I've got him on the......

Fast n' Furious

Fast n' Furious

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
580
Location
WI
Display Name
Display name:
iJustLanded
TCAS! Once again here I am enjoying another beautiful afternoons IFR flight through the NY metro on V16 somewhere between the Calverton and JFK VORs in the Mooney. Approach is dutifully calling traffic which I either report seeing or report not seeing when suddenly I am called as traffic to some guy flying a Cessna Skylane who is navigating the airway below me as a VFR airplane. He reports "not in sight but I have him on the TCAS". Dead silence for about five seconds when the controller keys up with "you have TCAS on a Skylane?" "Well, no I have TIS" the guy with the Skylane replies back to NY. Oh boy, I'm thinking.....this should be interesting and I was not disappointed. Which brings me to this here aviation related question: For you folks who are flying airplanes with TIS or ADS-B or TCAD or any other type of non certified collision avoidance equipment, how exactly are you using it? As an advisory only item or as something else? I'm a big fan of TCAS by the way but I wish more people would really look out the window more.
 
I use it as a means to visually spot traffic. As it should be. But what I have learned, even in severe clear, some traffic is very difficult, if not impossible to spot.

Also, it is kind of strange when you spot traffic, think it will go under you and it actually goes over by a thousand feet. All kinds of illusions out there.
 
Fast n' Furious said:
TCAS! Once again here I am enjoying another beautiful afternoons IFR flight through the NY metro on V16 somewhere between the Calverton and JFK VORs in the Mooney. Approach is dutifully calling traffic which I either report seeing or report not seeing when suddenly I am called as traffic to some guy flying a Cessna Skylane who is navigating the airway below me as a VFR airplane. He reports "not in sight but I have him on the TCAS". Dead silence for about five seconds when the controller keys up with "you have TCAS on a Skylane?" "Well, no I have TIS" the guy with the Skylane replies back to NY. Oh boy, I'm thinking.....this should be interesting and I was not disappointed. Which brings me to this here aviation related question: For you folks who are flying airplanes with TIS or ADS-B or TCAD or any other type of non certified collision avoidance equipment, how exactly are you using it? As an advisory only item or as something else? I'm a big fan of TCAS by the way but I wish more people would really look out the window more.
Click to expand...

I recently installed Ryan TAS-610 (previously known as the 9900BX) and I use mine as a backup to "See and Avoid" as well as ATC. It also seems to help find the traffic which never seems to be exactly where ATC calls it. I am hoping that it will give me some protection from "VFR" traffic at uncontrolled airports when the wx is really IMC but someone wants to do pattern work fifty feet below the ceiling and can't be bothered with a radio, but I haven't had an opportunity to do much in that way..
 
Greg Bockelman said:
I use it as a means to visually spot traffic. As it should be. But what I have learned, even in severe clear, some traffic is very difficult, if not impossible to spot.

Also, it is kind of strange when you spot traffic, think it will go under you and it actually goes over by a thousand feet. All kinds of illusions out there.
Click to expand...

IME you can't spot anything smaller than a 727 beyond 2 miles most of the time.
 
We have TIS in the Cherokee. I use it as a secondary source of info (eyeballs primary), but still a useful source. I got an alert one time about an airplane converging on me from below -- no way to see him, and he was converging. When I made a turn away from him was when I first made him visually...
 
Our system has a huge lag but once you get used to it you can spot traffic at 20 miles if the air is extremely clear and they are making a decent reflection - a contrail helps too!
I also notice that at long ranges the angle off the bow is for eg... 20 degrees, but as you zoom in, the angle goes to 30 or 40, so it takes getting used to.

Ive heard some controllers say they hate hearing fishfinder, or tcas contact; the only usable response for them is, 'no contact' or 'traffic in sight'. Comments on this thread diversion?


Here is another Q I have...
TCAS I & imc. The traffic turns red (your altitude) and you get the audio alert and atc is way too tied up to get a word in, think there'd be any comebacks if you did a turn?
 
I use TIS as a secondary source. I find it to be "pretty" good, but there is enough slop that I can't rely on it for 100% (and there are a lot of places where there is no coverage).

HOWEVER, it beats the alternative of "no" radar input in crowded terminal areas when ATC drops flight following for some reason.
 
It's not a good or useful call. The controller wants to be able to use you seeing the traffic to assign you visual separation. The controller has the best TCAS gear money can buy so you either see the traffic or you don't. He cannot separate you based on your TCAS. Above FL180 it's a real waste of a call because visual separation is N/A. Eurocontrol is using TCAS for separation in the terminal areas and from what I've been told it's working pretty well.

