TCAD Installations in Gliders?

How about the original Mark One Eyeball - most folk
have two inbuilt units and they provide a damn sure
fire way to avoid a collision.

LOOKOUT!

Gav


At 10:48 19 October 2003, Thierry wrote:
Hello,
At 13.8v the ProXalert R5 device needs only ONE watt
compared to
nearly 5 watts for the Trafficscope(c). It displays
up to three
threats including squawk, altitude and distance. It
also features a
built in altitude alerter.
It will be available mid November. See our Website

www.proxalert.com

Have safe flight,

Regards,


'John Morgan' wrote in message news:...
'Eric Greenwell' wrote in message
http://www.ryan-tcad.com/products/traffic_9900B.html

It's the only TCAD system I'm aware of.


Eric ('n all),

There's also 'Skywatch', I think by BF Goodrich. Same
problem though,
expensive and consumes too much power for a glider.
What would be *really*
good is if they came out with a portable ADS-B for
cheap! But since that
won't happen soon - or ever, the only game left I'm
aware of is passive
transponder detectors . . . and these have gotten
mixed reviews until just
recently. The following is cut from a post on the
Mooney tech group:

'Just got my TrafficScope TPAS VRX from Surecheck
last week and
had a chance to fly with it.
Absolutely a first-rate product!!! Much, much better/different
than the earlier TPAS RX-110 version.

http://www.surecheck.net . . .'

The problem with previous passive detectors is they
were based on signal
strength only, no bearing or altitude info. That,
and some users experienced
a lot of falses. The new version mentioned above still
doesn't give bearing,
but it *does* give altitude of the target and since
it decodes this info,
can eliminate much of the falsing, alerts from overhead
airliners etc.

I have no connection with the above company and don't
have one of these
things to play with - yet. At $1200 . . . figured
I'd wait some until there
are more happy customers.
--
bumper - ZZ
'Dare to be different . . . circle in sink.'
to reply, the last half is right to left





---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date:
10/9/2003

"Gavin Goudie" wrote in message
...
How about the original Mark One Eyeball - most folk
have two inbuilt units and they provide a damn sure
fire way to avoid a collision.

LOOKOUT!

Gav


"Damn sure fire way to avoid a collision" might be true if they were only
hooked up to something with a better processor than the Mark One Brain. Even
so, they can only cover a relatively small portion of the potential threat
area at a time as they are the predator, forward looking binocular vision
version (instead of the more preferred, side-mounted prey version). From the
accident stats, "see and avoid" and "big sky principal" are anything but
damn sure.

"LOOKOUT!" is good advice, the best tool we all have, but it ain't the
be-all-end-all . . . if it were, deer wouldn't need ears.
--
bumper - ZZ
"Dare to be different . . . circle in sink."
to reply, the last half is right to left


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 10/9/2003

Gavin Goudie wrote in message ...
How about the original Mark One Eyeball - most folk
have two inbuilt units and they provide a damn sure
fire way to avoid a collision.

LOOKOUT!

Gav

Most of the time, the Mk 1 Mod 0 Eyeball works fine - IF you can look
in the direction of the threat. Fine during thermalling (plus you are
easy to see, assuming the other guy is also looking out...). But
during long glides between thermals, you CANNOT SEE the threat running
you down from behind. I would love to have a traffic warning device -
and a transponder - but havn't found anything yet that I can afford
(yet).

Then there is the problem of all the neat gadgets in the cockpit now:
Glide computers, PDA's with moving maps, handheld GPS's. Real easy to
spend way too much time heads down; so the admonition to LOOKOUT! is
still absolutely valid!

I guess a lot depends on where, what, and how you fly. Hanging around
the gliderport in the house thermal, the biggest threat is the student
in the same thermal staring at his variometer. Flying XC in the
western US (or Oz, etc) my biggest fear is some doctor in his Baron
hitting me from behind. Of course, as long as I keep my cruise speed
up, I can eliminate the threat from most Cessnas and Pipers!

Kirk
LS6-b "66"

Kirk Stant wrote:
...
Most of the time, the Mk 1 Mod 0 Eyeball works fine - IF you can look
in the direction of the threat. Fine during thermalling (plus you are
easy to see, assuming the other guy is also looking out...). But
during long glides between thermals, you CANNOT SEE the threat running
you down from behind.
...

