Glider Crash - Minden?

Derek Copeland wrote:

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

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!

Derek Copeland

At 17:42 01 September 2006, Jack wrote:
Derek Copeland wrote:

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

snoop, I was referring to mode A only. Without altitude, will TCAS know
how far below I am to filter me out? Does it determine it by direction
and distance?

Ramy

snoop wrote:
Ramy, With regard to the "signal an alert to any airline cruising at
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.


Ramy wrote:
Thanks Glen. I am not aware of any transponder equiped glider not using
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

Glen Kelley wrote:
Ramy,

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" wrote in message
ups.com...
Thanks for the excellent overview, Glen. Regarding number 3, why would
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 wrote:
A few additions to Kirk's excellent points - from the background of
former
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

Derek Copeland wrote:

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

------


At 17:42 01 September 2006, Jack wrote:
Derek Copeland wrote:

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 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"

Snoop,

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


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"

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.

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'

Derek Copeland wrote:
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.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA

www.motorglider.org - Download 'A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane
Operation'

..... and it creates a lot less drag than will occur when your wing is
ripped off by a bizjet!

Mike


"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'm not in the market for a transponder, but I do like the low current
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

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.