Bargin tcas alert

[Dave]

About a week ago I got a small collision prevention device called
trafficscope micro. It seems to work really well in areas of
congested airspace, and places I most frequent. It is not cheap
($200) but it works well for the intended purpose. The best price I
got was from talking to my local retail
http://www.flightessentials.net/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=746

I bought this after many frustrated incedents with our ATC system.
There have been numerous time where I was only one of the few aircraft
flying VFR at 1:00 AM in the morning dedicated to perhaps a single ATC
sector, and they failed to alert me to other approaching IFR traffic.
Most of the time I fly I often compete with incoming cargo flights
ranging from C-310 aircraft to Merlin turbo-props. None of these
aircraft have TCAS and are flying as blind as I am. I don't
understand how the FAA allows such a lapse in general aviation safety,
just because the hours we fly are o-dark'30. I understand that they
need to scale down their staff at night, but there is no excuse for
the lack of assitance I often get. However, I hear people get sports
updates freduently.

[Thomas Borchert]

Dave,

> a small collision prevention device called
> trafficscope micro. It seems to work really well in areas of
> congested airspace, and places I most frequent. It is not cheap
> ($200) but it works well for the intended purpos
>

No voice warnings...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Dave]

True. There is no "alert" per se, but it does give an indication as to
the nearest aircraft around me. I think for the money it is a good
heads-up warning that only helps to aid me in knowing when to search
more, and when to relax and enjoy flying more.


Thomas Borchert > wrote in message >...
> Dave,
>
> > a small collision prevention device called
> > trafficscope micro. It seems to work really well in areas of
> > congested airspace, and places I most frequent. It is not cheap
> > ($200) but it works well for the intended purpos
> >
>
> No voice warnings...

[Thomas Borchert]

Dave,

> True. There is no "alert" per se, but it does give an indication as to
> the nearest aircraft around me
>

Let's see: It's giving you a visual indication. While checking whether
that comes on, it will keep you from looking outside where the traffic
is - both traffic with an active transponder and that without one. Seems
to me that the net result is a loss of total time spent scanning for
traffic - for all of 200 bucks.

And yes, units with an aural warning are different in that very respect.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Vaughn]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> Dave,
>
> > True. There is no "alert" per se, but it does give an indication as to
> > the nearest aircraft around me
> >
>
> Let's see: It's giving you a visual indication. While checking whether
> that comes on, it will keep you from looking outside where the traffic
> is - both traffic with an active transponder and that without one. Seems
> to me that the net result is a loss of total time spent scanning for
> traffic - for all of 200 bucks.

And if our intrepid pilot is not bothering to look out the window, what
makes you think that he/she will bother looking at the display on the little
TCAS box? It seems to me that adding an audable alert to that little gizmo
would be cheap...and necessary.

Vaughn

>
> And yes, units with an aural warning are different in that very respect.
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
>

[Terri Johnson]

I've been using my Micro since I got it and have never had a problem
seeing the bright green, yellow and red lights, even in the sun. It's
mounted on my dash where I don't have to take my eyes away from
scanning to see it. Sure, something over my headset would be since,
but for $249 (what I paid for it), I can't complain.

I've noticed in the many posts by Thomas Borchert that he sells the
Monroy. Perhaps there's a bias at work here? How much is the Monroy
compared to the Micro, I wonder...

T. Johnson

"Vaughn" > wrote in message >...
> "Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Dave,
> >
> > > True. There is no "alert" per se, but it does give an indication as to
> > > the nearest aircraft around me
> > >
> >
> > Let's see: It's giving you a visual indication. While checking whether
> > that comes on, it will keep you from looking outside where the traffic
> > is - both traffic with an active transponder and that without one. Seems
> > to me that the net result is a loss of total time spent scanning for
> > traffic - for all of 200 bucks.
>
> And if our intrepid pilot is not bothering to look out the window, what
> makes you think that he/she will bother looking at the display on the little
> TCAS box? It seems to me that adding an audable alert to that little gizmo
> would be cheap...and necessary.
>
> Vaughn
>
> >
> > And yes, units with an aural warning are different in that very respect.
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
> >

