I don't think you can compare the Monroy to the traffic scope for
function, any more than an ADF can really be compared to GPS. The
Monroy doesn't account for altitude, so when you have a 737 flying
overhead thousands of feet up the Monroy would be screaming bloody
murder. I think they mention altitude on their web, but in talking to
them and using it, they try to rely on somehow the signal being
blocked to give only aircraft within an altitude band. I never saw
this "blockage" take place. But, with the traffic scope you know
exactly how high above or below you they are, and can select through
modes to pin point an altitude band or range. I think the traffic
scope giving you the actual altitude of the other aircraft is the way
to go, since the concept of avoiding someone can be made by altitude
separation, even if you never see the other aircraft. Obviously the
next best thing would be directional azimuth, but the lowest priced
system I have seen on the market is near or at 5 figures.

"Marco Leon" mleon(at)optonline.net wrote in message ...
Thanks. The consensus is that the Monroy was better than the Surecheck TPAS.
I wouls be curious to see if the Monroy still holds up to the Traffic Scope.
Be sure to post a review if you ever get a chance to fly with the new
SureCheck box.

Marco

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Marco,

We have the Monroy ATD200 in our Tobago - works great! However, the new
generation Surecheck units (something vr) look interesting.
--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)




Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com