our only option is the 30 years
old technology of transponders, which are relatively effordable for
most pilots I see flying at the Reno area.
Ramy
Marc Ramsey
> Derek, I am not advocating mode S transponder (which I couldn't efford
> one either ), it is doing nothing to improve safety then mode C,which
> should cost around 2K in the US, no more then a flight computer.
Double that figure, and you'll have a more typical installed cost in the
US, particularly in a type certified glider. A transponder installation
is a different kettle of fish from a glide computer, a 337 is often
required...
Ramy
if it sounded like, we don't even know yet if the glider had a
transponder or not. I was just trying to make a point (again) on the
importance of transponders, as the only mean currently available to us
to avoid these kind of accidents. But how can a jet travelling at over
300 knots, which may have been 400 knots closing speed, could see a
glider on time to react if (assuming) the glider was flying straight
and level? It is almost impossible to see a glider more then a mile
away if it is not turning or zooming. This translates into 5 seconds or
so to see and react at these speeds.
Since on average we are circling say 30% of the time, we are invisible
70% of the time we are in the air.The only reason we don't collide all
the time is that the sky is big and gliders are small. See and Avoid
only works in traffic pattern, not when crusing. Check the following
article:
http://dwp.bigplanet.com/fosterflight/scottsrants/view.nhtml?profile=scottsrants&UID=10015
To avoid making myself unpopular, I'll rest my case. I am very glad no
one was hurt, and hope that more pilots will fly with transponders at
their own choice as a result. And if you do, please don't turn it off
away from Reno, especially not over the white mountains as some of us
are flying with TPAS. If you don't use a tranponder, please make a
circle every few minutes...
Ramy
Ramy
it. Bailing out of a broken glider is no easy task.
Ramy
diederik
installation of transponders. The Dutch CAA was convinced to "stall"
installation of
transponders for a couple of years. Arguments that were used:
- Power consumption.
- Very limited amount of manufacturers that are producing LOW POWER
consumption transponders (no competition so a manopoly for one or two
supliers).
- What setting will you put the transponder on when you don't have any
ATC communication?
- Positioning of the antenea. That is something the the manufacturer of
the AC should determine (who is going to go back to Sweizer for the
1-26 or 2-33 or 2-22 or to Glasflugel for the Libelle). If you don't
put them in the right position it could harm the pilot (radiation
hazard) and/or provide a useless signal that can only be recieved from
useless angles (on the 747 they originaly had placed the transponder
antenne on top, until they discoverd that it didn't gave a decent
signal for ATC while flying straight and level....)
- What do you think that ATC will do when a glider contest is going on
or when there are 10 gliders in one thermal? There first responce will
be to filter out all gliders, since they don't use any ATC
communication. Because of so many gliders in a small area the system
will generate "false returns" (it interogates one transponder and gets
a return from a different transponder so it will mess up the whole
system)
- Why do we have different classes of airspace, that is exactly the
reason, to keep us seperated (commercial AC from gliders). So if a
commercial aircraft is in class G airspace they should be the one to be
extra allert. According to the rules a powered AC should give way to a
Glider!
- Most of the time we are flying realtively low so the possibility of
running into a commercial aircraft is relatively low. The only AC's
that fly fast and low are Fighters and they don't carry any transponder
at all!
- It is also a question of mentality of the commercial pilots, I have
flown a number of test flights with a fokker 100 and only during
takeoff or landing do they ever raise there head to see what's outside
of the aircraft (even though these pilots were also glider pilots)!
- Generaly glider pilots are most of the time busy to see what's going
on outside in conterary to comercial pilots. Why should the glider
pilot pay for solving a problem that is mainly caused by commercial
flights? If we raise an airline ticket by not even one US$ cent (0,01)
there is enough money to provide every glider with a transponder so why
ask every individual glider pilot to spend a 1000 US or more to solve
a problem that is not theirs?
- Now it is the Mode S transponder they want, when this discussion took
place, not even 3 years ago they wanted us to install Mode C
transponders, so what's the next $ 4000 (total cost of installation
maintenance extra power suply, certification in some cases) gadget that
they want you to replace the mode S transponder with?
Diederik
PS: this can become a long discussion!
Stewart Kissel
One picture=1,000 words
kirk.stant
Ramy wrote:
> Meanwhile, at least in the US, our only option is the 30 years
> old technology of transponders, which are relatively effordable for
> most pilots I see flying at the Reno area.
Ramy, what if the collision had been between an older Learjet, not
equipped with TCAS, and not talking to ATC (in the process of being
handed off, talking to FSS, or just tooling around VFR. Transponders
would be totally useless in preventing the midair.
Remember, unless equipped with TCAS (big jets) or an IFF interrogator
(many military fighters), or talking to the controlling agency that is
actually watching you and your transponder, it's not going to do any
good. It is absolutely no good at preventing VFR - VFR midairs.
TPAS is a good solution, since it warns you of someone else tooling
around with his xponder on. ADS-B would be nice, if
affordable/practicable in a glider. FLARM is pretty much only
glider-to-glider, and requires active participation (and is a moot
point in the US anyway, at present).
If I was going to get up in the flight levels with my glider (no
thanks, I happen to like my old gelcoat, thankyou!) I would seriously
consider a transponder. Also an attitude indicator!. Down lower, if
traffic is an issue, then I'm leaning towards some kind of TPAS - like
device. I'm waiting for one with a good aural cue (I think there is
one out now). Any comments from current TPAS users out there?
Kirk
66
Ramy
gives you warning for nearby transponder equipped aircraft. All it does
actually is alerting you to scan for traffic when there is traffic
nearby. It doesn't tell you where it is though, but for $500 I think it
worth it. There is now a better unit offered on Wings and Wheels
http://www.wingsandwheels.com/page4.htm
Installation is not much of an issue, since those units are so small
you can stick them to the glare shield as I do. Just make sure to buy
one with voice alerts as you noted, as you would not notice the leds
during day time when your eyes are focused outside.
Ramy
Gary Emerson
> Why are we asking what else could the glider pilot do?
> Why aren't we asking "what else could the jet pilot have done?"
> The jet does not have a greater right to use the skies than the glider.
Furthermore, let's not forget the FAA right of way rules. A glider has
right of way over all powered craft unless that craft is in distress.
Eric Greenwell
> Ramy wrote:
>> Meanwhile, at least in the US, our only option is the 30 years
>> old technology of transponders, which are relatively effordable for
>> most pilots I see flying at the Reno area.
>
> Ramy, what if the collision had been between an older Learjet, not
> equipped with TCAS, and not talking to ATC (in the process of being
> handed off, talking to FSS, or just tooling around VFR.
Do they actually do that? And why would they want to, as long as they
had radar coverage? I'm having a hard time imagining a professional jet
pilot flying around at 300 knots that wouldn't want to be talking to
ATC, especially with passengers.
I'm not questioning your advice on TPAS units, just wondering how likely
your scenario is. The TPAS units would also work with the average
Cessna, which is certainly doesn't have TCAS, and even more likely to be
without ATC contact.
--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane
Operation"
Mike the Strike
alerted a couple of times of approaching traffic when it started
replying to frequent interrogations. I was able to locate these
aircraft visually. Clearly an alert system would be an inexpensive and
valuable asset.