Yes, I remember a huge glider (well, only 15 m, but so close it seemed
really huge) coming just above my head during such a glide, because
it left the same slope as myself just a few seconds after me, just a
few meters higher and flew just a little faster than me. None of us
could see the other glider just up to this moment.

But there is a simple device that could help in this case, which is
fitted in most motor gliders with a retracting prop: a small rear
facing mirror. I wonder why we don't have such a mirror on every glider.

In article ,
says...
Yes, I remember a huge glider (well, only 15 m, but so close it seemed
really huge) coming just above my head during such a glide, because
it left the same slope as myself just a few seconds after me, just a
few meters higher and flew just a little faster than me. None of us
could see the other glider just up to this moment.

But there is a simple device that could help in this case, which is
fitted in most motor gliders with a retracting prop: a small rear
facing mirror. I wonder why we don't have such a mirror on every glider.

I've tried mirrors several times over the past 20 years, but haven't
been able to find one that showed a wide enough view and still had a
big enough image of the glider I was trying to see. Perhaps one that
simply showed only what was above and a little behind would work for
the situation you describe, but I think it would frequently be
reflecting the sun into your eyes. The one on my motorglider certainly
does, unless I tip it down.

--
!Replace DECIMAL.POINT in my e-mail address with just a . to reply
directly

Eric Greenwell
Richland, WA (USA)

"Kirk Stant" wrote in message
om...
Most of the time, the Mk 1 Mod 0 Eyeball works fine - IF you can look in the
direction of the threat. Fine during thermalling (plus you are easy to see,
assuming the other guy is also looking out...). . . .
__________________________________________________ __________________________
________

Some background on the original question . . . Between 1982 and 2003, there
were, according to the NTSB, ca. 400 MACs in the United States, of which 18
involved gliders, of which 10 - count'em - ten - were glider/glider in a
thermal!* There were others that were not reported.** Two more were
glider/glider in the pattern. We're not doing such a good job of
see-and-avoid even in the situation(s) where see-and-avoid is the ONLY
practical way to avoid a MAC. B U T . . . .

The ORIGINAL question, about TPAS/TCAD, was focussed on trying to get a
better grip on the risk of MACs which are not all that obvious from the
historical record, but which loom menacingly over the horizon - e.g., with
an airliner (TCAS equipped) or other large (transponder equipped) airplane
(or, in the latter case, maybe even a glider). These are instances where
see-and-avoid is not really working and is not going to work (e.g., the
airliner coming up on your six, which HAS led to NMACs.). There's a growing
list of anecdotally reported MACs between airliners and/or military aircraft
and gliders.

So, anyone know of a pilot who's actually installed or used a TCAD unit in a
glider? (Or a TPAS, for that matter . . .)

Jim Kellett, Resident Curmudgeon
Chief Flight Instructor, Skyline Soaring Club
Captain and CFI(G), Civil Air Patrol
Chairman, Classic Division, Vintage Sailplane Association
Webmaster, Open Cirrus Website
"If Flying Were the Language of Man, Soaring Would be its Poetry"



* Query on the downloaded NTSB accident database.
** Personal communication

In article ,
says...

So, anyone know of a pilot who's actually installed or used a TCAD unit in a
glider? (Or a TPAS, for that matter . . .)

Jim, have you experimented any with flight following? I've not used
it, but allegedly, ATC with warn you of other transponder equipped
aircraft. It's not the same as carrying a warning device in the
glider, but it might have some utility, and it's cheap!

Of course, you wouldn't be on the glider frequencies anymore, but
another transceiver would take care of that.
--
!Replace DECIMAL.POINT in my e-mail address with just a . to reply
directly

Eric Greenwell
Richland, WA (USA)

Jim, have you experimented any with flight following? I've not used
it, but allegedly, ATC with warn you of other transponder equipped
aircraft. It's not the same as carrying a warning device in the
glider, but it might have some utility, and it's cheap!

ATC doesn't generally LIKE it, but they've given me
flight following before with no transponder. I let them know
who I am by doing a 360 (easier than trying to turn
to a compass heading THEY call out).