[Thomas Borchert]

Vaughn,

> It seems to me that adding an audable alert to that little gizmo
> would be cheap...and necessary.
>

Well, looking at the market, it's at least several hundred dollars
more. But from having usedg such a device, it is well worth the money,
IMHO.
--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Terri,

> I've noticed in the many posts by Thomas Borchert that he sells the
> Monroy. Perhaps there's a bias at work here?
>

No, there isn't. I couldn't care less what device with an aural warning you get,
but I DO consider an aural warning essential - for the reasons given. Do you have
anything to say regarding my reasoning or would you care to continue personal
attacks?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Dave]

Thomas Borchert wrote:
> Vaughn,
>
> > It seems to me that adding an audable alert to that little gizmo
> > would be cheap...and necessary.
> >
>
> Well, looking at the market, it's at least several hundred dollars
> more. But from having usedg such a device, it is well worth the
money,
> IMHO.
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

No it isn't. For several hundred dollars to add an audio feature is
rediculous.

[Dave]

I think I may have stepped into something, but I read the posts and did
not see a "personal attack" on you. Terri simply stated that you happen
to sell one of these devices. Do you sell one of these types of
warning systems? If so admit such, and no harm, no foul.

[RST Engineering]

Somebody send me the schematic of the one that doesn't have an aural warning
and tell me at what level (green, yellow, or red) you want a beep and if I
can't do it for less than $5 in Rat Shack parts I'll push a peanut down the
flight line at Oshkosh next year.

Jim


"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> Vaughn,
>
>> It seems to me that adding an audable alert to that little gizmo
>> would be cheap...and necessary.
>>
>
> Well, looking at the market, it's at least several hundred dollars
> more. But from having usedg such a device, it is well worth the money,
> IMHO.
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
>

[[email protected]]

I certainly didn't imply a personal attack, and sorry if I stepped on a
raw nerve. I was simply making the point that, if the visual is strong
enough, which my Micro is, the audio alert is not really needed to
further "clutter" what's coming over my headset. Not every device in
the cockpit needs audio alerts, IMHO. A DME for example, or a portable
GPS.

And in fairness, I posted that Mr. Borchert sells Monroy because of
numerous other posts saying as much, such as
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.aviation.owning/messages/357478722c33dc27,86b68b14fdda9e98,02853a1d90ece993 ,8262aa5013180e82,4597ec976bcb7482,29dd2cc363642a1 6,8251e969049fa956,a5714b0eddee4fb5,3a6b2414fcdad6 43,c1564f7f0aadc30a?thread_id=9abcb280cfa2bb09&mode=thread&noheader=1&q=thomas+borchert+monroy#doc_c1564f7f0aadc30a.
A simple web search reveals his website of www.aeroversand.de.

Anyway, I am very happy with my Micro, as are the fellow pilots I fly
with. I was the "guinea pig" of the group and can report that I
wouldn't fly without it. And for under $300, I can't imagine why anyone
wouldn't have at least this product.

T. Johnson

[Dave]

"I'll push a peanut down the
flight line at Oshkosh next year." LOL!!

[Thomas Borchert]

Dave,

> For several hundred dollars to add an audio feature is
> rediculous.
>

As I said in my original post, it's not me making those prices - I was
just commenting on the units that are available on the market. Mind
you, the more expensive units have valuable additional features beyond
audio, IMHO. But I don't really understand why the cheapo-unit
mentioned in the OP doesn't have audio.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

> And in fairness, I posted that Mr. Borchert sells Monroy because of
> numerous other posts saying as much, such as
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.aviation.owning/messages/357478722c33dc27,86b68b14fdda9e98,02853a1d90ece993 ,8262aa5013180e82,4597ec976bcb7482,29dd2cc363642a1 6,8251e969049fa956,a5714b0eddee4fb5,3a6b2414fcdad6 43,c1564f7f0aadc30a?thread_id=9abcb280cfa2bb09&mode=thread&noheader=1&q=thomas+borchert+monroy#doc_c1564f7f0aadc30a.
> A simple web search reveals his website of www.aeroversand.de.
>

Thanks for the advertising, but I still don't understand what "fairness" has to
do with my original post - or my being associated with that website. And since we
had rather unpleasant discussions in this context before, I may have been
oversensitive. Then again, this is usenet...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[[email protected]]

Just out of curiosity, what did you mean "unpleasant discussions in
this context before?" As I am new to these devices I am curious about
their history.