Having the right of way in a glider is about as useful as having right
of way in a sailboat when you're about to be run over by a mega
container ship (which has also happened to me). Large aircraft (and
vessels) just might not see you and, even if they do, can't avoid you
becasue of their mass and speed. I'd just like to steer clear of
conflict, which includes alerting others to my presence and learning
about theirs.
Good grief, there are still folks in the USA (including some well-known
glider FBOs) that fly without radios, let alone transponders.
Mike
W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
practically universal in the European Alps, and widely fitted in Australia.
In the Swiss Alps it is also fitted to rescue helicopters, partly because of
its obstacle database.
ADS-B out can be read by ADS-B in.
In Australia they are working on the idea that an enhancement to ADS-B
could enable it to read Flarm, and an enhancement to Flarm could enable it
to read ADS-B.
This is why things may improve when Mode A/C and Mode S are phased out in
favour of ADS-B.
In Australia Flarm is built under licence (OzFlarm), there are other
licensees. Is there nobody interested in doing this in the USA ? It
would surely be ideal for any light aircraft. I understand that there is
an add-on to Flarm which can sound a signal in headphones.
Remember, Modes A/C and S are only transmitted when the Transponder is
triggered by an interrogation. Flarm and ADS-B transmit regularly without
having to be triggered.
W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
Remove "ic" to reply.
>
> "kirk.stant" <kirk....@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1156886955.1...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
>>
>> Ramy wrote:
>> Meanwhile, at least in the US, our only option is the 30 years
>> old technology of transponders, which are relatively affordable for
>> most pilots I see flying at the Reno area.
>>
>
> <snip>
>
> TPAS is a good solution, since it warns you of someone else tooling
> around with his xponder on. ADS-B would be nice, if
> affordable/practicable in a glider. FLARM is pretty much only
> glider-to-glider, and requires active participation (and is a moot
> point in the US anyway, at present).
>
> <snip>
>
> Kirk
> 66
>
kirk.stant
to see from another aircraft approaching.
So much for professional pilots looking out the window.
If the glider had been cruising I could understand it. I've lost
gliders I've been following when I knew where they were. But there is
little excuse in a two-crew cockpit to miss something as substantial as
an 18 meter glider thermalling in front of you!
In the AF we called it clearing your flightpath. Everything else is
secondary at jet speeds.
Good job getting the jet and it's valuable pax back unharmed. Love the
pic of the glider spar in the radome! But I would love to hear the
crew admit they were heads-down at the time of the collision, if that
is what really happened.
Of course, I could be totally wrong - sun, bugs on the canopy, etc...
And this assumes the glider was actually turning, of course.
Well, it's better than trying to take off on the wrong runway,
anyway...
Check 6, guys! (and 9, and 3, and 12, and...)
Kirk
66
Eric Greenwell
> Hmm, the glider is thermalling - probably the easiest thing in the air
> to see from another aircraft approaching.
>
> So much for professional pilots looking out the window.
>
> If the glider had been cruising I could understand it. I've lost
> gliders I've been following when I knew where they were. But there is
> little excuse in a two-crew cockpit to miss something as substantial as
> an 18 meter glider thermalling in front of you!
A thermalling glider should be able to see approaching aircraft more
easily, too. Quite different from being run down by a faster aircraft
coming up behind. We probably shouldn't be too smug at this point, until
we know the facts for sure.
snoop
BTIZ
so now what are we going to enforce..
BT
"Ramy Yanetz" <rya...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:YLPIg.21540$gY6....@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
Mike Schumann
Mike Schumann
"W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.)." <bill...@freeuk.comic> wrote in message
news:ed2k8h$r83$1$8300...@news.demon.co.uk...
Mike Schumann
that is approaching at 200-300 knots.
Mike Schumann
"Eric Greenwell" <flyg...@charter.netto> wrote in message
news:Zn6Jg.3900$nR2.1435@trnddc03...
Eric Greenwell
> reports are the ASG29 had a transponder..
> so now what are we going to enforce..
Maybe using it? I don't think it's been confirmed the transponder was
operating, but I'm sure ATC knows, and should have the tapes to prove it.
SAM 303a
"Mike Schumann" <mike-...@traditions-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:u%gJg.3214$xQ1...@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
jb92563
HL Falbaum
can disappear during two parts of the circle even when we know where to
look. And the jet jock probably does not know what to look for or to
understand the significance of what (s)he sees.
A thermalling glider has a moving blind spot that may be 15 seconds or more.
Not much-but how much distance can a bizjet cover in 15 seconds? Remember to
increase the TAS (and thus GS) by 2% per thousand feet over and above the
IAS.---The jet can go from a speck to very big in that distance.
--
Hartley Falbaum
DG800B "KF" USA
"Eric Greenwell" <flyg...@charter.netto> wrote in message
news:Zn6Jg.3900$nR2.1435@trnddc03...
> kirk.stant wrote:
>> Hmm, the glider is thermalling - probably the easiest thing in the air
>> to see from another aircraft approaching.
>>
>
Matt Herron Jr.
so it was not turned on...
Mike the Strike
transponder? Can't be worse than getting run over by a bizjet.
Mike
Jack
> ...and what is the downside of operating a new but uncertified
> transponder? Can't be worse than getting run over by a bizjet.
One serious downside would be to cause a false Resolution Advisory
indication on another ship's TCAS, resulting in a traffic conflict where
none was likely otherwise, either with the "offending" glider or another
ship.
Jack
Eric Greenwell
> We know how to recognize a thermaling glider from far off. But the glider
> can disappear during two parts of the circle even when we know where to
> look. And the jet jock probably does not know what to look for or to
> understand the significance of what (s)he sees.
>
> A thermalling glider has a moving blind spot that may be 15 seconds or more.
> Not much-but how much distance can a bizjet cover in 15 seconds? Remember to
> increase the TAS (and thus GS) by 2% per thousand feet over and above the
> IAS.---The jet can go from a speck to very big in that distance.
Yes, and even worse, the glider goes from a tiny speck to not very big
in the same distance. It's a tough situation for see-and-avoid.
Mike the Strike
new transponder and encoder that are correctly working (properly
reporting position and altitude) but are not certified?
Mike
Jack
> OK, let me rephrase the question - what is the downside of operating a
> new transponder and encoder that are correctly working (properly
> reporting position and altitude) but are not certified?
How do you find one of those?
Jack
----------------------
Eric Greenwell
What does "certification" entail? When my transponder was installed, all
it got was a 5 minute "VFR check" with a little box about 5 feet from
the glider that showed it responded to interrogations and that the mode
C altitude reported was the airport elevation. It that all it takes to
ensure a TCAS isn't fooled?
Mike the Strike
someone who probably isn't an expert on avionics just using a test box
or gizmo of some sort. It's easy to test your encoder yourself - many
transponders will report their output for you - and if your transponder
replies to interrogations with the correct altitude, the only questions
remaining are the transmitter output frequency and power. (something I
am equipped to measure too, but then I am a geek with high-tech toys!)
If I had a working transponder, it would be on, whatever the status of
the paperwork!
Mike
sta...@gmail.com
snoop wrote:
> Must be nice to walk on water!
Actually, it's the water into wine trick that really wows the crowd I
hang with...
