737 vs glider

[Ramy[_2_]]

Anyone have more details about it? In particular, was the glider equipped with transponder? This is not good rep for us, but could have been worse.
https://thepointsguy.com/2017/09/united-737-avoids-midair-collision-ohare/?utm_source=TWITTER&utm_medium=social&utm_term=Editorial&utm_campaign=TWITTER-100000080461661

Ramy

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 8:15:59 PM UTC-7, Ramy wrote:
> Anyone have more details about it? In particular, was the glider equipped with transponder? This is not good rep for us, but could have been worse.
> https://thepointsguy.com/2017/09/united-737-avoids-midair-collision-ohare/?utm_source=TWITTER&utm_medium=social&utm_term=Editorial&utm_campaign=TWITTER-100000080461661
>
> Ramy


Found it. 19:45 UTC at 7075'MSL, 10 mi NE of Rockford, IL. ASH-26E topping out in a thermal and 737 exiting a brief hold - same altitude and the same location within a mile or less as near as I can tell.

There's only one flight posted on OLC for the Chicago area today. If there was buddy flying I guess it could have been the other one.

Andy Blackburn
9B

[[email protected]]

> ...

'Seems highly unlikely that the glider had a transponder, else the 737 would / should have received an alert / warning from controllers.

I personally wouldn't want to fly a sailplane in a busy area like that w/o a transponder.

When i look at the "flight track" image in the cited article, i'm not at all able to tell which "right turn" would have been the emergency maneuver. Nothing (at least compared to all others) appears "extreme". Perhaps the resolution of the tracking doesn't allow for it.


Karl
*----->
Boulder CO (another very busy airspace)

[Tom BravoMike]

On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 10:15:59 PM UTC-5, Ramy wrote:
> Anyone have more details about it? In particular, was the glider equipped with transponder? This is not good rep for us, but could have been worse.
> https://thepointsguy.com/2017/09/united-737-avoids-midair-collision-ohare/?utm_source=TWITTER&utm_medium=social&utm_term=Editorial&utm_campaign=TWITTER-100000080461661
>
> Ramy

Last Friday, Sept. 22, when soaring south of Ionia, MI (somewhere on Grand Rapids and Lansing line), I suddenly saw a business jet (size of Cessna Citation or bigger) crossing in front and above, probably less then a 1000' higher than myself (5K-6K MSL altitude). Whether he saw me or not, I don't know. That close encounter and the incident described in this thread make me even more convinced: ADS-B for ALL (including gliders and drones) is the future. Very near future...

[Steve Koerner]

On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 8:00:40 AM UTC-7, Tom BravoMike wrote:
> On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 10:15:59 PM UTC-5, Ramy wrote:
> > Anyone have more details about it? In particular, was the glider equipped with transponder? This is not good rep for us, but could have been worse..
> > https://thepointsguy.com/2017/09/united-737-avoids-midair-collision-ohare/?utm_source=TWITTER&utm_medium=social&utm_term=Editorial&utm_campaign=TWITTER-100000080461661
> >
> > Ramy
>
> Last Friday, Sept. 22, when soaring south of Ionia, MI (somewhere on Grand Rapids and Lansing line), I suddenly saw a business jet (size of Cessna Citation or bigger) crossing in front and above, probably less then a 1000' higher than myself (5K-6K MSL altitude). Whether he saw me or not, I don't know. That close encounter and the incident described in this thread make me even more convinced: ADS-B for ALL (including gliders and drones) is the future. Very near future...

And including Air Force jets! It's been ****ing me off this year to have near encounters with fighter jets that don't emit ADS-B on training flights in shared airspace. It's just asinine that the Air Force hasn't got it done yet and says they won't meet 2020 (per an article I read).

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

We're not far north of the mode C veil around EWR and others. ATC brings jets through above cloudbase on weekends since we can be there and currently don't need a transponder. Otherwise, they come through about 5-6K'AGL and we are about 540'MSL.

Yes, we've had days of 10K' bases in southern NY. It pays to not run the wispies in the corridor and to look "up track" every so often.

(Yes, I know this incident happened on a Monday.....).

[[email protected]]

> ...

