CAA conspicuity trials

Come on in for general chat and POLITE banter between LAA members

Moderators: John Dean, Moderator

User avatar
Rod1
Posts: 567
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:22 am
Location: Midlands

CAA conspicuity trials

Post by Rod1 » Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:42 pm

CAA conspicuity trials
The CAA has issued the following press release which indicates the LAA are involved. Anyone any idea who is organizing our end and do they need any small composite aircraft?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has agreed to fund research into making light aircraft and gliders more visible to other pilots. Through the Airspace & Safety Initiative (ASI), the CAA has engaged with the British Gliding Association (BGA) and the Ministry of Defence to explore ways of improving the visibility of light aircraft, especially gliders. Being constructed of white composite materials many of these aircraft can be very difficult to spot when airborne.

The importance of the research was reaffirmed by the AAIB Report into a fatal 2009 midair collision between an RAF Grob 115E tutor, and a Standard Cirrus Glider over Drayton, Oxfordshire (see http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cf ... G-CKHT.pdf). The work will build on previousresearch carried outby Dr Tony Head of Cranfield University on behalf of the BGA.

The new research will involve a joint CAA/MoD trial, with support from the BGA, which will concentrate on the visual conspicuity of gliders and light aircraft. The CAA will fund the trial, while the RAF’s No 22 (Training) Group will assist with the provision of motor gliders and crews from Royal Air Force Syerston. The Light Aircraft Association has also been asked to assist in work to make the types of small light aircraft which are constructed from composite materials more visible. Results are expected before the end of the year.

Phil Roberts, Deputy Director of Airspace Policy at the CAA, said: “This research could have a significant impact on reducing future mid air collisions involving gliders and other small light aircraft. Improving airborne visibilityof gliders will be no easy task, but we are pleased to be working with the BGA and the MoD to try and achieve that goal and build on the earlier work done by Cranfield University.”

For further media information contact the CAA Press Office on: 0207 453 6030 or [email protected]

Follow the Airspace & Safety Initiative on www.twitter.com/airspacesafety

Notes to Editors:
021864

Graham Clark
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:28 am

Trials

Post by Graham Clark » Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:59 pm

I would hope that the trials would not be limited to choice of aircraft colours and flashing lights, but also include low-cost warning systems already in general use elsewhere (e.g. FLARM, of which the BGA now has some experience).

John Price
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:27 pm
Location: Eynsford

Post by John Price » Wed Sep 21, 2011 7:47 am

Didn't the RAF do this years ago ? I think they found out that painting aircraft black was best which they then did.

John.

cardiffrob
Posts: 370
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:56 pm

Post by cardiffrob » Wed Sep 21, 2011 7:49 am

How about mandatory smoke systems?

Only half joking. Wouldn't it be great to have a tiny windscreen washer pump automatically delivering a tiny squirt into your exhaust pipe every 15 seconds to leave a dashed line wherever you go, thus pointing you out.
Rob Thomas
034851

Nick Allen
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:00 am
Location: Oxford
Contact:

Post by Nick Allen » Wed Sep 21, 2011 9:24 am

Nice idea, Rob! But I think the smoke should spell out your callsign in Morse code.

Andrew Leak
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:49 pm
Location: Southampton
Contact:

Post by Andrew Leak » Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:54 pm

Another interesting idea...as I fly gliders as well as Light aircraft, loading the airframe with layers of paint/decals etc would only be detrimental to the weight and performance of such a balanced airframe. Installing electronic methods (Mode S springs to mind ..aargh) is a non starter as most have limited battery endurance (weight etc). So apart from putting big dayglo stripes everywhere and wrecking the performance, why can't everybody just keep a good lookout, a good few encounters with light aircraft and gliders have occurred because of the advent of GPS and the need to concentrate on something INSIDE the cockpit and not outside!

Finally strobe lights/LED's - possible again, but the former will take too much power and the latter...well depends how long you're airborne before the juice runs out I suppose. Is there really an answer? Use eyeball Mk1, perhaps?
034852

cardiffrob
Posts: 370
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:56 pm

Post by cardiffrob » Wed Sep 21, 2011 3:27 pm

Nick. Forget spelling your callsign in Morse code...just get it spelling out your unique ICAO 24 bit binary address

In my case it will be ....... 0100_00_000_010_01_1010100001

Cheaper than buying a Mode S transponder!
Rob Thomas
034851

Nick Allen
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:00 am
Location: Oxford
Contact:

Post by Nick Allen » Wed Sep 21, 2011 3:30 pm

Genius, Rob!

Trevor Harvey
Posts: 190
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 1:20 pm
Location: Scotland

Post by Trevor Harvey » Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:02 pm

My opinion on transponders for what it's worth, they will only be 100% effective when 100% of airborne vehicles have compatible units fitted that can all talk to each other, & tell the pilot where to look in 3 dimensions.
I would guess that the result of this survey will recommend that we all paint our aircraft a particular shade of EASA approved black.
My completely unlit rape seed yellow will not do :twisted:

cardiffrob
Posts: 370
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:56 pm

Post by cardiffrob » Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:40 pm

Reading the finer print of the original post, from what I can remember from my VGS days, the Grob motorgliders used at Syerston were exempt from having to carry Mode S. Has this changed?
Rob Thomas
034851

User avatar
Rod1
Posts: 567
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:22 am
Location: Midlands

Post by Rod1 » Wed Sep 21, 2011 5:02 pm

Flarm and devices like PowerFlarm have the potential to make a huge difference.

Rod1
021864

User avatar
macconnacher
Posts: 256
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:26 am
Location: Northampton

Post by macconnacher » Wed Sep 21, 2011 5:49 pm

But did not the move to black cause an accident or near miss in the lake district when a black Tucano could not be seen against the lake? The RAF have gone back to adding some yellow again. Black works great against cloud but we operate with the ground as a background.

History repeats itself: Tiger Moths became camouflaged out of necessity during the war eventually covering the sides by 1941. When the threat of enemy action over the UK retreated in 1944 many units went to putting yellow back on the wingtips and around the fuselage since air to air accidents were the greater hazard.
Stuart Macconnacher
002353

Trevor Harvey
Posts: 190
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 1:20 pm
Location: Scotland

Post by Trevor Harvey » Wed Sep 21, 2011 10:21 pm

Probably completely out of the box but how much technology would be required for one GPS to read or receive the presence of another GPS & display that? Most? a/c are more likely to want a GPS rather than some form of SSR.

Nick Allen
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:00 am
Location: Oxford
Contact:

Post by Nick Allen » Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:41 am

how much technology would be required for one GPS to read or receive the presence of another GPS & display that?
Isn't that basically what a FLARM does? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLARM

User avatar
Rod1
Posts: 567
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:22 am
Location: Midlands

Post by Rod1 » Thu Sep 22, 2011 8:52 am

“Isn't that basically what a FLARM does?”

Yes, with the addition of predicting the flight path of the aircraft concerned.

Rod1
021864

Post Reply