No apologies - the bizjet should have seen the glider. The glider also
should have seen the bizjet. There may be reasons why that didn't
happen - and I'll be the first to admit I've been guilty of late
detection of aircraft nearby. If I screw up, I've got no problem
admitting it - there really isn't much room for ego where flight safety
is concerned.
But I also know from first hand that all this hysteria about closing
speed is BS. Even jet fighters can be seen in time to avoid.
Airliners are huge and almost impossible to miss. Bizjets fit in
between.
But you have to be looking.
Kirk
Stefan
> But I also know from first hand that all this hysteria about closing
> speed is BS. Even jet fighters can be seen in time to avoid.
No.
http://www.bfu-web.de/cln_003/nn_41544/DE/Publikationen/Untersuchungsberichte/1998/Bericht__3X191-1-2.98,templateId=raw,property=publicationFile.pdf/Bericht_3X191-1-2.pdf
http://www.bfu.admin.ch/common/pdf/1598
Stefan
snoop
water into Shiner Bock. Anyway, Kirk, I was looking at the Reno/Minden
area arrival procedures and almost all of them have in a BIG box the
words, Caution Intensive Glider traffic, or something to that effect.
I haven't read back through the thread, to see which arrival is in
question, but it appears to me that our local glider folks have done
their homework, with regard to putting up the big billboard for those
of us who come zipping through that airspace in hi performance
aircraft, that there are other aircraft in the area. Be aware.
I fly out of Dallas Love for work and Texas Soaring for fun. When I've
been at work and flying that one arrival, which puts us on top of TSA,
I always ask the controller, "is there any glider activity today"? Plus
I call on 123.3 to see if anyone is up. This doesn't happen that often,
but when it has been a nice day, and the possibility of glider activity
exists I do these things.
Playing the devils advocate, I was asking Bubba, in another thread,
what the chances are that the glider pilot will be asked about his
installation and use of oxygen at 16000ft. Another angle.
Mark Dickson
(probably was) flying IFR. He may have been recieving
a radar service from Reno. If so, he should have been
passed traffic information by ATC. Even if the glider
was not transponding it would still have produced a
primary return; don't believe that myth about gliders
not providing radar returns, they do.
Brian
getting a reply and if the altitude checks with my altimeter.
Not official, but I sometimes am suspicious of certified transponders
and don't want pay a shop to find out if I need to take it to the shop.
Brian Case
Mike Schumann
approaching at 100 - 200 knots.
Mike Schumann
"SAM 303a" <brentDAHTsullivanATgmailDAHTcom> wrote in message
news:12fb8l3...@corp.supernews.com...
Tony Verhulst
> Water into wine? Bubba and I have been tryin' to figure out how to turn
> water into Shiner Bock.
We were enjoying a single malt Scotch after a fine day of soaring and
some one said "that stuff looks like p*ss". My comment was "get me the
guy that passed it and 5 gallons of water" :-).
Tony V "6N"
kirk.stant
Stefan wrote:
> No.
Yes. I've done it in fighters, light planes, and gliders. Dodged
F-16s and AV-8Bs in Arizona for many years in my LS6.
Of course, if you don't see it, for whatever reason, then yes it can
hit you. If you were deaf, you could even get run over by a blimp!
(except the shadow might warn you!).
Worse case is getting run down from behind. It helps if you hear the
fighters and throw up a wing so they see you (done that too - it worked
just fine). You do have to be willing to move your glider around to
look all around when you suspect there is someone in your blind spot.
I'll keep on looking out the window instead of fiddling with my PDA.
Cheers,
Kirk
66
LOV2AV8
IFR does not relieve anyone of "see and avoid" when VMC. This is a
common misconception when receiving IFR handling from ATC. I think we
need to educate others as to the fact that there are aircraft above
10,000 MSL without Transponders. I have heard from more than one
airline pilot "What's he doing up here" when our field is on the
sectional and Tucson Approach puts a warning on ATIS with altitudes
we're operating at. I've had pilots defend thier position saying they
were IFR and don't even have a sectional with them to know they are in
the vicinity of a glider field.
Eric Greenwell
> Eric Greenwell <flyg...@charter.netto> wrote:
>
>> What does "certification" entail? When my transponder was installed, all
>> it got was a 5 minute "VFR check" with a little box about 5 feet from
>> the glider that showed it responded to interrogations and that the mode
>> C altitude reported was the airport elevation. It that all it takes to
>> ensure a TCAS isn't fooled?
>
> the 91.413 tests, which reference Appendix F of Part 43. As
> a matter of interest, I looked them up:
>
> Appendix F--ATC Transponder Tests and Inspections
>
> The ATC transponder tests required by Sec. 91.413 of this
> chapter may be conducted using a bench check or portable
> test equipment and must meet the requirements prescribed in
> paragraphs (a) through (j) of this appendix. If portable
Big snip. An awful lot of stuff that doesn't apply to a mode C VFR
transponder check. Does any of it make my "box on the ground check"
insufficient to meet the standards? It would take longer to read, let
alone understand, than the actual check took.
Eric Greenwell
>
>> ...and what is the downside of operating a new but uncertified
>> transponder? Can't be worse than getting run over by a bizjet.
>
> resolution could result from a bad encoder altitude.
My transponder reads out the encoder altitude. Is that adequate? Or how
about asking ATC what altitude they are reading from my glider? Or how
about using it in Mode A until it's checked?
Eric Greenwell
> Stefan wrote:
>> No.
>
> Yes. I've done it in fighters, light planes, and gliders. Dodged
> F-16s and AV-8Bs in Arizona for many years in my LS6.
>
> Of course, if you don't see it, for whatever reason, then yes it can
> hit you. If you were deaf, you could even get run over by a blimp!
> (except the shadow might warn you!).
>
> Worse case is getting run down from behind. It helps if you hear the
> fighters and throw up a wing so they see you (done that too - it worked
> just fine). You do have to be willing to move your glider around to
> look all around when you suspect there is someone in your blind spot.
Would you write an article for Soaring magazine about your techniques?
It seems like an appropriate time. I know I don't see fighters soon
enough, and I'm sure I could miss aircraft coming up behind me. I often
see aircraft in the distance, but I know I haven't seen some airplanes
of various types that were potential threats.
Graeme Cant
> ...and what is the downside of operating a new but uncertified
> transponder? Can't be worse than getting run over by a bizjet.
> Mike
I'd guess the problem is the same as the parachute with an out of date
packing slip. It's illegal to carry the parachute, much less attempt to
use it just because it's the only thing that might save your life.
An uncertificated transponder installation probably has a C/B that the
pilot was told was illegal to set. A conscientious, Japanese visitor
probably thinks following the hometown rules is the right thing to do.
GC
309
Fortunately, it is not as easy for the government to change the
regulations as it is for us to spew them on the web.
Good detective work, Todd.
As the Dali Lama was qouted: "Study the rule so you can break them
properly."
-Pete
T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
SAM 303a
"Mike Schumann" <mike-...@traditions-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:f5sJg.12309$Qf....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
SAM 303a
fast in such an area?
What are the responsibilities of the jet pilot? If the pilot must yeild to
the glider, isn't the jet pilot being irresponsible if she flies at a speed
that allows her no opportunity to yeild?