Indeed, from back in March of '16:

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2016/march/07/air-force-may-not-make-2020-ads-b-deadline


*----->

[LOV2AV8]

I'm curious how this happens. ATC sees gliders on their radar in Tucson. Wouldn't they SW flight get a traffic alert with "type and altitude unknown"? from ATC. ATC has the job of deconflicting and should worst case it as the unknown traffic is the same altitude as the 737. We have been contacted by Tucson TRACON and they would like to meet in order to share their concerns over transponder equipped gliders being at 10,000' over Pinal Airpark (KMZJ). We haven't met yet but take a look at the proximity to the Tucson Class C. A long ways away and they're complaining about us that are transponder equipped. Seems like a bad omen.

Randy "AV8"

[Darryl Ramm]

On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 11:32:33 AM UTC-7, LOV2AV8 wrote:
> I'm curious how this happens. ATC sees gliders on their radar in Tucson. Wouldn't they SW flight get a traffic alert with "type and altitude unknown"? from ATC. ATC has the job of deconflicting and should worst case it as the unknown traffic is the same altitude as the 737. We have been contacted by Tucson TRACON and they would like to meet in order to share their concerns over transponder equipped gliders being at 10,000' over Pinal Airpark (KMZJ). We haven't met yet but take a look at the proximity to the Tucson Class C. A long ways away and they're complaining about us that are transponder equipped. Seems like a bad omen.
>
> Randy "AV8"

There should be no surprise at all that this can happen. ATC requires transponders in aircraft to provide reliable seperation and gliders are very hard to visually see and can be at altitudes and in locations that have high traffic densities of fast jets and airliners.

Can primary radar see gliders? Sure. Sometimes.

Is that anything as effective (or frequent useful at all in practice) as having a transponder and seeing the glider via SSR? No.

And having a transponder also makes the glider visible to TCAS, the wonderful last resort tool to help avoid mid-air collisions. And having a transponder makes your aircraft visible via TIS-B to ADS-B In and Out equipped aircraft in busy airspace (i.e. will should have ADS-B ground station coverage).. Primary radar is not relayed to TIS-B or anything else.

ATC may or may not see gliders on primary radar. And if they do approach primary radar does not provide altitude data. Primary radar relies on doppler discrimination to see aircraft against ground clutter, what that looks like varies dramatically depending on the area/terrain. Gliders don't fly often fast towards or away from the radar antenna, and they stop and thermal slow where they may disappear off the display. Operators may have to turn up the doppler discriminator significantly to reduce target clutter caused by things like traffic on freeways or wind power generators. The later for example makes gliders flying to the East of Travis AFB totally invisible to primary radar, all in a very busy area full of traffic coming into and out of the San Francisco Bay Area. Travis RAPCON (who provide civil as well as military ATC in that area) love gliders with transponders....

When you talk to those ATC folks, which is certainly a good idea, ask for a tour of their facility and have them show you what they are dealing with and ask them about ground clutter, and have them show you the primary radar and doppler discriminator effects.

For transponder equipped gliders it may be that they want to understand your operations a bit more, might want folks to be in radio communications with ATC, etc. Talking to them is the only way of finding out. It can really helps to have somebody from the glider community who is an experienced power pilot, ideally with an instrument rating or airline experience etc. to be in those conversations.

As I'll point out in other posts, you should not be just looking at Class C or simmilar proximity, you should be looking at STAR and SID procedures as well when evaluating local traffic risks. Of course traffic can come from anywhere at any time, but STAR and SID routes give you a good idea where lots of traffic is expected to be.

[Tom BravoMike]

I like this part most:
"It will cost $2.5 million for the aircraft that need it".

Mr. President , can you look into it, please...


On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 1:07:25 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> > ...
>
> Indeed, from back in March of '16:
>
> https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2016/march/07/air-force-may-not-make-2020-ads-b-deadline
>
>
> *----->

[LOV2AV8]

Funny you mention STAR's. Dingo is a point 10 miles NW of El Tiro gliderport and most traffic comes right over the top of us on the 115 degree heading. El Tiro has been operating sailplanes for 34 years. Victor 105 and Victor 16 are both to our west and east and would go a long way to deconflict traffic. .

