Tango Mike
Well Known Member
The "Flawed" discussion in this Safety forum is an instructive resource that has identified for me a personal need to understand the ADS-B system better. The technical aspects are confusing, to say the least, and it will take me some time to sort through it.
In the meantime, I'm not seeing much in the way of discussion here or elsewhere, though I may be missing it, about an issue that frankly worries me more than all the implementation issues combined.
Underlying all the technology, whether it be the early contribution of transponders and radar to safe separation of airplanes or the Next Gen concepts being implemented, "SEE AND BE SEEN" (SABS) is the ultimate defense against mid-airs unless the view out the windscreen is obscured. Which, for many reasons, creates a situation with less likelihood of encountering another airplane in the same piece of sky.
For the purposes of this thread, lets assume VFR conditions, under IFR or VFR flight rules with or without flight following, one pilot flying alone or with a passenger who will be of no help because he or she is physically and mentally plugged into an iWhatever.
"Traffic," says the box.
The first reaction of any pilot is to go head down to answer the question that trumps every other consideration at that moment: "Where the heck is he?"
You need to know clock position, range, altitude above/below, and lateral and vertical trends. With that position in three-dimensional space in mind, you bring your eyeballs to bear for the tally ho.
But there's nothing there. At that instant, the "why" means nothing as you most probably glance back inside to take another look. Then maybe that sequence repeats a few times, and all the while you've not visually cleared any other piece of the sky. A non-ADS-B airplane could be barreling down on you from another clock position while your attention is tunnel-visioned elsewhere, and SABS has gone on holiday.
What about two pilots in the airplane? Any discussion prior to flight about who does what in the event of a traffic alert?
In a 2-crew member airplane, I always briefed copilots that the pilot flying the leg (PF) never looked inside the cockpit in response to a traffic advisory or alert. Heads up, the PF followed the verbal description from the pilot not flying (PNF) to put eyes on the threat. If the threat of collision increased, click off the autopilot to hand-fly the airplane and be ready.
I submit that far too many pilots with ADS-B in the cockpit approach the collision-avoidance problem with the same attitude evidenced by that most useless of calls at a non-towered airport:
"Any traffic in the pattern please advise."
That's an example of the big-sky theory gone berserk. When you hear that, you know almost to a certainty that if no one answers, the pilot who said it concludes, "I'm alone in the pattern." SABS gets shoved under the seat. Never mind the original-equipment Cub shooting touch and goes. Or the pilot on the wrong frequency. Or with the volume turned down. Big Sky Airport, here I come!
Here's the ADS-B equivalent from my own repertoire of experience.
Non-towered airport with an award-winning $100-hamburger diner at opening time for lunch, a beautiful Saturday after a couple of weekends of lousy weather, aviators eager to slip the surlies and order food from at least three of their favorite food groups: burgers, fries, and malts.
A pilot reports on final at, get this, 30 miles out. That should have been a warning to the rest of us to clear out.
The standard rectangular pattern is nearly a zoo, with airplanes at all four corners and more trying to squeeze in.
In the midst of this, the straight-in idiot continues to report decreasing distance. The last call I remember hearing was about 3-5 miles. The number one airplane established in the pattern is on downwind approaching base. He calls the straight-in twice asking for his distance. No reply.
I was number two behind the guy about to turn base and couldn't see anyone on final. Neither did the base traffic as he called and started the turn. About half way through on base, he sees the straight-in traffic fly close underneath him, forcing a go-around.
On the upwind, the go-around pilot very politely suggested to the straight-in fool that he should pay more attention to traffic established in the pattern and make sure it's clear when electing to fly a straight-in.
And here's the reply: "But I didn't see and traffic on my ADS-B."
I guess all those calls were from another airport.
Rest assured, I appreciate the fact that this is an absurd (but true) example of a pilot who has a lot more wrong with his decision making than interpretation of ADS-B traffic.
That said, it's not hard to envision that among the total population of aviators out there flying with this new system for enhancing safe separation, a significant and more dangerous percentage will be less likely to embrace SABS as the ultimate and final defense against the mid-air bending of metal because of two things:
1) Spending more time head down because of system alerts, and 2) Making the erroneous assumption that if nothing is showing on their magic screens, "It'll probably be all right."
Personally, as an aviator with about a half-century (thankfully) of no mid-air-collision flying behind me, I'd like to see a lot more awareness and discussion of the potential for ADS-B to increase the likelihood of near misses and collisions when not used properly. Add to that the technical deficiencies illuminated in the "Flawed" thread, and we've got a lot of work to do.
