60N30W wrote:
Now as far as cost I will agree with you that installing TCAS in a C172 might be a little costly but one midair with an unequiped a/c will end up costing more money than it would cost to equipe the entire fleet of g/a a/c with TCAS.
The Russian Tupolev 154 and Boeing 757 cargo plane slammed into each other possibly as they both dived in a desperate attempt to get out of the other's flight path. There were no survivors.
Cause we know that when both airplanes have tcas neither will ever crash into one another...
Above someone else mentioned about the 757 Freighter and the TU 154 that both had TCAS and still managed to hit each other, well what has to be remembered is that they were given conflicting messages, told to climb when the TCAS said to descend. Lot more to that acciedent than most think. Not wanting to get into right now, except to say that the TCAS worked as it was supposed to, it was the humans that did not preform as they should have.
Now as far as an aircraft flying into an area that it should not be in, well no matter what we do there will always be someone who makes a mistake or is just brain dead, for example no matter how many signs saying "DO NOT ENTER" whether it be a door or a road someone will always go the wrong way and cause an accident. You will never be able to prevent every accident but you can try your best to prevent as many as possible and I think that is what Capt. Perkins is trying to do.
Now as far as the last mid-air in Canada a few years back a Navajo and a Metro collided, maybe TCAS would have help prevent this, also I think the plane belonging to a Toronto radio station was involved in a non-fatal mid-air with a flight school aircraft, and I think I just read about two float plans that bumped into each other but luckly it was not a hard bump. I also seem to recall a mid-air not too laong about in the Seattle area involving at least one g/a aircraft, can't recall how many died in that one. So there have been some mid-airs in Canada and the States over the last few years.
Again I just don't think his ( Perkins) comments warrented being called a jackass, the man has been in avaition longer than most on this or any other forum have been alive and is very well respected in aviation safety circles. We (Airline) pilots have no desire to kill g/a in Canada we just want to make the crowded skies we share as safe as possible.
cpl_atc wrote: I guess the question that needs to be asked is, is it worth it to ground whatever portion of the GA world (and some smaller commercial operators) that would not be able to afford the equipment, in order to prevent a type of accident that is exceedingly rare?
Midair's are rare, but near misses occur daily. We frequently experience RA's in the EWR area due to the number of aircraft and airports serving the NY/NJ area.
I for one, would like to see TCAS mandated to operate in congested areas, but then, I am only thinking selfishly of myself, not the underpriviledged aircraft owners.
Put TCAS in all GA planes thats kinda funny, since we had a thread on here that all the GA types complaining that NavCan was trying to kill GA by instituting landing fees at the big airports. Yes 5 bucks per landing will apparently kill GA but asking them to get a 20,000$ TCAS system is perfectly justifiable............ It seems kinda extravagent for something that someone is probably going to forget to turn on anyways. Hey 60N30W you selling these things...LOL! JK!
---------- ADS -----------
FSS: puting the Service back in Flight Services....
No I have nothing to do with sales at all, just fly a plane. I only got involved in this thread since someone called a good friend of mine a jackass, and because of that someone then called me wierd...such as life.
cpl_atc wrote: I guess the question that needs to be asked is, is it worth it to ground whatever portion of the GA world (and some smaller commercial operators) that would not be able to afford the equipment, in order to prevent a type of accident that is exceedingly rare?
Midair's are rare, but near misses occur daily. We frequently experience RA's in the EWR area due to the number of aircraft and airports serving the NY/NJ area.
I for one, would like to see TCAS mandated to operate in congested areas, but then, I am only thinking selfishly of myself, not the underpriviledged aircraft owners.
When the drivers on the road get tcas, I'll tell the boss to get tcas...
I was riding as a passenger on an A-320 a few years back and taking off from CYYC. Took off 34 and made a left turn out and came back circling overhead the button of 34 (I could see just about the entire layout of the airport from the left hand side of the aircraft). Thought it was a bit weird for and Eastbound flight to CYYZ to climb west first like that, but hey, I guess ATC had traffic or some reason to get us flying west first.