Dingo 5 arrival
https://resources.globalair.com/dtpp/globalair_00430dingo.pdf

[Darryl Ramm]

On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 10:36:08 PM UTC-7, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 8:15:59 PM UTC-7, Ramy wrote:
> > Anyone have more details about it? In particular, was the glider equipped with transponder? This is not good rep for us, but could have been worse..
> > https://thepointsguy.com/2017/09/united-737-avoids-midair-collision-ohare/?utm_source=TWITTER&utm_medium=social&utm_term=Editorial&utm_campaign=TWITTER-100000080461661
> >
> > Ramy
>
>
> Found it. 19:45 UTC at 7075'MSL, 10 mi NE of Rockford, IL. ASH-26E topping out in a thermal and 737 exiting a brief hold - same altitude and the same location within a mile or less as near as I can tell.
>
> There's only one flight posted on OLC for the Chicago area today. If there was buddy flying I guess it could have been the other one.
>
> Andy Blackburn
> 9B

So early days, and little hard information, I do hope we find out that glider involved (if it was even this ASH26E, or even a glider at all) had a working transponder and there is more to this story.

It's easy to just think of the distance to (very busy) Class B and C airspace here and for that reason alone I would hope pilots flying cross country in that general area would make a decision to equip with transponders.

But in addition to general proximity to Class B and C airspace it's also useful to be aware of traffic routes feeding that airspace, and in this situation, the location Andy suspects lies close to a VOR, under a victor airway, and on a O'Hare STAR route. You can see hold locations marked on the enroute chart near the Janesville VOR https://skyvector.com/?ll=42.44549920857787,-88.8471684575333&chart=428&zoom=3. Looking at those IFR charts is a good starting point to seeing what is likely to be around.

The Janesville Eight STAR (https://www.airnav.com/airport/ord) into O'Hare puts aircraft near where the ASH25E seems to have been, at the same altitude range. There should be no surprise there is IFR traffic, fast jets and airliners there and because of that a practical need for transponders for gliders who are flying at those altitudes in that area.

Anyhow posting these enroute and STAR examples are intended to encourage pilots to do some research and be aware of traffic routes around busy airspace they fly near. Don't forget to look at SID routes as well. I hope all that and much more is know to folks locally near where this occurred, and I still hope we find any glider involved actually had a transponder and it was being used.

[John Cochrane[_3_]]

It will be interesting to hear more details. This happened over Beloit Wisconsin, where there is a glider operation, so it was likely a Beloit-based glider.

Other Chicago operations -- Chicago Glider, Sky Soaring, and Hinckley -- are much closer to O'hare class A. When I flew out of each, attention to this issue was intense. Sky soaring especially operates frequently on the edge of class B, so we watched for traffic coming out our going in the side of class B. Transponders are very common in these close-in operations. Chicago glider club flies near the common southwest approach over the Joliet VFR, near the edge of MDW class C, and transponders are pretty much universal. Flying there we often saw 737s take gentle turns to avoid a thermal, alerted to us via Transponders.

Reports from Chicago say it was an excellent day for soaring with much higher altitudes than usual, around 7,000'. Still, what was a O'hare bound jet doing that low, in class E airspace, that far out? Airline pilots, is this a common route and practice? It would seem that staying above 10,000' until quite near the massive Ohare Class B would be prudent!

Chicago airspace is full of light aircraft. Gliders are a small part of the traffic. It always puzzled me flying from Chicago Glider, and puzzles me now as a Southwest passenger, just why the approach to Midway lets down to highly congested class E airspace under 10,000' way outside of the Class B or C and then motors on through swatting the proverbial bugs off the wingtips as they come in. It's nice for me to review all my old landing sites from close up, but I don't think that's what they had in mind.

John Cochrane

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

> Still, what was a O'hare bound jet doing that low, in class E airspace,
> that far out? Airline pilots, is this a common route and practice? It would
> seem that staying above 10,000' until quite near the massive Ohare Class B
> would be prudent!

Indulging in spitting into the wind, am I the only one who remembers one
"justification" for "the inverted wedding cakes" being extended so high, the
"promise" that ATC would route all commercial arriving (departing) traffic
into (out-of) the top of each wedding cake? I didn't believe it then, and
years of soaring in the vicinity of (first) Stapleton (and then) DIA further
disabused me of the notion there was any hint of reality in that "promise."