Tosh
In the meantime, I'm not seeing much in the way of discussion here or elsewhere, though I may be missing it, about an issue that frankly worries me more than all the implementation issues combined.
Underlying all the technology, whether it be the early contribution of transponders and radar to safe separation of airplanes or the Next Gen concepts being implemented, "SEE AND BE SEEN" (SABS) is the ultimate defense against mid-airs unless the view out the windscreen is obscured. Which, for many reasons, creates a situation with less likelihood of encountering another airplane in the same piece of sky.
For the purposes of this thread, lets assume VFR conditions, under IFR or VFR flight rules with or without flight following, one pilot flying alone or with a passenger who will be of no help because he or she is physically and mentally plugged into an iWhatever.
"Traffic," says the box.
The first reaction of any pilot is to go head down to answer the question that trumps every other consideration at that moment: "Where the heck is he?"
You need to know clock position, range, altitude above/below, and lateral and vertical trends. With that position in three-dimensional space in mind, you bring your eyeballs to bear for the tally ho.
But there's nothing there. At that instant, the "why" means nothing as you most probably glance back inside to take another look. Then maybe that sequence repeats a few times, and all the while you've not visually cleared any other piece of the sky. A non-ADS-B airplane could be barreling down on you from another clock position while your attention is tunnel-visioned elsewhere, and SABS has gone on holiday.
What about two pilots in the airplane? Any discussion prior to flight about who does what in the event of a traffic alert?
In a 2-crew member airplane, I always briefed copilots that the pilot flying the leg (PF) never looked inside the cockpit in response to a traffic advisory or alert. Heads up, the PF followed the verbal description from the pilot not flying (PNF) to put eyes on the threat. If the threat of collision increased, click off the autopilot to hand-fly the airplane and be ready.
I submit that far too many pilots with ADS-B in the cockpit approach the collision-avoidance problem with the same attitude evidenced by that most useless of calls at a non-towered airport:
"Any traffic in the pattern please advise."
That's an example of the big-sky theory gone berserk. When you hear that, you know almost to a certainty that if no one answers, the pilot who said it concludes, "I'm alone in the pattern." SABS gets shoved under the seat. Never mind the original-equipment Cub shooting touch and goes. Or the pilot on the wrong frequency. Or with the volume turned down. Big Sky Airport, here I come!
Here's the ADS-B equivalent from my own repertoire of experience.
Non-towered airport with an award-winning $100-hamburger diner at opening time for lunch, a beautiful Saturday after a couple of weekends of lousy weather, aviators eager to slip the surlies and order food from at least three of their favorite food groups: burgers, fries, and malts.
A pilot reports on final at, get this, 30 miles out. That should have been a warning to the rest of us to clear out.
The standard rectangular pattern is nearly a zoo, with airplanes at all four corners and more trying to squeeze in.
In the midst of this, the straight-in idiot continues to report decreasing distance. The last call I remember hearing was about 3-5 miles. The number one airplane established in the pattern is on downwind approaching base. He calls the straight-in twice asking for his distance. No reply.
I was number two behind the guy about to turn base and couldn't see anyone on final. Neither did the base traffic as he called and started the turn. About half way through on base, he sees the straight-in traffic fly close underneath him, forcing a go-around.
On the upwind, the go-around pilot very politely suggested to the straight-in fool that he should pay more attention to traffic established in the pattern and make sure it's clear when electing to fly a straight-in.
And here's the reply: "But I didn't see and traffic on my ADS-B."
I guess all those calls were from another airport.
Rest assured, I appreciate the fact that this is an absurd (but true) example of a pilot who has a lot more wrong with his decision making than interpretation of ADS-B traffic.
That said, it's not hard to envision that among the total population of aviators out there flying with this new system for enhancing safe separation, a significant and more dangerous percentage will be less likely to embrace SABS as the ultimate and final defense against the mid-air bending of metal because of two things:
1) Spending more time head down because of system alerts, and 2) Making the erroneous assumption that if nothing is showing on their magic screens, "It'll probably be all right."
Personally, as an aviator with about a half-century (thankfully) of no mid-air-collision flying behind me, I'd like to see a lot more awareness and discussion of the potential for ADS-B to increase the likelihood of near misses and collisions when not used properly. Add to that the technical deficiencies illuminated in the "Flawed" thread, and we've got a lot of work to do.
Tosh