Near mid-air collision yesterday

[Bennett]

Not the first controller error, or, unfortunately, the last.  I have have had a least two instances, where  I "overruled" an ATC controller - both in IMC on approaches. In one instance the controller issued me a vector (I guess he forgot about turning me) that was flying me directly into a mountain that I knew was there.(GPS terrain display and warnings). I made a hard 90 degree turn  when I was finally so close to that mountain that I was sure I would crash into it if I didn't turn. I called him to say I was turning, and he issued me new vectors. Later in a phone call I initiated, he admitted that he actually just forgot about me, although I was on his screen. The second time the controller set up vectors to put me an an approach to the wrong airport - a military base, and I had a hard time getting through the chatter to discuss this. Once again, I turned away before I entered that restricted airspace, and finally got through to the controller who seemed surprised I wasn't flying a Navy jet.  Mooneys may be fast, but not that fast. The two airports were close, and aligned about the same, but it was clear to me (Loran in those days) that the vector was wrong for the civilian airport. 

[Piloto]

The Uberlingen 2002 mid-air shows that the radar and TCAS techonologies worked properly. The cause of the mid-air was simply lack of ATC manpower. The controller was overloaded with traffic and lost control of it. ADS-B would not have changed the outcome unless  the budget for it would have been instead assigned for additional controllers.

 

On many instances when you call ATC and there is no inmediate response or late on responding is due to him being busy attending other traffic. Bennett experience with the controller is not rare. It happened to me in multiple occassions causing to overshoot the approach path. 

 

I still fail to see how ADS-B/UAT enhances the safety of the airline flying public, when the airlines have onboard WX radar and TCASII that outperform ADS-B/UAT technology by far.

 

José

[Bennett]

Jose,

 

I am not counting the simple overshoot of a vector to final. I agree this happens (too) often.  The first instance was really scary in that I knew from many VMC flights in the area where the mountain range was, and I knew the controller was busy from the radio traffic, but still he (admittedly) forgot about me.  Some years ago (like 20 years ago!) I participated in the FAA program called Operation Raincheck (no idea about the name) in which I spent about 10 days at Oakland Center, and about 5 days at Bay Tracon.  The object was to have instrument rated pilots go through a "quicky" controller course on simulators, a ground school, and then spend a couple of days plugged in at various controller stations to try and understand what controllers do, and why they do it.  Great experience. It was coupled with another FAA program: Fly a Controller where pilots would take up controllers for a few flights to see how pilots experience their interface with working controllers.  I thought it was a great idea then, and I am sorry that the programs no longer exist. 

[WardHolbrook]

Mid-airs are the one thing that scare me about flying. I have control over just about everything else. Having electronic aids are helpful - we've got TCAS II on the jets and since we always fly IFR we've got ATC looking over our shoulder as well, but that doesn't take away from the need for plain, old-fashioned, honest-to-goodness scanning, using proper scanning techniques. It's not good enough to simply look outside, you've go to look outside correctly. I'm sure that your CFI taught you to scan for traffic the same way mine taught me... Scan the horizon for a short distance, stop momentarily, and repeat the process. I can remember being told why this was the most effective technique to locate other aircraft. It was emphasized repeatedly to not fix your gaze for more than a couple of seconds on any single object. The instructors, some of whom were WWII veterans with years of experience, instructed us to continually "keep our eyes moving and our head on a swivel" because this was the best way to survive, not only in combat, but from peacetime hazards (like a midair collision) as well. We basically had to take the advice on faith (until we could experience for ourselves) because the technology to demonstrate it didn't exist at that time. Click on the link below for a demonstration...     www.msf-usa.org/motion.html

 

As far as fudging on cruising altitudes goes, I'd just remind you that If you're IFR on a west-bound airway at 6,000' msl and some east-bound VFR guy is cruising that same airway at 5,500' msl at best you're only going to have 500' separation. 500 feet isn't much to begin with and if you eat into it 100' and the VFR guy does the same, that's not a lot of cushion - especially when you consider how well some guys hold altitude.  (Also remember that everyone is using GPS to navigate with so everyone will be tracking the airway centerline smack down the center.)

 

However, never forget that when it comes to VFR-VFR and VFR-IFR traffic separation the "prime directive" is and always will be "See and Be Seen". Not only must you be able to see, you also need to be seen. Why do you think jets run their recognition and/or landing lights on departure and arrival? It's so that other aircraft can see them. A smart pilot will turn on his lights when operating in crowded airspace. We run our lights in the jets, day or night, anytime we are below FL180 just so others can see us better. A wise pilot will also install some sort of pulse light system on his airplane to enhance the effectiveness of running his lights during the day.