Today's "typical routings" of commercial traffic in the vicinity of every
"inverted wedding cake" with which I'm vaguely familiar (Denver, Dulles, LAX,
SF) might well make a reasonable person wonder why the "operational fiction"
of inverted wedding cakes still exists given "typical airline
arrival/departure routing realities." Yeah, I imagine "operational
flexibility" is a wonderful concept if you're a harried ATC person...but
darned if there aren't devils in those pesky details. Witness (say) ADSB, a
wonderful concept whose implementational details have been discussed so
patiently on this forum for years, now. Here we are, less than 3 years away
from "full USA ADSB coverage" and undoubtedly every aircraft owner, pilot and
installation tech is completely up to speed with every important aspect of
today's ADSB market offerings? (Quiz to follow...)

Bob - sigh - W.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 2:06:33 PM UTC-7, John Cochrane wrote:
> It will be interesting to hear more details. This happened over Beloit Wisconsin, where there is a glider operation, so it was likely a Beloit-based glider.
>
> Other Chicago operations -- Chicago Glider, Sky Soaring, and Hinckley -- are much closer to O'hare class A. When I flew out of each, attention to this issue was intense. Sky soaring especially operates frequently on the edge of class B, so we watched for traffic coming out our going in the side of class B. Transponders are very common in these close-in operations. Chicago glider club flies near the common southwest approach over the Joliet VFR, near the edge of MDW class C, and transponders are pretty much universal. Flying there we often saw 737s take gentle turns to avoid a thermal, alerted to us via Transponders.
>
> Reports from Chicago say it was an excellent day for soaring with much higher altitudes than usual, around 7,000'. Still, what was a O'hare bound jet doing that low, in class E airspace, that far out? Airline pilots, is this a common route and practice? It would seem that staying above 10,000' until quite near the massive Ohare Class B would be prudent!
>
> Chicago airspace is full of light aircraft. Gliders are a small part of the traffic. It always puzzled me flying from Chicago Glider, and puzzles me now as a Southwest passenger, just why the approach to Midway lets down to highly congested class E airspace under 10,000' way outside of the Class B or C and then motors on through swatting the proverbial bugs off the wingtips as they come in. It's nice for me to review all my old landing sites from close up, but I don't think that's what they had in mind.
>
> John Cochrane

Flight originated at Sky Soaring (as marked on the SeeYou database).

I put the two flight traces together in Google Earth. Here's a link to some imagery.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bw1ChKkWEYLNeE4wTkxheHU4bFU

Looks like the two aircraft first started evasive maneuvers at around 19:44:24 UTC with the 737 at the ASH-26E's 10 o'clock or so and no more than a few dozen feet difference in reported altitude. The glider dove off a 150 feet or so to the north and the 737 climbed a similar amount and passed each other with maybe 500' horizontally 8-10 seconds later. Without the evasive maneuvers it looks to me like a coin flip whether the two would have hit each other - the 737 went right through the middle of the thermal and the altitudes were within measurement error. Obviously the pilots will have a lot more to say about that.

I'd repeat what Darryl said about transponders and knowing arrival/departure routes.

Andy

[[email protected]]

The Southwest aircraft descend early because they are going into Chicago Midway and O'hare runs the show. Same thing happens at Dallas Love and DFW. When ATC builds the arrivals (STARs) and departures (SIDS) the big airports get priority, the smaller (Midway, Love) airports have their terminal procedures built around them. Early descents WELL outside of the Class B airspace is very normal and required to get under/around the traffic going into the major airports. Any clubs that operate near B and busy C airspace should have a committee that meets occasionally with the ATC folks, dialogue goes a long way. We (TSA) notify ATC every time we fly and a note is attached to the Love Field ATIS/AWOS describing glider operations south of the class B.

Knowing the arrival points and typical altitudes should be common and required knowledge of all club members. On another note, 500' separation is all ATC is required between IFR and VFR aircraft. If your not accustomed to a 500' pass it will appear very, very close. When I fly alone during the week I monitor the appropriate Regional Approach frequency just for situational awareness, I have a transponder, ATC sees me and I hear them occasionally move IFR traffic around me. Some of the passes are no more than 500', but legal.