"Eric Greenwell" <flyg...@charter.netto> wrote in message
news:qDjJg.3232$XD1.570@trnddc01...
Papa3
T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
> I've had situations where I hear piston traffic coming from
> behind while in cruise. I'm never quite sure if "throwing a
> wing up" helps me because it makes me easier to see or hurts
> me because it makes my impact cross section larger for the
> oncoming aircraft in level cruise. I've always been
> inclined towards the "it hurts me," but not with any real
> conviction one way or another.
> --
> T o d d P a t t i s t - "WH" Ventus C
> (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
In those situations, I've always found that ducking my head and
slouching my shoulders to assume the nearest thing to fetal position
possible in a glider cockpit was comforting. Not sure what it does to
the probability of an impact though :-).
In all seriousness, I have in the past been fairly careful about flying
along those Victor airways that I know to be primary approach corridors
into our local area (ie. New York). Whenever I've been in one, I've
tended to do what Kirk does, which is to make a slightly more than 90
degree shackle turn every few minutes to both provide a visible surface
and to see what's behind me. In retrospect, it's probably not an
extremely effective maneuver since the timing would have to be just
right to have any impact (or, rather, not have any impact). Just the
other day, I had a 40 mile final glide, level for the most part between
4,500 and 6,500 MSL (pretty rare here in the East, but it does happen).
That was a long time to be more or less invisible to a rapidly
approaching Bizjet if there happened to be one...
Erik Mann
LS8-18 P3
kirk.stant
Eric Greenwell wrote:
> Would you write an article for Soaring magazine about your techniques?
> It seems like an appropriate time. I know I don't see fighters soon
> enough, and I'm sure I could miss aircraft coming up behind me. I often
> see aircraft in the distance, but I know I haven't seen some airplanes
> of various types that were potential threats.
>
Eric, it's not so much a technique as paranoia about other traffic.
There are some tricks that all pilots should know and use: have an
absolutely clean canopy (inside and out - I'm amazed by how filthy most
pilots let their canopies get), minimize reflections and obstructions
(PDA's, big compasses, etc.), keep "inside the cockpit" tasks short,
refocus at inifinity often while scanning, look for threats, not just
passing airplanes (low or high is not very critical, what's on the
horizon is dangerous!, and ALWAYS CLEAR YOUR FLIGHTPATH), look for
motion or lack of it in the forward quadrant.
Use every tool available - call out passing planes to other gliders and
vice versa, listen to tower when passing a busy airport, look for
shadows on the ground (good in the pattern), smoke trails or glints in
the air, and sound - if anything makes the hairs on the back of your
neck stand up, the turn and look around.
Think about where the traffic will be coming from. When you are
cruising and are near the VFR hemispheric altitudes, look in the
direction the traffic will be coming from. Most power pilots will fly
at "easy" altitudes (multiples of 500').
Avoid hanging around VORs, intersections, and following major
interstates - lots of power traffic there, flying IFR (I follow roads)!
Due to the speed difference it is hard for a glider to get away from a
fast mover at close range, but if you are seen there is a good chance
he will maneuver to avoid. And your cross section is basically the
same whether turning or flying straight - it's just oriented different.
But whip into a steep turn (45 degrees either way) and you will
probably be seen - and you get to see other planes maneuver out of your
way. I've seen everything from King Airs, 737s, and F-16s respond to a
wing flash.
Of course I've also seen a 737 fly right through my thermal just
outside of Class B airspace (acturally right next to an
approach/departure extension of the B airspace. I was carefully
thermalling outside the Class B, watching the arrivals, and watched as
one guy approached from the West. When it was obvious he was going to
join me in my nice 7 knot thermal, I moved out of his way, let him by
(no noise by the way) then re-entered the thermal and continued the
climb.
I've also heard jet noise, done a check turn, and been rewarded with
the sight of 2 F-16s about a half mile away maneuvering hard to go
around me.
Final tip - if you see one jet fighter, start looking real hard for the
other one, and for the additional two in trail. And if the one you
see is going to pass about a mile to your side, then be real scared of
the one you don't see that is in one mile spread formation, watching
his leader, just like you are. Fighters almost never fly alone.
Anybody else got good suggestions/techniques/tips?
Kirk
66
Ramy
In the 7 years and about 2000 hours I flew my LS4, I never saw
commercial traffic close by, and I fly most of the time in the Reno
area. Maybe it has to do with the fact that I am using a transponder?
I had one close call over airsailing with an airliner in the short time
I flew club gliders without transponders (I believe they all have
transponders now).
Ramy
J. Nieuwenhuize
250 knots max)
J. N.
Jack
> I've had situations where I hear piston traffic coming from
> behind while in cruise. I'm never quite sure if "throwing a
> wing up" helps me because it makes me easier to see or hurts
> me because it makes my impact cross section larger for the
> oncoming aircraft in level cruise. I've always been
> inclined towards the "it hurts me," but not with any real
> conviction one way or another.
Give the girl a break. Move the thing around a little. She might even be
looking out the window, and maybe you'll get a better view behind too.
I'd like to install a Spitfire type rear view mirror or a pair of canopy
bow mirrors like the F-4 and T-38. It might help to see up and behind in
a gaggle, or getting ready to roll on takeoff (letting somebody else do
my clearing for me with the canopy closed on the ground has always been
a little uncomfortable).
Jack
Jack
> Isn't there a speed limitation in class G in the USA? (In Europe it's
> 250 knots max)
91.117
250 KIAS max. below 10,000' msl., except when min. safe airspeed is higher.
Jack
Glen Kelley
fighter pilot, current airline pilot, and current glider pilot:
1. We often surprise each other in sailplanes with how hard it is to see
each other. Don't expect an airline pilot to be any better at it! The
fighter pilot at least will have good visual acuity and is used to looking
for small targets.
2. Airline pilots don't carry sectionals - at the speeds we operate, there
would be little time to use them anyway. Fighter pilots will carry a low
level map and will have thought about visual traffic conflicts, wires,
terrain, etc in the planning stages. At the speeds they operate, they
aren't looking at those maps very often, once airborne.
3. The busier glider operations are notam'd and often referred to by atc
controllers. If you have an operable transponder, you will *normally* be
called out by atc and if TCAS equipped, airline pilots will be aware of your
location. They would still have to see you to maneuver away from you. (See
note 1.) Big airliners are not very maneuverable (mine - the Boeing 737 -
is limited to 2.5 g!).
4. Fighters are a different case. They don't have TCAS and only some of
them have the ability to interrogate/detect transponder targets. Some of
them have air intercept radar capability, but sailplanes are small radar
targets and will often (usually!) be filtered out because of their low
speeds and altitudes - like highway traffic. If they are at low altitude,
fighters usually operate at high speed (420 - 540 indicated, except the
A-10). As Kirk pointed out they will almost never be alone, but will be in
formations of 2 - 4. When low level (100 to 1500 agl, most commonly 300 -
500agl), they will normally *not* be receiving traffic information from ATC.
When operating in a MOA, there may be intercept controllers who can call out
glider traffic, but again, without a transponder, it is unlikely. The
formations will vary, but most pairs of flight lead and wingman will be
laterally spread by 5000 to 10000 feet, for visual lookout. The flight lead
will be spending quite a bit of his time looking forward for threat
detection and navigation, but the wingman will be spending less time looking
forward because he must maintain formation. If they see you, they have an
excellent capability to avoid you. Head on and tail on, the sailplane has
the tiny visual profile that fighter designers dream of.... In other words,
you are nearly invisible unless you have a wing up in a turn/thermal.