ANYWAYS, shortly after, I noticed the engines winding down a bit and could feel the aircraft leveling off....rather abruptly! Happened to look outside again and could see a Dash 8 diving away at rather a large rate of bank and descent rate. I only had a PPL back then but knew that we were damn close.
This was before 9/11 so later in the trip went to the flight deck to chat with the crew. Questioned them on the departure and both looked first at each other and then me looking rather suprised. Captain says something like: "Oh, you noticed that...yeah ATC had us converging in the climb. Caught it just in time."
As a pilot with one foot in the little airplane world and another in the heavy metal world it always ticks me of that the little guy is always presumed to be in the wrong, lets look at the "Down East International" twit{with credits given to "Capt Jack" to use the name of his great series of articles} who claimed a near miss with a Cessna 172, what actually went on was that the heavy metal was cleared the apch and descended into class G airspace way below the sector alt and barged through the circuit of a small VFR airport, thus comming a little close to a Cessna, the Cessna was in fact on the MF for the right airfield unlike the heavy metal, in a "cover his arse" reaction the jet driver went on the attack but you know what? the TSB pointed out that it was his error, not the little guy, all this explains why this particular airline is on my"no fly list".
Down East International?? Don't you mean Out West International? The incident reports identify the WJ Boeing as the one who descended below 3000. The CJ Boeing was on radar vectors for ILS07 YOW and being altitude controlled by ATC..........or, am I missing your point? I talked to the CJ guy, he was on the localizer when the little guy crossed the LOC right in front of him.
Passengers: 129
When: Jan. 28, 2004
Where: Victoria, B.C.
What happened: Westjet plane was coming in to land in Victoria and ordered to stay above 3,000 feet until final approach. Westjet was then told to contact the Victoria tower. The Westjet pilot did not completely read back the instructions and the controller did not notice the lack of confirmation. Westjet descended below 3,000 feet. A Cessna was in the area and the much larger Westjet passed just 100 feet above the Cessna, a nautical half mile away horizontally.
Cause: Transport Canada ruled it was Cessna pilot and controller error. Controller given one day recertification with supervisor. [/color]
MID-AIR EMERGENCY
Aircraft:
Canjet Boeing 737 inbound from Ottawa
Cessna 172, unknown flight school
Passengers: 122
When: July 12, 2005
Where: Ottawa International airport
What happened: Ottawa traffic controllers were guiding the Canjet plane from Montreal to Ottawa. When Canjet was 12 nautical miles from the airport, the Cessna suddenly flew over the larger jet, coming within 100 feet of its left wing.
Cause: Cessna pilot was not in radio contact with controllers as required and lacked a transponder, so the plane was virtually invisible to controllers and the Canjet plane. Flight school denies it made a mistake.
Mandating TCAS for small GA aircraft may not be feasible at the moment, but mandating transponders is, and this installation is not that costly. There is a line that is crossed regulary in GA where people that don't have the money to fly, continue to operate aircraft in poor condition.
I believe there is a regulation that applies to all turbine powered aircraft 6 seats or more mandating TCAS. As such a GA aircraft will show up to the faster and larger traffic, if the GA has a transponder.
As for the belittled subject not turing on the system, that can be rectified with a proper installation.
Just because "you" cannot think of a GA/heavy metal collision in Canada in recent times means absolutley nothing. An SAS MD and a 172 collided a couple of years ago in Italy as an example just off the top of my head. With that thought process why have security at all? There has not been a hijacked aircraft in Canada in recent memory. In fact if Canadian aviation followed that thought process about the only technological advancement would be the door in the Beaver capable of a 45 gallon drum. The professional pilots and level headed people reading this forum will understand that aviation today is down to dealing with the slight chances.
A Mode C transponder is a 152 is an easy and cheap installation. A mode S would be better. This first step will allow the larger aircraft to see the smaller ones.
cpl_atc wrote:Now as far as the last mid-air in Canada a few year Aside from the PSA accident in California years ago (727 vs. 172), I cannot think of another large commercial midair between IFR and VFR aircraft.