WR

[Darryl Ramm]

On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 1:35:54 PM UTC-7, LOV2AV8 wrote:
> Funny you mention STAR's. Dingo is a point 10 miles NW of El Tiro gliderport and most traffic comes right over the top of us on the 115 degree heading. El Tiro has been operating sailplanes for 34 years. Victor 105 and Victor 16 are both to our west and east and would go a long way to deconflict traffic. .
>
> Dingo 5 arrival
> https://resources.globalair.com/dtpp/globalair_00430dingo.pdf

In the Pinal Airpark and El Tiro area you are closer to actual ILS arrivals and departures so more need to look at those as well and you'll notice for example ILS approaches going to the TACUB fix kind of between El Tiro and Pinal Airpark. That may be part of the ATC concern here, and I who knows what the Air Force traffic is doing in that area. All good things to hear from the ATC folks.

You can go to https://www.aopa.org/airports/TUS and download a combined PDF of all the approaches plates, STARs etc. that makes it easy to review.

You can also look up any fix etc. location at from the FAA e.g. https://nfdc.faa.gov/nfdcApps/services/airspaceFixes/fix_search.jsp?selectType=state&selectName=NM&keyword=TACUB

And add those fixed to Google earth or SeeYou etc. to help visualize things while looking at the procedures.

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 2:51:19 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> The Southwest aircraft descend early because they are going into Chicago Midway and O'hare runs the show. Same thing happens at Dallas Love and DFW.. When ATC builds the arrivals (STARs) and departures (SIDS) the big airports get priority, the smaller (Midway, Love) airports have their terminal procedures built around them. Early descents WELL outside of the Class B airspace is very normal and required to get under/around the traffic going into the major airports. Any clubs that operate near B and busy C airspace should have a committee that meets occasionally with the ATC folks, dialogue goes a long way. We (TSA) notify ATC every time we fly and a note is attached to the Love Field ATIS/AWOS describing glider operations south of the class B.
>
> Knowing the arrival points and typical altitudes should be common and required knowledge of all club members. On another note, 500' separation is all ATC is required between IFR and VFR aircraft. If your not accustomed to a 500' pass it will appear very, very close. When I fly alone during the week I monitor the appropriate Regional Approach frequency just for situational awareness, I have a transponder, ATC sees me and I hear them occasionally move IFR traffic around me. Some of the passes are no more than 500', but legal.
>
> WR

It was a United flight that landed on 09L at O'Hare. Don't know if that changes things or not. It was maybe 300' vertical separation after everyone evaded. The trajectories looked like they were headed for zero separation in altitude. The horizontal separation was anywhere from 0 to a few hundred feet - half a thermal width or less.

I can't Imagine ATC would do that on purpose with a circling glider that's climbing, but maybe that's not what you meant.

Andy

[Darryl Ramm]

On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 2:06:33 PM UTC-7, John Cochrane wrote:

>Still, what was a O'hare bound jet doing that low, in class E airspace, that far out? Airline pilots, is this a common route and practice? It would seem that staying above 10,000' until quite near the massive Ohare Class B would be prudent!

Likely flying a "standard approach" (STAR) into O'Hare. It is really important we don't think fast jets and airliners are only found in Class A, B and C airspace.

Maybe a useful reminder that the midair collision of the ASG29 and Hawker 800 happened around 30 nautical miles from the edge of Reno Class C Airspace.. Out if good old Class E. The Hawker 800 had just left Class A, and was contacting Reno Approach and would have been talking a Mustang VOR route into Reno.

"Oh sure but that's a private jet, an airliner on the other hand..." Bzzzt no. Just an example in that area airliners landing flying approaches into Reno often fly under gliders flying out of the Truckee area. All in Class E airspace.

I wanted to mention Reno again because it's the poster child for transponder use (and I'm always been impressed with most pilot attitudes and PASCO efforts etc. to encourage transponder use there), but many other locations also have traffic issues where pilots likely should be using transponders, and I'd hate for pilots to not think that through carefully and only assume the problem exists at Reno.