You never lose the responsibility of seeing and avoiding. You get a TCAS I alert and make a positive ID of the target and do something about it, you're within your responsibility. Make up your own RA while in IMC? 'Nother matter completely. Sorry about messin' up the quote feature but....stuff happens I guess.
 
Last edited:
I have TIS and love it. As others have mentioned, I use it as a supplement, to point my eyes in the right direction. If anything I feel like I look outside of the cockpit more than when I didn't have it, because I'm aware of just how many targets are out there sharing the sky with me. It's amazing how hard it is to see some traffic even when you know exactly where to look. It's been very helpful on a number of occasions. I hate hearing that British woman tell me "Traffic not available" when I lose radar coverage.
 
Keep in mind that the big difference between TCAS and TIS is that TIS is effectively nothing more than a repeater of ATC's radar -- it doesn't know anything ATC does not. TCAS, OTOH, operates independently of ATC, and can see folks ATC cannot.
 
Fast n' Furious said:
TCAS!
Click to expand...

I heard a new one today. Someone called in to approach saying they had traffic on their scope and couldn't see it! :dunno: So, approach gave them a traffic call. As I recall, it was "no factor," a Skyhawk at 2100 vs. a Navajo or somesuch at 5k+. Maybe the biggest waste of radio bandwidth I've ever heard...
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Here is another Q I have...
TCAS I & imc. The traffic turns red (your altitude) and you get the audio alert and atc is way too tied up to get a word in, think there'd be any comebacks if you did a turn?
Click to expand...

The AFM Supplement for TCAS I prohibits such a maneuver based solely on TCAS-displayed information in the Limitation section. If the turn causes a loss of separation with another aircraft, the comeback could very well be a violation. TCAS II contains the same limitation for maneuvers using the traffic display. The bearing accuracy is insuficient to support such a maneuver.
 
Fast n' Furious said:
Above FL180 it's a real waste of a call because visual separation is N/A.
Click to expand...
Well, as long as ATC is wasting calls by pointing out traffic up there...;)

In my experience, most ATC traffic calls don't result in a "visual separation" clearance anyway, even below FL180...ATC is must making me aware of the traffic, and I'm letting them know what my awareness level is.

Fly safe!

David
 
What I was getting to there is that ATC cannot use your eyeballs as any part of required separation above FL180. While a traffic call is a nice thing....that's all it is whether you see the traffic or not. My other fav is to climb a heavy in front of me through my altitude, give me the obligatory "caution wake turbulance" call, and then deny my request for an off airway turn. Yowsa!
 
anonn said:
The AFM Supplement for TCAS I prohibits such a maneuver based solely on TCAS-displayed information in the Limitation section. If the turn causes a loss of separation with another aircraft, the comeback could very well be a violation. TCAS II contains the same limitation for maneuvers using the traffic display. The bearing accuracy is insuficient to support such a maneuver.
Click to expand...

That is what I thought. I didn't turn but, as the target converged on us, I will say the urge was irresistable!
 
I have flown planes with TIS John and the only time I ever indicate that I have traffic is if I see it with my own two eyes.
 
Fast n' Furious said:
I'm a big fan of TCAS by the way but I wish more people would really look out the window more.
Click to expand...
The response is "looking!"....as we have been for the preceeding 60 seconds as TIS points it out.....and I DO HATE IT when they give the "caution, wake turbulence call, and refuse my turn.
 
LOL--I've got him on the fishfinder. Who cares? Do you see him? I want people to SEE me.
 
Heh, heh...

Yes, I often wonder if the other guy has any idea I'm out there while I'm watching him. I just hope the Pulselites and strobes get his attention.
 
On a return flight from Oshkosh one year, controllers kept having me change altitudes and headings to avoid some triffic that, at one moment was closing on me and the next moment was loitering in my vacinity. It was a beautifully clear day, unusual for Michigan, and I could see nothing anywhere near me. I was wishing I had TCAS at that time.

This went on for what seemed like about 10 minutes. I came to the conclusion that it was either a Klingon Bird of Prey with it's cloaking device on and using a stolen transponder or the controllers were trying to have a little fun with me.

Jeannie
 
"Traffic, 1 o'clock, heading 180, speed 400, angels 30"
"Roger, radar contact"

oops, wrong time, wrong airplane...
 
See and avoid is rule one. I have a Garmin 330 with TIS and fly in the NY metro area. When traffic is called out to me I usually take a look in the direction of the reported traffic, followed by a quick look at the my Garmin 530 screen. If I don't see the reported traffic visually, but have it on the TIS, I will avise ATC that I don't have a visual, but have em on TIS and complete my reply with standard phrasology " Searching for Traffic" I've never encountered a problem or been questioned further by ATC on this.