[Thomas Borchert]

> Just out of curiosity, what did you mean "unpleasant discussions in
> this context before?" As I am new to these devices I am curious about
> their history.
>

Do a google search. But rest assured, the discussion I am talking about
had nothing to do with the devices. They were typical usenet excesses.

If you want to know more about these devices, I'd recommend the
articles in Aviation Consumer as a starting point.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[[email protected]]

I have resisted until now, but I must say my peace.

First off, I was anticipating Mr. Borchert raising the "Aviation
consumer card"

A quick search of Florida's Secretary of State Corporations will yield
anyone a historical representation of Mr. Paul Bertorelli's ownership
in a group called MOA. Mooney Owner Association. Also his tail number
is a co-ownership that reveals even more. He is not only part owner,
but stands to profit from the proceeds in some of the products he
recommends I think.

After speaking with several other avionics manufacturers, as I built my
RV-6A, I quickly realized this empire of cloaking under "unbiased
reviews" yields more than just a measly journalistic paycheck.

Let's explore my observations shall we:

1. Mr. Borchert sells the Monroy devices and profits from the sell of
such units. Keyword search "Thomas Borchert Monroy"
or http://www.aeroversand.de/ATD_Long.htm (notice the family name at
the bottom)
2. Mr. Paul Bertorelli write *unbiased opinions* regarding such devices
and has a part interest in the MOA whom he also write articles
for(Mooney Owners of America)
http://www.moapilot.com/The_Mooney_Pilot/TMP_Sept01/content_sept01.html
3. Mr. Monroy just so happens to own a Mooney and produce Mooney long
range tanks and has had past dealings which Mr. Bertorelli has
benefited from
4. Numerous avionics manufacturers have explicitly told me that they
have either been threatened by Paul, or been told to "conform" in order
to get positive reviews. This includes giving up websites for free for
his benefit.

I think it is sad that many people try and take advantage of GA pilots
like myself in such a crooked way.

This is just my opinion based on many months of research and talking
with various other GA enthusiasts. For some reason I'm sure Mr. Paul
Bertorelli or Thomas Borchert will be along soon to dispute all my
findings.

[Thomas Borchert]

Listen, "Tailwind9901",

I know this is Usenet, but this really cracks me up - again and again.

First, it would be nice if you had the guts to put a real name to stand
by your postings, but, oh well...

> but stands to profit from the proceeds in some of the products he
> recommends I think.

You think. You think??? That's all to support your slanderous remarks?
Show some proof!

> 1. Mr. Borchert sells the Monroy devices and profits from the sell of
> such units. Keyword search "Thomas Borchert Monroy"

No secret at all.

> 4. Numerous avionics manufacturers have explicitly told me that they
> have either been threatened by Paul, or been told to "conform" in order
> to get positive reviews. This includes giving up websites for free for
> his benefit.

You got names? You got the paperwork for the lawsuits that, surely, these
manufacturer's legal departments have raised against AvCon? Show some
proof!

> I think it is sad that many people try and take advantage of GA pilots
> like myself in such a crooked way.

Implicitly, you accuse me. How, pray, tell, in this thread, have I taken
advantage of anyone in a crooked way? I don't get it, so please explain
it to me - if you can.

> This is just my opinion based on many months of research

Opinion and research don't go together well. Through research, you tend
to find facts. If you did, please present them. If you didn't, your
opinions are slanderous blathering at best.