5. As Kirk said, the primary threat is at 6 o'clock, because it is the
hardest to see - essentially, only the overtaking aircraft has a reasonable
chance of avoiding a collision. Therefore, if you know you are operating in
a high threat area: MOA, low level route, approach corridor, VFR flyway,
near an airport etc, I would "belly check" periodically, depending on the
nature of the threat. The timing is based on the amount of time it takes for
the threat aircraft to close from outside visual range to hitting me from
the 6 o'clock position. I use visual ranges of 8nm for airliners, 5 nm for
small commercial jets (corporate and regional jets) and fighters, and 3 nm
for light aircraft - adjust as your visual acuity and experience dictate. I
use worst-case speeds as follows: airliner and small jets - 4 nm/min,
fighters - 8 nm/min, and light aircraft - 2.5 nm/min. Combing detection
ranges and times, I calculate: airliners - 2 min, small jets - 1 min and 15
sec, fighters - roughly 40 sec, and light planes - approx 1 min and 15 sec.
So... if you are straight and level for more than these times, there is
sufficient time for an aircraft to move from outside (my) visual range to
the same airspace as my (your) little pink body. As you would probably
guess, fighters are the worst case because of their relatively small size
and high closure rate. On the positive side, there are typically more
eyeballs with better acuity and better maneuverability involved.
Interestingly, small jets and light aircraft are not that far behind, as far
as detection time is concerned. In my experience they are far less likely
to see you than the fighters. The same is true for airliners, but because
of their size you have more time to see them coming...
6. How to do a belly check: No, I don't hack a stopwatch, but I keep the
above times in mind with respect to the likely threat for my area. My
primary threat is small jet/light aircraft that operate on various
highway/flyways and approach corridors. Away from these specific areas,
traffic density is extremely low. First clear your "new six" - if you are
going to turn left, look to the area behind to the right 4 - 5 oclock
position - this will be your new blind spot. Next clear your new nose
position - this is where you are going to roll out. Finally make a 45 deg
turn to the left and visually clear your "old six", which is now at your
left 7 to 8 o'clock. Often/usually, a belly check can be incorporated into
turns you are going to make anyway, for other reasons. When you visually
clear, make sure you focus on something on the horizon, otherwise you are
only visually clearing out to an arms length. If I really need to hold a
straight line, I do the belly check as a gentle 45 deg turn to each side.
7. In a thermal, periodically check to the outside of your term to clear
your "new six". If there are other sailplanes with you in the thermal, of
course they are the primary threats for midair, but you still need to check
for other aircraft. Fortunately, you are easier to see while turning - as
long as the other pilots are looking...
8. Proximity to clouds. You need to think about what you are doing when
you are near cloudbase, in proximity to likely IFR traffic. If you are 500'
below cloudbase (perfectly legal), and an airliner descends out of the cloud
at 250kt on his descent profile on collision course (perfectly legal), there
may be as little as 20 seconds to impact. If you are tail on when this
happens - good luck. I'm sure no one would ever be right at cloudbase on a
nice day, because that would violate the FARs - more importantly, you are
"rolling the bones" every time you do this on a known approach corridor.
9. Conclusion. If you fly in a high airliner/small jet threat area and
can afford a transponder it will help other people see/avoid you. If your
primary threat comes from military operations in MOAs, I would not spend the
money on a transponder unless I knew those fighters have intercept/atc
controllers passing them information. The various TPAS - type devices will
help your see/avoid efforts and should help in the case of fighters,
although the flight lead is likely the only one squawking in the formation.
Only you/your club knows the primary threats for your particular operating
area and you need to understand what they are. Taylor your altitude
awareness/cloud avoidance and belly check frequency to the nature of your
local area. Don't cede visual lookout/avoidance responsibility to someone
else - ever. Sailplane right-of-way is a myth in most situations and a
comfort only to your survivors/legal counsel.
Hope this helps.
Glen
Yuliy Gerchikov
shall we?
Please, do me a favor. Open your favorite word processor (while you are,
obviously, reading R.A.S. at some sort of a computing device). Set font to
Arial, size to 10 and zoom to 100%. Type letter o (lower case) on a blank
page. Move the blinking cursor away. Step back 10 feet. This is the same
angular size the Hawker was to the glider pilot only 20 seconds (one turn in
thermal) before impact. Can you see it? If you can, congratulations --
you've got one heckofa vision.
Now change the text color to *white*.
Any more questions?
The truth is, if you can't see this tiny *motionless* speck ...two miles
away ...in the inversion haze ...on one thermalling turn, then it is going
to hit you before you finish the next.
Let alone, where can you go in those few seconds even if you do see 'em?
--
Yuliy
"kirk.stant" <kirk....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1157045194....@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Ramy
In the meantime, Let's hope the sky stays big this Labor Day weekend,
as with the current forecast, many will be smoking the skies near
Minden :-)
Ramy
Ramy
a TCAS equipped airliner pilot need to see me if the TCAS gives the
resolution? I'm pretty sure most of the airliners vectored around me
never actually see me (although I always
wave ;-)
Ramy
Glen Kelley
The problem is that TCAS will display you as a target with altitude unknown
(unless you have mode c with an encoding altimeter). Therefore, TCAS will
only call you out as traffic and display your position without generating a
Resolution Advisory (RA). We see this pretty often as VFR traffic. We will
be looking hard for the traffic, but won't necessarily maneuver the
aircraft, since we can't see altitude/heading.
If in fact, the sailplane does have mode C with an encoding altimeter, then
the RA will be generated and you should see the big bird maneuver to avoid
the conflict. Note that a TCAS RA will direct maneuvering in the vertical
only, since TCAS azimuth is considered too innacurate to generate turn-based
avoidance. Typical RAs would be "Climb,Climb, Climb - Descend, Descend,
Descend - Reduce Climb - Reduce Descent, etc".
I guess I figured most of the gliders with transponders weren't using Mode
C, so good catch.
Glen
"Ramy" <rya...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1157075884....@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Mike Schumann
make sure it is a Mode C.
Mike Schumann
"Glen Kelley" <kell...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:lmNJg.476$XK4.324@trndny07...
Ramy
mode C. Seems like once you go through the hassle and cost of
installing a transponder, the encoder is the easy part. Mode A sounds
almost useless, more confusing then not. A mode A transponder could
signal an alert to any airline crusing at 30K above.
Which baffles me - Why aren't modern transponders already including
internal encoder??
Ramy
Jack
former hangar mate, the Mosquito pilot from Houston, makes real sence.
If you cannot see and avoid in visual flight rules area... SLOW DOWN.
Failure to do so is irresponsible. We don't need transponders if we all
avoid each other and that requires time to see and react. To me this is
the equivalent of riding with my brother in Phoenix who likes to drive
90 on the freeway, tailgating impossibly close, and passing on both
shoulders. It's crazy. I only go with him if I'm driving these days.