Again ...first and foremost we need to see and avoid. The gadgets are nice, but TIS is only a tool to help in congested area that have the service, it ain't TCAS or ADS-B
 
wangmyers said:
LOL--I've got him on the fishfinder. Who cares? Do you see him? I want people to SEE me.
Click to expand...
OK...I don't see you, but I have you on the fishfinder...now I know where to concentrate my traffic scan, I can see when your bearing relative to me changes, and keep looking til I see you. Consider yourself safer because I see you on the fishfinder.

Fly safe!

David
 
MauleSkinner said:
OK...I don't see you, but I have you on the fishfinder...now I know where to concentrate my traffic scan, I can see when your bearing relative to me changes, and keep looking til I see you. Consider yourself safer because I see you on the fishfinder.

Fly safe!

David
Click to expand...
Very true, but now that you are focusing your scan on me, you might miss the non-transponder aircraft at your 12. This has happened to me, and it scared the crap out of me.

If you don't see the traffic, you have nothing. If you have traffic in the panel, remember that it is only an aid.
 
Coming back into OLM yesterday afternoon the tower (who now has radar) was calling traffic at my 1 O'clock, altitude unknown. A minute later he calls and says the traffic appeared to be orbiting the south end of Budd Inlet. Great, I was practically there myself. From what I had seen the day before from the ground I knew it was a nice yellow Piper Cub. Should be easy to see, right? Wrong. I never did see him. That was about as nervous as I've been about traffic in quite a while. Very happy when the tower called and said that I had passed him and he was no longer a factor. Bet if I'd been flying one of the Cessnas instead of the Arrow I wouldn't have had a wing in the way and probably would have seen him.
 
Maverick said:
. I came to the conclusion that it was either a Klingon Bird of Prey with it's cloaking device on
Click to expand...

Jeannie,

Romulans were the ones with the cloaking device...that is, of course, until Kirk stole it in one of the few episodes where Spock gets the girl.

Len
 
At a recent wings program we were told is that ADS-B will be FAA's solution and become mandatory for new planes in 3-5 years. ADS-B is quite impressive. I haven't taken a flight with it yet, but that will change this month. I'll start a new thread when I get that done. :)
 
Len Lanetti said:
Jeannie,

Romulans were the ones with the cloaking device...that is, of course, until Kirk stole it in one of the few episodes where Spock gets the girl.

Len
Click to expand...



The Klingons got one as well so it only seems fair that GA should have one too

The Return of the Cloak

By the 23rd century, the very idea of practical invisibility was considered only theoretically possible as the amount of power required would be enormous. This was proven untrue in 2266 when the USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) encountered a Romulan bird-of-prey that used the device to cross the Romulan Neutral Zone and wipe out several Earth Outpost Stations. The Enterprise was able to defeat the bird-of-prey in battle, partially because the cloaked ship was still visible to tracking sensors, but there was no doubt the device itself had been a success. (TOS: "Balance of Terror")
The cloaking device soon spread to the Klingon Empire as well, "by virtue of an alliance between the two militaristic powers." One of the first Klingon vessels to be equipped with the device was the IKS Klothos, whose Commander Kor used it to great effect at the Battle of Caleb IV. Soon, the device was standard on almost all Klingon vessels, such as the B'rel-class bird-of-prey. (Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, DS9: "Once More Unto the Breach")
Click to expand...
 
wangmyers said:
Very true, but now that you are focusing your scan on me, you might miss the non-transponder aircraft at your 12. This has happened to me, and it scared the crap out of me.

If you don't see the traffic, you have nothing. If you have traffic in the panel, remember that it is only an aid.
Click to expand...
Actually, I'm focusing my scan on you a lot less than I would be without TCAS...at least with TCAS, I know there's a good probability that our paths won't cross, and so I can continue to look elsewhere.

Fly safe!

David
 
EVERYTHING official I read is that there are two and only two response choices when ATC calls out traffic..."Approach 57039 negative contact" or "Approach 57039 has the traffic". What's so hard about that?

I'd like to hear from some Part 121 pilots about what they are told (if anything) about the response to an ATC traffic call out in their recurrent training. "Fishfinder" sounds sooo unprofessional.
 
Lance F said:
EVERYTHING official I read is that there are two and only two response choices when ATC calls out traffic..."Approach 57039 negative contact" or "Approach 57039 has the traffic". What's so hard about that?

I'd like to hear from some Part 121 pilots about what they are told (if anything) about the response to an ATC traffic call out in their recurrent training. "Fishfinder" sounds sooo unprofessional.
Click to expand...