--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[[email protected]]

No offense Tom, but your monroy 300 system really sucks wind. I got
this hoping it would be an improvement over previous 200 version, but
in reality it turned out to be a real flop. I applaud the concept and
very reasonable price, but it is really lacking reliability. There
where numerous times where it reported traffic that either didn't
exist, or had the wrong altitude. I returned the monroy for an upgrade
to Shurecheck Trafficscope, and have had very positive results. Be it
far from perfect, it is still the best system on the market for the
cost.

- Nicholas

[Andrew Gideon]

wrote:

> No offense Tom, but your monroy 300 system really sucks wind.

I don't know diddly about these devices, but I do know a little something
about USENET. Posts from both and
originated at the same IP: 67.97.98.132.

Hmm. Several other recent posts in this group also originated in that
network neighborhood. This includes a 3 Dec message from
(Dave)" with a subject of "Bargin tcas alert".

- Andrew

[[email protected]]

"I don't know diddly"

I agree with you.


Andrew Gideon wrote:
> wrote:
>
> > No offense Tom, but your monroy 300 system really sucks wind.
>
> I don't know diddly about these devices, but I do know a little
something
> about USENET. Posts from both and

> originated at the same IP: 67.97.98.132.
>
> Hmm. Several other recent posts in this group also originated in
that
> network neighborhood. This includes a 3 Dec message from
> (Dave)" with a subject of "Bargin tcas alert".
>
> - Andrew

[Thomas Borchert]

Andrew,

It's called gorilla marketing (spelling intentional)

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Jim Utic]

Wow... with all the childish bickering going on here, its a wonder
anything useful comes out of these discussions. Grow up, people! I
usually dont get into these, but the name-calling was just getting too
much, so here's my 2-cents worth:

I purchased a Micro for my 152. I have had some experience with these
products, having installed a Monroy 200, then a 300 in my Duchess. What
a piece of junk (my opinion). Erroneous altitudes and numbers all over
the place. I sent it back and got a Trafficscope VRX. I ended up
installing the VRX and I am very impressed with how accurate it (seems)
to be. Misses a few planes once in a while, but not enough to keep me
from using it. Lesson learned... if theres a choice between to products
that do the same thing, the cheaper one is usually less reliable.

The Micro doesnt give altitude, but for the $296 I paid for it ($289 +
$7 shipping), I wouldnt expect it to. An audio alert would be an
interestng add-on, but not really needed since it sits right in front
of my nose! Thats bunk if you're looking outside and think you cant see
10 bright LEDs... they really grab your attention. But then, Ive
actually used the product. The unit functions similarly to the VRX with
respect to reliability... if it lights up, I can usually count on
seeing an aircraft. Wish I knew the altitude, but I guess thats what
the more expensive unit is for.

Anyway, nice job, Surecheck. I will recommend these to whoever asks
(and even those that dont). Just wish I could display the traffic info
on my Garmin 430.

Jim Utic

Thomas Borchert wrote:
> Dave,
>
> > True. There is no "alert" per se, but it does give an indication as
to
> > the nearest aircraft around me
> >
>
> Let's see: It's giving you a visual indication. While checking
whether
> that comes on, it will keep you from looking outside where the
traffic
> is - both traffic with an active transponder and that without one.
Seems
> to me that the net result is a loss of total time spent scanning for
> traffic - for all of 200 bucks.
>
> And yes, units with an aural warning are different in that very
respect.
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[TaxSrv]

"Jim Utic" wrote:
> ...but the name-calling was just getting too
> much, so here's my 2-cents worth:
> ...
> I have had some experience with these
> products, having installed a Monroy 200, then a 300 in my Duchess.
What
> a piece of junk (my opinion). Erroneous altitudes and numbers all
over
> the place.

I had a Monroy 200, now a 300. There are much less frequent anomalies
than with the 200, and mine works very well. I will grant that some
competing units may work as well or better. But I bought it before
the latest competition came out, and I have no buyer's remorse.

Fred F.