What I fear is the jet pilot's neglegence will be paid for by lost
flying priviledges in the soaring community. The other piece is going
into an area of reputed heavy glider traffic. Shouldn't she have known
that? Perhaps slowing them down isn't realistic. Demanding that at
least one of them have his/her head out of the cockpit isn't, in my
opinion.
Jack Womack
PIK-20B N77MA (TE)
Glen Kelley
airliner knows you are around. Clearly Mode C provides more "protection".
Glen
"Ramy" <rya...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1157084326.3...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
Glen Kelley
least not until the investigation is complete.
Sailplanes are very hard to see. We surprise each other from time to time
at much slower closure rates than any jet is going to see closing with a
sailplane. Failure to maintain visual separation is a given, but negligence
is a stretch until someone shows the Captain/FO of the corporate jet were
reading the newspaper, serving drinks to the pax, or something equally
unlikely in the descent phase.
As far as airliner speeds and routing go, who do you think is going to win
if the airline industry is going to have to slow down or otherwise adjust to
blend with sailplane traffic (read that burn more gas and arrive later)? My
bet is with the airlines and flying public. Think about all the airports
that are closed after new housing encroaches on the airport boundaries. As
a small interest group we need to pick our battles.
I have never flown at Minden, but it sounds like the local crowd clearly
understands what is at stake and have tried to be good neighbors. Since no
one was seriously hurt, perhaps the flying environment won't change much.
Glen
"Jack" <schre...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1157084350....@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
Bob C
1. Remember, the most important glass in a glass cockpit
is above the instrument panel. I used to quote this
to airline pilots, but these days I find it appropos
for many gadget-oriented glider drivers.
2. If you're not seeing much traffic, you're just not
looking hard enough.
3. I tried the 10 point font 'o' at ten feet. Even
in light blue it was clearly visible. At age 46, it's
actually harder to see it at 10 inches! I see another
aircraft at 10 miles, I wish I could read my altimeter
to tell ATC where I am ;o)
4. The rules are see and avoid, and give way to the
glider. The PIC is responsible for knowing all pertinent
information about the intended flight. Adjusting speed
or flight path to avoid heavy glider traffic is not
just a good idea, it's the law.
At 04:42 01 September 2006, Glen Kelley wrote:
>Ramy, I would agree. Mode A isn't completely worthless,
>since at least the
>airliner knows you are around. Clearly Mode C provides
>more 'protection'.
>
>Glen
>'Ramy' wrote in message
>>> 'Ramy' wrote in message
Graeme Cant
>
> The truth is, if you can't see this tiny *motionless* speck ...two miles
> away ...in the inversion haze ...on one thermalling turn, then it is going
> to hit you before you finish the next.
No. YOU are going to hit it.
Ok, I'll accept "we'll hit each other" but I can't let the arrogance of
"it is going to hit you" pass without comment.
Powered aircraft are only one user of airspace.
GC
Graeme Cant
My apologies, Yuliy. I misread your post as coming from a power pilot
with the "How can I possibly be expected to get out of a glider's road?"
point of view. when I re-read your post I'm 180 degrees wrong! Sorry!
GC
> GC
W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
http://www.filser.de/onlineshop/english/ are modes A/C and S, and have
extended squitter; they all have an integral alticoder. These are probably
the cheapest on the UK market http://www.lxavionics.co.uk/ .
I would be surprised if this is not true of other makes, I am sure it soon
will be.
W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
Remove "ic" to reply.
>
> "Ramy" <rya...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1157084326.3...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
snoop
30K above", most TCAS equipment will only show targets 10k above or
below their own ship, and that is selectable. On our TCAS the
selections are "above, auto, below'.
I will typically in cruise, select the below feature, especially if
negotiating weather, to see which way the other guys are going. Plus in
the descent it's nice for planning purposes, you can see where the
traffic your descending into is.
snoop
the stated speeds in these posts have been underspoken, if that's a
word. Sometimes coming into the DFW airpsace, say for instance on the
GREGG5 arrival, there is a fix where they mandate us to slow to 250
knots for spacing with other traffic.
During the quiet time of the day, the controller might say, "no speed
restriction", which tells the crew, hey I'm still above 10000msl, let's
go fast. That means I'm legally allowed to run it up to, VMO, the max
indicated airspeed for that altitude/aircraft. If I'm at 11000'msl, I'm
cleared to run it up to 340 knots for a short time, anticipating that
all of a sudden the controller is going to come back with a "descend to
5000" command, and I'm going to cold cock the thrust levers, pull out
the spoilers, and slow to the 250knots required below 10000'.
Jack are you coming for Labor Day Races?
snoop
With regard to the glass cockpit, the automation is wonderful stuff,
and if more people would learn to set it up, use it and look out the
window more, we'd all be better off. This means all of us,
powered/glider, as I too am guilty of playing with my glider toys while
zipping along on task.
Unfortunately, a lot of our pro pilot friends don't take the time to
fly wonderful GenAv ships like our gliders, and taildraggers, so what
do they want to do when they get to work, shut off the automation and
hand fly the beast. Been in the business for almost thirty years,
watching someone, now head down, hand fly an aircraft with millions of
dollars worth of automation play the High and the Mighty is not
impressive anymore.
When I go to work after a weekend of glider/taildragger play, at 200'
off the deck it's "autopilot on", until 50' over the numbers where I
disengage to land. We brief the approach while still in cruise, yes,
nitpickers, there is always the chance of change of runway, then it's
automation all the way down, keeping eyes going outside. For a VNAV
descent it's only two key strokes, for a FLC descent it's one. If
properly managed it's a thing of beauty to see how little the crew has
to do other than manage, and look outside. Watching guys who want to
play pilot, and turn off the automation in the terminal area, well now
your having to watch him/her, and the airplane. Just easier, to use the
automation at work, then go yank/bank the toys on the weekends!
With regard to item #4, I think "give way" applies to everybody,
especially who ever sees the other guy first, if there's time. Let's
not be "dead right" in interpreting the rules. Avoidance requires
insight provided by all parties involved. If we in our glider take off
thinking, those doggone engine powered beasts better get out of the
way, because the "law" says I own the road, then were as good as dead.
Pick up the phone, mike, our heads, and fly defensively.
Derek Copeland
testing, licensing and Value Added Tax. You can buy
a decent airworthy wooden glider for far less than
that in the UK!
If any anti-collision device of about the size, cost
and power consumption of a small portable GPS unit
becomes available, then I might be prepared to buy
one, especially if it doesn't require an externally
mounted aerial that reduces glider performance.
Derek Copeland
At 11:30 01 September 2006, W.J. \bill\ Dean \u.K.\.
wrote:
>All the transponders currently listed by Filser
>http://www.filser.de/onlineshop/english/ are modes
>A/C and S, and have
>extended squitter; they all have an integral alticoder.
> These are probably
>the cheapest on the UK market http://www.lxavionics.co.uk/
>.
>
>I would be surprised if this is not true of other makes,
>I am sure it soon
>will be.
>
>W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
>Remove 'ic' to reply.
>
>>
Jack
> If any anti-collision device of about the size, cost
> and power consumption of a small portable GPS unit
> becomes available, then I might be prepared to buy
> one, especially if it doesn't require an externally
> mounted aerial that reduces glider performance.
Derek, on how many of your best days of the year could you tell the
difference with a tiny external 1030-1090 MHz antenna? Yes, it's
expensive, but let's not get silly about performance degradation.