[[email protected]]

Andy, No my 500' comment was not about this incident which was obviously last second maneuvering to avoid a midair or very near midair. Just saying that if you have a "close encounter" it may be legal and orchestrated by ATC.. I believe that some in the past have filed " near miss" reports that may have been under the full control of ATC and filing a report does nothing good for soaring.

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

Got it. Thanks for the clarification. I still have a hard time imagining ATC routing traffic within 500' of a glider if they appreciated how we operate, legal or not. They could save us all some false NMAC reports with a little more separation.

[Ramy[_2_]]

Chances are that the airliner would have never seen the glider if it wasn't thermaling. When flying straight and level in a collision course we are invisible.

Ramy

[[email protected]]

Glider did not come from Beloit operation

[John Cochrane[_3_]]

Let us add a word of appreciation for the United pilot, who was looking out the window, spotted a thermalling sailplane -- hard to do at 80 knots with our visibility and distractions, let alone 250 knots and his -- and promptly did something about it.

John Cochrane

[John Carlyle]

I've been in 3 close calls with big iron while flying my glider inside the mode C veils N of PHL and also W of EWR. In all 3 cases I'm convinced that my Trig TT21 was a lifesaver. All occurred at about 6,000 MSL.

There were several things that were impressed on me as a result of these encounters. First, it is absolutely amazing how quickly these aircraft close on you from the time you first see them. Second, being 500 feet under a 747 or 737 in a glider is absolutely terrifying! Third, it was very difficult for me as a private pilot to dig out the needed SID or STAR information from paper charts - the advent of the geo-referenced SkyVector charts is a real step forward.

Finally, don't count on having 500 feet separation. The legal variance on altitude encoders is +/- 125 feet, so you might be as close as 250 feet!

-John, Q3

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

My closest near collisions have all been in the airport environment and both the other aircraft and I were under control of the tower. In one case, September of 2003 out of Burbank, tower put a United Airlines MD 80 heading to Dallas, and me (in an MD520 N) , on a collision course at about 200 ft AGL. An amazing story all told, but bottom line, buy the safety devices you can, but... We both filed NASA reports and the guy at NASA actually called me and said this is the most amazing story he had seen, then told me he was not supposed to do this, he offered me the phone number of the United pilot. Interesting how both the United pilot and I had a little bit different perspective of the same event. If someone can find the incident report I would love to read it. Burbank tower actually tracked me down and apologized.

On Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 11:55:43 AM UTC-7, John Carlyle wrote:
> I've been in 3 close calls with big iron while flying my glider inside the mode C veils N of PHL and also W of EWR. In all 3 cases I'm convinced that my Trig TT21 was a lifesaver. All occurred at about 6,000 MSL.
>

[jfitch]

On Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 11:55:43 AM UTC-7, John Carlyle wrote:
> I've been in 3 close calls with big iron while flying my glider inside the mode C veils N of PHL and also W of EWR. In all 3 cases I'm convinced that my Trig TT21 was a lifesaver. All occurred at about 6,000 MSL.
>
> There were several things that were impressed on me as a result of these encounters. First, it is absolutely amazing how quickly these aircraft close on you from the time you first see them. Second, being 500 feet under a 747 or 737 in a glider is absolutely terrifying! Third, it was very difficult for me as a private pilot to dig out the needed SID or STAR information from paper charts - the advent of the geo-referenced SkyVector charts is a real step forward.
>
> Finally, don't count on having 500 feet separation. The legal variance on altitude encoders is +/- 125 feet, so you might be as close as 250 feet!
>
> -John, Q3