Heres what I try to use:

http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/PCG/T.HTM

TRAFFIC IN SIGHT- Used by pilots to inform a controller that previously issued traffic is in sight.

http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/PCG/N.HTM

NEGATIVE CONTACT- Used by pilots to inform ATC that:
a. Previously issued traffic is not in sight. It may be followed by the pilot's request for the controller to provide assistance in avoiding the traffic.
 
Fast n' Furious said:
Above FL180 it's a real waste of a call because visual separation is N/A. Eurocontrol is using TCAS for separation in the terminal areas and from what I've been told it's working pretty well.
Click to expand...

Above 180 it's extremely valuable and already has saved two 747s from running into each other over the Pacific. Controllers and pilots both screw up occasionally.

How is Eurocontrol separating with TCAS?
 
Lance F said:
"Fishfinder" sounds sooo unprofessional.
Click to expand...

I agree, when I hear a professional say that it just grates on the nerves. Far worse than the infamous "any traffic in the area please advise".
 
Larryo said:
Above 180 it's extremely valuable and already has saved two 747s from running into each other over the Pacific. Controllers and pilots both screw up occasionally.

How is Eurocontrol separating with TCAS?
Click to expand...

They are allowing aircraft that are in trail to an approach gate to make adjustments to their spacing based on TCAS. The guy I need to talk with about specifics is on a trip but we spoke about it a few weeks ago. When he gets back I'll ask some questions and post 'em up. I know it's being utilized at Nurenburg and possibly at Frankfurt.
 
Larryo said:
Above 180 it's extremely valuable and already has saved two 747s from running into each other over the Pacific. Controllers and pilots both screw up occasionally.

How is Eurocontrol separating with TCAS?
Click to expand...

They don't. It is a collision avoidance system, not a separation tool.
 
Glad someone added a post to remind me to follow up. The scenario is this, on a IFR clearance and while VMC, Nurenburg is issuing the clearance to fly the high speed approach based on you maintaining five mile TCAS separation from the aircraft in front of you. Sure sounds to me like they're using TCAS to separate airplanes. Aircraft given the clearance is a Challenger.
 
Fast n' Furious said:
Glad someone added a post to remind me to follow up. The scenario is this, on a IFR clearance and while VMC, Nurenburg is issuing the clearance to fly the high speed approach based on you maintaining five mile TCAS separation from the aircraft in front of you. Sure sounds to me like they're using TCAS to separate airplanes. Aircraft given the clearance is a Challenger.
Click to expand...

I have been issued a similar instruction on the arrival into ATL, e.g., Reduce to 280 kts until 5 nm behind the traffic at 12 o'clock and then normal speed. However, separation responsiblity remained with the controller. There was no transfer of separation responsibility. ICAO PANS-ATM has no provisions for such a transfer of responsibility. I am unaware of DFS having implemented something not sactioned in the PANS.
 
C-1 PILOT said:
complete my reply with standard phrasology " Searching for Traffic"
Click to expand...

That is NOT standard phraslogy. your resposnse should be either,
1.traffic in sight
2. negetive contact
Period. No more no less. This is a pet peeve of many controllers according to them at the many Faa sponsored "safety meetings and "operation raincheck"s I have attended.
 
I'm surprised, I actually do this one correct. No "Looking for traffic" or anything else. Either "747 in Sight" or "Negative Contact" followed by "In sight" later if I spot it.
 
I think I'm quickly becoming an old crumudgeon - some thoughts in no particular order:

When you consider how congested most feqs in the NE - Mid Atlantic are it is annoying when someone wastes the bandwidth with trivia - I'd hate to think that a loss of seperation that could have been avoided in fact occurred b/c someone babbling about their "fishfinder sighting" had the freq. cluttered, or that an a/c could not delare an emergency b/c of the same. This flying stuff is serious business and we owe it to each other to do things right every time. If there is a mistake it should be inadvertent, not b/c someone knowingly was making unauthorized and unhelpful "fishfinder" calls.

When I was 121 (it is ten years ago now) we had TCAS (the real thing not the GA low end uncertified stuff) and we never called traffic in sight based on the TCAS and we certainly never made an operational change except for a resolution advisory - period.

I think it is a great tool TCAS or TIS or whatever you have, but in VMC the system expects your eyes to be outside the aircraft (whether or not you are on an IFR flight plan) and the protocols make no accomodation for electronic "in sight calls."

Lastly, if you are looking at what amounts to a repeater of the what the controller is seeing you are subject to the same errors and inaccuracies that the controllers are subject to. I imagine there is a substantial component to radar controller training that examines the inherent inaccuracies in radar data and why they result in fairly large seperation standards.

Y'all be careful out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top