Not keeping the pieces of the glider flying in close formation will
degrade your personal performance considerably.
Jack
Derek Copeland
I know that a UK pilot removed a transponder aerial
from his glider part way through a Nationals competition
because he was losing too much performance in relation
to his competitors in similar gliders. Also I fly a
Standard Cirrus, so I need all the performance I can
get!
Derek Copeland
Ramy
how far below I am to filter me out? Does it determine it by direction
and distance?
Ramy
Jack
> I know that a UK pilot removed a transponder aerial
> from his glider part way through a Nationals competition
> because he was losing too much performance in relation
> to his competitors in similar gliders.
What serious competitors will do to gain a perceived (or imagined)
edge would stun Ripley's most jaded researchers.
Though the difference may be quantifiable by theoretical
aerodynamicists, are the numbers measurable in actual performance? I
am always open to citations of flight tests which may demonstrate such
differences.
Here we should be addressing the cost/benefit relationship for
ourselves. I fear that it will require government mandate and
resulting high production levels to bring the unit price down. But we
could do that ourselves to some degree by establishing a demand to
serve our own safety interests.
I have ordered a PCAS (less than $500 from Tim Mara at Wings and
Wheels <http://www.wingsandwheels.com/page4.htm>) Now the problem is
where to place it in my 1-26E. I may have to buy a different glider
just to accommodate the new PCAS unit. ;>
I'd buy a Standard Cirrus like yours, but I'm addicted to Aluminum.
Jack
------
Eric Greenwell
> Jack,
>
> I know that a UK pilot removed a transponder aerial
> from his glider part way through a Nationals competition
> because he was losing too much performance in relation
> to his competitors in similar gliders. Also I fly a
> Standard Cirrus, so I need all the performance I can
> get!
You can't measure the performance loss that a transponder antenna on
your Std Cirrus, the drag is so little; nonetheless, the fiberglass
fuselage will let you mount one internally. The big advantage is it's
protected from ground and handling damage.
--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane
Operation"
Jack
Not going to make the lap races at TSA...DRAT!!! Work and family stuff
got in the way at the last minute. I understand what the rest of you
said about the airlines, flying public, and picking your battles.
Sorry, it was more af a rant than anything...
Jack Womack
Derek Copeland
or not would depend on the engineer certifying the
installation. I understand that the latest generation
sailplanes with carbon fibre fuselages will have to
have externally mounted aerials, probably top or bottom
so that they will transmit both up tp TCAS equipped
airliners and down to Air Traffic Control. Although
the aerials are quite short, they do produce a significant
amount of drag. Remember that a 500 kg glider with
a 50:1 glide angle will only have a drag of 10 kg at
best glide speed.
I am not a tehnofreak, but I understand that Transponder
aerials have to be base loaded and require a metal
ground plane to work properly. Obviously not a problem
for a spam can or a metal Schweitzer glider, but something
else that has to fitted into the already crowded centre
section of a FRP sailplane.
Derek Copeland
At 01:12 02 September 2006, Eric Greenwell wrote:
>Derek Copeland wrote:
>> Jack,
>>
>> I know that a UK pilot removed a transponder aerial
>> from his glider part way through a Nationals competition
>> because he was losing too much performance in relation
>> to his competitors in similar gliders. Also I fly
>>a
>> Standard Cirrus, so I need all the performance I can
>> get!
>
>You can't measure the performance loss that a transponder
>antenna on
>your Std Cirrus, the drag is so little; nonetheless,
>the fiberglass
>fuselage will let you mount one internally. The big
>advantage is it's
>protected from ground and handling damage.
>
>--
>Change 'netto' to 'net' to email me directly
>
>Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
>
>www.motorglider.org - Download 'A Guide to Self-launching
>Sailplane
>Operation'
>
engre...@charter.net
> Whether I would be able to mount the aerial internally
> or not would depend on the engineer certifying the
> installation. I understand that the latest generation
> sailplanes with carbon fibre fuselages will have to
> have externally mounted aerials, probably top or bottom
> so that they will transmit both up tp TCAS equipped
> airliners and down to Air Traffic Control. Although
> the aerials are quite short, they do produce a significant
> amount of drag. Remember that a 500 kg glider with
> a 50:1 glide angle will only have a drag of 10 kg at
> best glide speed.
Here is what an aeronautical engineer wrote on our ASH 26 E newsgroup,
responding to the same concern of another owner:
"As a sanity check assume 1/8" by 2" wire (projected area .25 square
inch) with a drag coefficient of 1 (normally a round wire is less) then
the
drag is (.25/144)*1*60*60/295 = 0.02 lbs at 60 knots or 0.08 lbs at 120
kots. (At 60 knots the flat plate drag is about 12 lbs per square
foot).
Even if the antenna was twice as long or twice as thick we are still
looking
at around .04 pounds at 60 knots or 0.16 lbs at 120 knots."
That's very small compared to 10 kg, and it's at 120 knots!
>
> I am not a tehnofreak, but I understand that Transponder
> aerials have to be base loaded and require a metal
> ground plane to work properly. Obviously not a problem
> for a spam can or a metal Schweitzer glider, but something
> else that has to fitted into the already crowded centre
> section of a FRP sailplane.
The ground plane can be as small a 6" in diameter, and internal
antennas have been installed sucessfully in gliders with less room and
tighter access than the Std Cirrus. Drag is not a valid concern for
your situation, but it sounds like you can't/won't afford the
considerable cost.
--
Mike the Strike
ripped off by a bizjet!
Mike
jcarlyle
draw, the built-in encoder, and the maximum 35,000 foot reporting
alititude of the Filser TRT800. The problem for me would be that it
isn't approved for use in the US.
Does anyone know what the hang-up is with regard to US certification of
the Filser transponder?
-John
kirk.stant
Yuliy Gerchikov wrote:
> The truth is, if you can't see this tiny *motionless* speck ...two miles
> away ...in the inversion haze ...on one thermalling turn, then it is going
> to hit you before you finish the next.
Yuliy,
Interesting test, but I don't think it anyway replicates real life.
Airplanes at a distance, co-altitude on the horizon, are going to be
black dots almost all the time. What you have to train yourself to
look for is a moving black dot against the background. Worse, you have
to also find the black dot that isn't moving - because that is the one
on a perfect collision course. That situation is tought, but not
impossible. If you turn at all, you break the collision course, and
generate motion on the canopy.
Plus, 20 seconds is an eternity when it comes to getting out of the
way.
So I don't buy your analogy - it just doesn't correlate with my
personal experience.
See and avoid is not the best solution, but it does work - if everybody
does it correctly. I'm starting to think that many pilots have never
been trained how to look for traffic - the basic physiological and
environmental facts that have to be understood in order to scan
succesfully for traffic. Scary!
These are great discussions, IMHO - makes us all think about how we fly
and how others fly.
And I know I need to spend less time with MCU and even more time
scanning!
Kirk
kirk.stant
Ramy wrote:
> Wow, so many aircrafts...
> In the 7 years and about 2000 hours I flew my LS4, I never saw
> commercial traffic close by, and I fly most of the time in the Reno
> area. Maybe it has to do with the fact that I am using a transponder?