In three occasions I've been close enough to a SW 737 to do a passenger count. Once probably close enough to pick them out of a lineup. Is that 500'? Closer? Hard to judge. All of these were on the north side of Reno. Since installing a transponder, nothing anywhere near that close - plenty of 737 vectored around me though, confirmed by listening to Norcal Approach. Transponders and ATC do work, if you give them a chance.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 11:23:46 AM UTC-4, Steve Koerner wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 8:00:40 AM UTC-7, Tom BravoMike wrote:
> > On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 10:15:59 PM UTC-5, Ramy wrote:
> > > Anyone have more details about it? In particular, was the glider equipped with transponder? This is not good rep for us, but could have been worse.
> > > https://thepointsguy.com/2017/09/united-737-avoids-midair-collision-ohare/?utm_source=TWITTER&utm_medium=social&utm_term=Editorial&utm_campaign=TWITTER-100000080461661
> > >
> > > Ramy
> >
> > Last Friday, Sept. 22, when soaring south of Ionia, MI (somewhere on Grand Rapids and Lansing line), I suddenly saw a business jet (size of Cessna Citation or bigger) crossing in front and above, probably less then a 1000' higher than myself (5K-6K MSL altitude). Whether he saw me or not, I don't know. That close encounter and the incident described in this thread make me even more convinced: ADS-B for ALL (including gliders and drones) is the future. Very near future...
>
> And including Air Force jets! It's been ****ing me off this year to have near encounters with fighter jets that don't emit ADS-B on training flights in shared airspace. It's just asinine that the Air Force hasn't got it done yet and says they won't meet 2020 (per an article I read).

I was on downwind to land my Taurus on a small strip in the Virginia Blue Ridge Mountains. My transponder started blinking which does not normally happen in mountain valleys. Then two F-16s whizzed by at the same (very low) altitude not much more that 500 ft away. I do not know if they saw me. I have an appointment to get ADS-B installed next week and wonder if it will help.

[[email protected]]

FWIW, I had a close encounter with an F-15 a few years ago. Local ATC had been sending inbound military traffic over our class D airspace at 3500 feet. I called local ATC, their response was "if you do not have a transponder I cannot see you". New young controllers rely totally on the technology. We have since had several get meetings and now have a great relationship with them.

Also gliders when circling have a ground speed that is less than 40 mph so the radar software ignores the contact. So "type and altitude unknown" call will not be made.

C5

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

No wonder piper cubs are painted yellow,.

[Dan Marotta]

Seems even old glider pilots rely more on ATC keeping them from conflict
than with keeping a good eye outside.Â* It's not just an affliction of
the young.

On 11/17/2017 6:45 AM, wrote:
> FWIW, I had a close encounter with an F-15 a few years ago. Local ATC had been sending inbound military traffic over our class D airspace at 3500 feet. I called local ATC, their response was "if you do not have a transponder I cannot see you". New young controllers rely totally on the technology. We have since had several get meetings and now have a great relationship with them.
>
> Also gliders when circling have a ground speed that is less than 40 mph so the radar software ignores the contact. So "type and altitude unknown" call will not be made.
>
> C5

--
Dan, 5J

[kirk.stant]

> I was on downwind to land my Taurus on a small strip in the Virginia Blue Ridge Mountains. My transponder started blinking which does not normally happen in mountain valleys. Then two F-16s whizzed by at the same (very low) altitude not much more that 500 ft away. I do not know if they saw me. I have an appointment to get ADS-B installed next week and wonder if it will help.

The reason you transponder was blinking is probably that the F-16s were interrogating you - almost all US fighters have transponder interrogators and can trigger your transponder - your location is then shown on the fighter's radar display (correlated to a radar hit if it is looking there). With a radar lock, the pilot will then see you highlighted in his HUD or helmet.

Some of you seem to think the military doesn't care about midairs and is nonchalant about zooming around at low level. That is totally wrong - dead is dead whether you are in a 1-26 or an F-35! And the systems in mil aircraft put civilian aircraft to shame. For example, the F-15E that I'm most familiar with has a transponder working on Modes 1, 2, 3 (A % C), 4, 5, and S; an interrogator that can look for all those modes, a radar that can pick you up well over 100 miles away; a targeting pod that can identify you visually; a huge bubble canopy so you can actually see out (much like a glider but unlike just about any other civilian plane - especially airliners) and two highly trained and motivated aircrew that really don't want to hit you.

If you don't have either a transponder or a PowerFLARM in you glider, you are a big part of the problem.

And yes, military is getting ADS-B in it's aircraft - but that takes time and money. You want a tax hike to pay for it? I do, but I doubt you could convince Congress!

Kirk
66

[[email protected]]

Some 20 years ago I was coming in to land a glider at a smallish airport in NE US, where I was towed out of earlier that day, and when I was crossing the field at pattern altitude a pair of military jets passed UNDER me. It was July 3. and they were practicing for the next day's official fly-by. I was not pleased.