[[email protected]]

The connection is this: you sell the Monroy unit. You have an
understandable bias towards Monroy products because you make money off
them. Nobody would expect you to say anything nice about any
competitive products. In all fairness, your perspective is biased
towards the brand you sell. That's all.

-Terri

Thomas Borchert wrote:
> > And in fairness, I posted that Mr. Borchert sells Monroy because of
> > numerous other posts saying as much, such as
> >
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.aviation.owning/messages/357478722c33dc27,86b68b14fdda9e98,02853a1d90ece993 ,8262aa5013180e82,4597ec976bcb7482,29dd2cc363642a1 6,8251e969049fa956,a5714b0eddee4fb5,3a6b2414fcdad6 43,c1564f7f0aadc30a?thread_id=9abcb280cfa2bb09&mode=thread&noheader=1&q=thomas+borchert+monroy#doc_c1564f7f0aadc30a.
> > A simple web search reveals his website of www.aeroversand.de.
> >
>
> Thanks for the advertising, but I still don't understand what
"fairness" has to
> do with my original post - or my being associated with that website.
And since we
> had rather unpleasant discussions in this context before, I may have
been
> oversensitive. Then again, this is usenet...
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

> In all fairness, your perspective is biased
> towards the brand you sell. That's all.
>

No, it's not. The point is that I didn't even mention any brand name -
and didn't even implicitly issued any recommendation at all. The only
"persepctive" I posted was to get one of these units, no matter which.
That is indeed what I would call fair. Hence, I consider your posts not
to be.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[[email protected]]

Tom, you wrote: "Seems to me that the net result is a loss of total
time spent scanning for traffic - for all of 200 bucks. And yes, units
with an aural warning are different in that very respect."

This can only mean that you do not favor the Micro, since it doesn't
have audio warnings. Now, you're saying your posts say to get "one of
these units, no matter which."

Now, Tom, which way are you going to go? ;)

-Terri


Thomas Borchert wrote:
> > In all fairness, your perspective is biased
> > towards the brand you sell. That's all.
> >
>
> No, it's not. The point is that I didn't even mention any brand name
-
> and didn't even implicitly issued any recommendation at all. The only

> "persepctive" I posted was to get one of these units, no matter
which.
> That is indeed what I would call fair. Hence, I consider your posts
not
> to be.
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[[email protected]]

There are better systems, but the cost is prohibitive. My experience
with the Monroy was not as pleasant.

[Dave]

I hear your atd stuff is losing sales, must be about time for another
ad boost from ol Paul at Avcon to slam the competition.





Thomas Borchert wrote:
> Listen, "Tailwind9901",
>
> I know this is Usenet, but this really cracks me up - again and
again.
>
> First, it would be nice if you had the guts to put a real name to
stand
> by your postings, but, oh well...
>
> > but stands to profit from the proceeds in some of the products he
> > recommends I think.
>
> You think. You think??? That's all to support your slanderous
remarks?
> Show some proof!
>
> > 1. Mr. Borchert sells the Monroy devices and profits from the sell
of
> > such units. Keyword search "Thomas Borchert Monroy"
>
> No secret at all.
>
> > 4. Numerous avionics manufacturers have explicitly told me that
they
> > have either been threatened by Paul, or been told to "conform" in
order
> > to get positive reviews. This includes giving up websites for free
for
> > his benefit.
>
> You got names? You got the paperwork for the lawsuits that, surely,
these
> manufacturer's legal departments have raised against AvCon? Show some

> proof!
>
> > I think it is sad that many people try and take advantage of GA
pilots
> > like myself in such a crooked way.
>
> Implicitly, you accuse me. How, pray, tell, in this thread, have I
taken
> advantage of anyone in a crooked way? I don't get it, so please
explain
> it to me - if you can.
>
> > This is just my opinion based on many months of research
>
> Opinion and research don't go together well. Through research, you
tend
> to find facts. If you did, please present them. If you didn't, your
> opinions are slanderous blathering at best.
>
>
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)