Aaviationist

There seems to be a great fear and resistance of technology for many members here in a certain age group. its irrational, short sighted, and in the case of a few we’ve seen above, hazardous. as these people age out, lose their medical, and generally go away I think we’re going to see the mentality observed in this thread that “you get fixated on ADSB” will likely go away with it. At least for the practical examples anyway. I’m sure there will be a few stuck to their keyboards telling others what they should and shouldn’t do.

I have my gear light on my airplane integrated into my modern avionics with full ADSB capability. haven’t had an issue and I do A LOT of touch and goes.

In true mooneyspace fashion this has gone exactly as expected. You can either ask the people here that made it about technical details or you can speculate, invent, guess, and argue your own opinions and alternate facts about what it is.

When I first started shopping for airplanes was about the time that first video went up. the outcome was always clear and I believe I and others reached out. Most of the time an airplane that is in a condition to be returned to service doesn’t get pushed off to the side and into the weeds. It was most definitely there for a known reason, which was also seen in the very first video.

It’s a distraction! Look out the window instead of relying on your gadgets and what’s-it’s that will drive you into the ground! get training instead the files are in the computer

Weather it’s approved or not is irrelevant. yes it is absolutely a comparison, ForeFlight uses the same relocated maps as everything else that is approved, and the gps coordinate of the ADSB target is the same gps coordinate on an iPad, or a fully integrated and approved device, AND in many cases it comes from the same source! not to mention that ADSB traffic targets do in fact also show up on approved devices….. your logic and reasoning gets less comprehensible and proves your lack of knowledge the more you comment in this thread.

You forgot “training provides a better safety than parachutes”

Another point about people stating ADSB is not accurate, the source is the same as the one that gets you to the runway on an RNAV approach. are you also saying that a gps approach is not accurate? or can we all just agree that the information provided for those points was a complete fabrication.

I’m sorry but nothing you have said in this entire diatribe is true or accurate. Then you bring in Cirrus and the parachute which is PROVEN to have a massive increase in safety. It’s a system that works. It’s why the airframe is the number one selling GA airframe and its safety enhancement is why every manufacturer in the space of GA is implementing, trying to implement, or is considering implementation of a BRS system. So who is wrong, everyone but you, or you? (I already know your answer to that) I’ve never seen someone make so many blatantly wrong statements and doubled down on them so hard. If you really are an instructor, someone needs to have a chat with your students.

There is no amount of flight instruction that is going to give me the situational awareness that ADSB does. no, flight instruction is not an alternative. flight training does not allow me to see the 5 people in the pattern while 15 miles out while on my way home from a long cross country unless you are some sort of wizzard…

@wombatonce again in this thread you are twisting words. I did not say ADSB was the answer to solving in air collisions. I DID say that ADSB having been available in both accident aircraft in a SPECIFIC example most probably would have had an impact on the outcome - which I believe to be true ADSB is a potentially life saving technology and is an excellent if not crucial tool in understanding the current status of an airport environment. The more aircraft that participate the more useful that tool is, and becomes. it’s a tool and technology that helps protect both you AND me, and to not be ADSB out equipped at this stage in the game be it to be a CB or to save a few bucks, is a disservice to you and everyone around you.

See and avoid doesn’t always work. A mixture of see and avoid and technology is better. in this case the technology would have presented an immediate solution to the problem with see and avoid that led to this accident. if you don’t think that’s the case, you need to have your brain examined. Any reasonable person would deduce that ADSB would have played a MAJOR factor in the mitigation of this specific incident. if you don’t think so I can assure you that you are the minority.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343689163_A_study_of_uncompensated_latency_in_ADS-B_reports

Again, wrong. they both were looking out the window. Then, one of two pilots started looking at the iPad while the other CONTINUED looking out the window. how does that mean ADSB fixation caused the accident? At this point that argument is just delusional and you are either actively skipping the parts you do t want to read or you are so out of touch with reality that your brain is just blocking it out. that’s crazy.

For ADSB in and out equipped aircraft the delay is minimal and is certainly NOT anywhere remotely close to 30 seconds. ADSB is capable of air to air. It seems there is a lot of mis-information and ill advised members participating in this thread.