On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 8:45:13 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> FWIW, I had a close encounter with an F-15 a few years ago. Local ATC had been sending inbound military traffic over our class D airspace at 3500 feet. I called local ATC, their response was "if you do not have a transponder I cannot see you". New young controllers rely totally on the technology. We have since had several get meetings and now have a great relationship with them.
>
> Also gliders when circling have a ground speed that is less than 40 mph so the radar software ignores the contact. So "type and altitude unknown" call will not be made.
>
> C5

[WaltWX[_2_]]

More like 25+ years ago I was circling at 600agl over a remote dirt landing strip, Swee****er, Nevada getting ready for a X-country off field landing.... when suddenly an F-4 flew directly under me. It was terrain flying down the valley near Mount Patterson at 100ft or so agl.

No transponder back then.

[Jim Kellett]

On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 1:30:58 PM UTC-5, kirk.stant wrote:

> Some of you seem to think the military doesn't care about midairs and is nonchalant about zooming around at low level. That is totally wrong - dead is dead whether you are in a 1-26 or an F-35! . . .
> If you don't have either a transponder or a PowerFLARM in you glider, you are a big part of the problem.
> Kirk
> 66

<snip>

What he said. I've had transponders in all the gliders I've owned since 1996, and for sure the military guys ARE paying attention! Once while ridge soaring on a ridge in the middle of the Shenandoah Valley, I spotted a couple of jets right off the deck coming in my general direction (yes, the xponder was blinking lilke all get-out). I watched both of them swing away, rock there wings at me, and drop right back down on their course.
The Curmudgeon

[Dan Marotta]

Tax hike? No.Â* How about a welfare reduction?

Otherwise, great information!

On 11/17/2017 11:30 AM, kirk.stant wrote:
>> I was on downwind to land my Taurus on a small strip in the Virginia Blue Ridge Mountains. My transponder started blinking which does not normally happen in mountain valleys. Then two F-16s whizzed by at the same (very low) altitude not much more that 500 ft away. I do not know if they saw me. I have an appointment to get ADS-B installed next week and wonder if it will help.
> The reason you transponder was blinking is probably that the F-16s were interrogating you - almost all US fighters have transponder interrogators and can trigger your transponder - your location is then shown on the fighter's radar display (correlated to a radar hit if it is looking there). With a radar lock, the pilot will then see you highlighted in his HUD or helmet.
>
> Some of you seem to think the military doesn't care about midairs and is nonchalant about zooming around at low level. That is totally wrong - dead is dead whether you are in a 1-26 or an F-35! And the systems in mil aircraft put civilian aircraft to shame. For example, the F-15E that I'm most familiar with has a transponder working on Modes 1, 2, 3 (A % C), 4, 5, and S; an interrogator that can look for all those modes, a radar that can pick you up well over 100 miles away; a targeting pod that can identify you visually; a huge bubble canopy so you can actually see out (much like a glider but unlike just about any other civilian plane - especially airliners) and two highly trained and motivated aircrew that really don't want to hit you.
>
> If you don't have either a transponder or a PowerFLARM in you glider, you are a big part of the problem.
>
> And yes, military is getting ADS-B in it's aircraft - but that takes time and money. You want a tax hike to pay for it? I do, but I doubt you could convince Congress!
>
> Kirk
> 66

--
Dan, 5J

[MNLou]

You are, of course, talking about a corporate welfare reduction I assume Dan?

Lou

[Dan Marotta]

Nope.Â* Corporations provide jobs.Â* I'm referring to the leeches that
take money in exchange for doing nothing.Â* C'mon...Â* You're not going to
start yelling about tax breaks for the rich, are you?

Dan

On 11/18/2017 1:53 PM, MNLou wrote:
> You are, of course, talking about a corporate welfare reduction I assume Dan?
>
> Lou

--
Dan, 5J

[MNLou]

Nah - I'll save that for other forums:)

Lou

[Dan Marotta]

:-D

On 11/19/2017 9:01 AM, MNLou wrote:
> Nah - I'll save that for other forums:)
>
> Lou

--
Dan, 5J