[Piloto]

Good advice WardHolbrook. But in combat the guy that will shoot you down will come from the back.

 

José 

[M016576]

Good advice WardHolbrook. But in combat the guy that will shoot you down will come from the back.

José

Not necessarily- guns and (modern) missiles work just as well in the face as they do in the stern. although the one thing almost all air to air combat veterans agree on, is that most of the time it's the one you don't see that gets you (this has been my experience in training as well!)

We had a pretty bad midair in Lemoore shortly before I arrived in 2003/2004 between 2 super hornets. All 4 aircrew perished... There were 4 aircraft at the merge, one of the mishap jets only saw 3, and pulled lead to attack one of them while going belly up to the fourth jet, who didn't see them, either (or they would have moved). Very sad... Seems like it happens every year or two. When your closure is over 1200kts with aircraft that are TRYING to get close to you, there is a constant potential for disaster.

Even with modern radars, IFF interrogators and IR targeting pods, I've picked up fighters for the first time with my eyeballs inside of 10NM (after crossing 100NM of airspace). It's a combination of all our "systems" plus a diligent lookout doctrine that gives us the best chance of survival. Now if only the mooney had a bubble canopy ;-)

[jetdriven]

When I fly locally, I always use a random altitude, such as 1700, 2200, etc.  That scheme works real well until one day we went to Brenham with a Bonanza friend of mine. Now he has the real deal, an S35 V-tail with the 285 HP engine.  And it is fast. He decided to let Becca have a taste of the Bonanza, and I took his 172 friend in the 201. Off we go, took some photos of each other on the way up. The first thing she said after getting out of the V-tail was "How much were these things again?"

 

Got gas, ate a burger, and then she took the 201 to the shop while Sean and I flew back in the Bonanza. Some more photos, then we broke formation and split up about halfway back.

 

Of course I picked 1700 feet and about 15 minutes later damn near ran smooth into the side of unidentified crossing traffic at 12 o-clock and less than a mile.  Same altitude. A Mooney 201. Ours. 

[aaronk25]

Thanks for all the thoughts. I believe the east bound traffic was transitioning through 4000ft but the plane went by so fast I didn't get much time to get a view of pitch.

I think I'm going to invest in a zaon system as I think it would have seen the traffic sooner, as long as he didnt just flip on the mode C at 4000.

I have a 396 panel mounted that I could interface the Zaon with but have been thinking about upgrading to the 796 and panel mounting it, but that means either moving the transponder (which doesn't make sense cause its old) or doing a remote transponder for the garmin 650, which I might as well to the adsb out transponder but holy smokes 5k??? So I might just pump traffic into the 396.....darn planes never just a easy step up

[Marauder]

Thanks for all the thoughts. I believe the east bound traffic was transitioning through 4000ft but the plane went by so fast I didn't get much time to get a view of pitch.

I think I'm going to invest in a zaon system as I think it would have seen the traffic sooner, as long as he didnt just flip on the mode C at 4000.

I have a 396 panel mounted that I could interface the Zaon with but have been thinking about upgrading to the 796 and panel mounting it, but that means either moving the transponder (which doesn't make sense cause its old) or doing a remote transponder for the garmin 650, which I might as well to the adsb out transponder but holy smokes 5k??? So I might just pump traffic into the 396.....darn planes never just a easy step up

 

Hi Aaron -- I have been doing some research in this area as well. If you go the Zaon path, let us know how it works out. ANY direction we head is going to cost a bunch.

[Piloto]

Thanks for all the thoughts. I believe the east bound traffic was transitioning through 4000ft but the plane went by so fast I didn't get much time to get a view of pitch.

I think I'm going to invest in a zaon system as I think it would have seen the traffic sooner, as long as he didnt just flip on the mode C at 4000.

I have a 396 panel mounted that I could interface the Zaon with but have been thinking about upgrading to the 796 and panel mounting it, but that means either moving the transponder (which doesn't make sense cause its old) or doing a remote transponder for the garmin 650, which I might as well to the adsb out transponder but holy smokes 5k??? So I might just pump traffic into the 396.....darn planes never just a easy step up

Beware that to insure 100% traffic detection you need to have an external antenna. The Zaon portable antenna is blind to traffic from behind and below. This is why I installed the Monroy ATD-300 with an external antenna and showing traffic on the G530.

 

José

[bumper]

Beware that to insure 100% traffic detection you need to have an external antenna. The Zaon portable antenna is blind to traffic from behind and below. This is why I installed the Monroy ATD-300 with an external antenna and showing traffic on the G530.