> I had one close call over airsailing with an airliner in the short time
> I flew club gliders without transponders (I believe they all have
> transponders now).
>
Could be where you fly - in the Phoenix area (and most of NW AZ), there
is a lot of traffic. Then again, It doesn't bother me to be around
other airplanes - it's kind of neat to watch a big old airliner cruise
by (and wonder if anyone in it saw me), or get checked out in a thermal
by a couple of AV-8 (which happened to me up by the Grand Canyon - they
altered course and came over to where I was thermalling at about
15,000', went by on either side of the thermal. I waved at them, of
course).
But just cuz you don't see it, don't mean it aint there!
Kirk
W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
The pilot who removed his transponder antenna is a friend of mine, and I
talked with him about it at the time.
The glider is an ASW27, he was flying in competition with other pilots in
ASW27s who were well known to him as people and as pilots. Some were
members of his club.
He has a transponder fitted (Becker Mode A/C, not Mode S) because he
frequently flies high in wave, particularly in Scotland, where it is
necessary to talk to an air traffic controller and either a great help or
essential to have a transponder. He is also a professional airline pilot.
During the competition the transponder would not have been turned on. He
started with the antenna fitted because he did not realise the difference in
performance it caused. After two or three days, with his ship not going as
well compared with the others as he expected, he removed it. The
difference was immediate and obvious, he described to me the difference with
it fitted as turning the ASW27 into an ASW20! Remember, he had been flying
with the antenna for some time, it was only in contest against other similar
gliders with good pilots that he saw the difference.
Please do not talk as if flying in UK contests involves the same collision
risk with CAT as flying in the high skies around Minden (I have never done
that, alas!). I understand that there has not been an actual collision in
the UK between a glider and CAT or the military since 1947.
To anyone buying a new modern machine from Schleicher, Schempp or the
others, the cost of fitting a transponder is only a small percentage of the
total cost, but would still involve finding panel space, and sufficient
power (particularly if the transponder is to be on whenever airborne). But
there are still a lot of low value gliders in use in the UK, and a lot of
gliding being done where the actual collision risk where a transponder would
make a difference is very small. In the USA, I wonder how many of the 1-26
fleet are fitted?
W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
Remove "ic" to reply.
>
> "Eric Greenwell" <flyg...@charter.netto> wrote in message
> news:HQ4Kg.227$m36.105@trnddc02...
>
>>
>> Derek Copeland wrote:
>> Jack,
>>
>> I know that a UK pilot removed a transponder aerial
>> from his glider part way through a Nationals competition
>> because he was losing too much performance in relation
>> to his competitors in similar gliders. Also I fly a
>> Standard Cirrus, so I need all the performance I can
>> get!
>>
>
> You can't measure the performance loss that a transponder antenna on your
> Std Cirrus, the drag is so little; nonetheless, the fiberglass fuselage
> will let you mount one internally. The big advantage is it's protected
> from ground and handling damage.
>
Eric Greenwell
> After two or three days, with his ship not going as
> well compared with the others as he expected, he removed it. The
> difference was immediate and obvious, he described to me the difference with
> it fitted as turning the ASW27 into an ASW20! Remember, he had been flying
> with the antenna for some time, it was only in contest against other similar
> gliders with good pilots that he saw the difference.
I remain skeptical: I sure didn't see any difference at all when I
fitted a transponder antenna to my ASH 26 E, flying against gliders I'd
flown with for years, nor have I heard of anyone else noticing a
difference. Perhaps something unusual was occurring in his case.
>
> Please do not talk as if flying in UK contests involves the same collision
> risk with CAT as flying in the high skies around Minden (I have never done
> that, alas!).
I won't, and I didn't. My remarks were directed at a Std Cirrus pilot
who felt he needed every crumb of performance, and that was why he
wouldn't consider a transponder. My belief the drag increase is
insgnificant, so it shouldn't be a factor in his decision. The need for
it and the cost are the most important factors, I think.
>
> To anyone buying a new modern machine from Schleicher, Schempp or the
> others, the cost of fitting a transponder is only a small percentage of the
> total cost, but would still involve finding panel space, and sufficient
> power (particularly if the transponder is to be on whenever airborne). But
> there are still a lot of low value gliders in use in the UK, and a lot of
> gliding being done where the actual collision risk where a transponder would
> make a difference is very small.
Also the situation in much of the USA. Though, I don't think the value
of the glider should be a factor in the decision to install a
transponder. I realize you are using the glider value as a proxy for the
spare cash the owner has, but I'd rather the focus was on the collision
risk, the value of reducing it, and the cost of installing a transponder.
> In the USA, I wonder how many of the 1-26 fleet are fitted?
I don't know, but some do have them in the Minden area.
Are you allowed to fly in airways in the UK (as we do in the US), and
would having a transponder give you greater access to them?
--
Note: email address new as of 9/4/2006
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
"Transponders in Sailplanes" on the Soaring Safety Foundation website
www.soaringsafety.org/prevention/articles.html
"A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org
Derek Copeland
A or Airways, full stop, period! We can sometimes access
Class B and Class D with an ATC clearance by radio.
The vast majority of gliding is done in Glass G airspace
where we are largely segregated from commercial air
traffic. However the latter are increasingly starting
to use the Class G around the smaller regional airports,
which is probably why the CAA wants the compulsory
fitting of Mode S transponders. The other issue is
the use of the open airspace by UAVs (mostly by the
US Military as far as I can find out). There is no
mandatory requirement for fitting airband radios at
the moment, so I don't expect to get any improved access
to controlled airspace by fitting transponders.
In the US the fitting of transponders appears to be
voluntary, if the owners/pilots consider it necessary
in their local airspace. If the CAA gets its way, Mode
S will be compulsory for all aircraft in the UK, including
low value vintage machine that only occasionally fly,
and even when they do stay local to the airfield. Basically
these beautiful machines will probably have to be placed
in museums or scrapped, which in my opinion would be
a great shame. We currently have a thriving vintage
glider movement in the UK.
The UK is a damp little island with far too much cloud,
often with a very low base. To successfully fly cross-country
you really do need all the glide performance you can
get.
Mode S transponders can only give collision warnings
to ACAS/TCAS equipped aircraft, or via radio messages
from radar equipped ATC. They are virtually useless
for preventing collisions between gliders or GA aircraft.
If we have to fit anything, I would prefer to wait
for ADS-B or some development of FLARM, which is of
general use to all pilots. Transponders are crude,
old fashioned, WW2 technology!
Derek Copeland
xcs...@yahoo.com
But it is not the drag, but the drag relative to the lift.
NO Antenna
500 kg glider
10 kg drag
L/D = 50.0
Antenna
500.2 kg glider (add antenna weight, liberal guess)
assume shape of antenna is straght wire, no tip (as above)
assume drag is 0.16 lbs = 0.073 kg
assume no interferance drag
L/D = 500.2/10.073 = 49.66
A third of a point loss is significant for those who know how to use it
(I am told).
Fine tune these results with a real antenna and try again.
(Standard Cirrus
330 kg
L/D = 35
9.43 kg drag
L/D w/antenna:
330/(9.43+0.073)=34.73
Noticable if you have done all your gap work, sealing, airfoil tuning,
etc...?)
John Gilbert - Washington State, USA
Std. Cirrus s/n 266