 

José

And even that won't give you 100% traffic detection . . . or come even close. For PCAS to work at all, the threat aircraft's transponder has to be interrogated so it replies so your PCAS can "see it", Interrogation only occurs in a radar environment or from another aircraft's TCAS. Also, there are still aircraft with no transponders . . . probably gliders being the worst case as they can be difficult to acquire visually. 

 

bumper

 

(who has a transponder and PCAS in the glider)

[kgbpost]

After an actual fatal midair in close proximity to my home base a year or so ago I decided to make the investment in the TAS-605 active system for my Bravo. At the time I considered it to be the best investment in safety that any potential upgrade could provide. After having it installed for over a year now I will say that sentiment has multiplied tenfold. 

 

Last week I had a warning, scanned where the callout said, instantly found a cherokee on a collision course at my altitude, initiated and aggressive avoidance manuever, and averted a very close one. 

 

Time after time the system has called out traffic that I may or may not have seen otherwise. Often times when being followed by ATC  I'll see a target on my system and wait to see curiously if or when the controller calls it out.

 

I'm sure other companies active systems work well too, i'm not trying to just pimp Avidyne. But I will say now that I won't leave home without it, period. In hindsight I would have installed that system before any of the gee whiz boxes that marginally improve situational awareness and/or decrease workload. That stuff is fun and looks cool, but the active traffic system is effective and will save your bacon. Even without the Aspen to display it on, or even on the 430W, as in my case, I'd put one in and worry about the TV screens later. I feel that strongly about it.

 

Brian

[Marauder]

After an actual fatal midair in close proximity to my home base a year or so ago I decided to make the investment in the TAS-605 active system for my Bravo. At the time I considered it to be the best investment in safety that any potential upgrade could provide. After having it installed for over a year now I will say that sentiment has multiplied tenfold. Last week I had a warning, scanned where the callout said, instantly found a cherokee on a collision course at my altitude, initiated and aggressive avoidance manuever, and averted a very close one. Time after time the system has called out traffic that I may or may not have seen otherwise. Often times when being followed by ATC I'll see a target on my system and wait to see curiously if or when the controller calls it out. I'm sure other companies active systems work well too, i'm not trying to just pimp Avidyne. But I will say now that I won't leave home without it, period. In hindsight I would have installed that system before any of the gee whiz boxes that marginally improve situational awareness and/or decrease workload. That stuff is fun and looks cool, but the active traffic system is effective and will save your bacon. Even without the Aspen to display it on, or even on the 430W, as in my case, I'd put one in and worry about the TV screens later. I feel that strongly about it. Brian

One of the avionics shops mentioned this system to me. Won't make you ADS-B compliant but sounds like it will save your bacon...

[kgbpost]

One of the avionics shops mentioned this system to me. Won't make you ADS-B compliant but sounds like it will save your bacon...

True. If you get on the list Avidyne is guaranteeing a $2000 upgrade for current TAS owners for ADS-B in. ADS-B out, which will be required in 2020 at the earliest if I'm not mistaken, will require me only to replace my transponder because I already have a WAAS GPS. I hope sometime before its mandated to upgrade to the GTN750 or IFD540, with a remote transponder, which will free up the extra space needed needed in the panel for the bigger unit compared to my 430W. 

 

The Avidyne system will work with the ADS-B in and the active interrogation signals, decipher the inputs and paint one target, as I understand it. That covers all the bases except for non transponder equipped aircraft, and of course the one that didn't get turned on.

 

Most importantly it works when either I and/or the threat aircraft are below radar coverage, which is often the case as I fly in, around and over mountainous terrain constantly, living in Colorado. A passive system can't and won't. How well will ADS-B traffic actually work? When will it be available with full coverage? How reliable will it be?...I'd be interested to know. For my families safety I wasn't willing to wait. 

 

I don't think you would be wasting your money investing in a TAS. Its here now and it works. I think with the advent of ADS-B it will just work that much better, not become obsolete. I would bet even with ADS-B the airlines will still be required to keep TCAS. Its just amazing to me this kind of technology is available and affordable for GA. Easily, in my opinion, the biggest safety achievements for GA I've seen in my lifetime. 

 

Brian

[Piloto]

 "I would bet even with ADS-B the airlines will still be required to keep TCAS"

 

You are very right on that Brian. ADS-B has no resolution advisory capability for a mid-air conflict like TCAS-II has. You do not need to spend $2000 for updating your TAS since all ADS-B out transponders are required to be Mode C compatible anyway. You will love the traffic display on the GTN-750. The traffic icons are big with easy to read fonts..

 

José