Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #50480
From: Bill Wade <super_chipmunk@roadrunner.com>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Ryan 9900B
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:16:32 -0500
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>
  I'm currently using a Garmin GTX330 transponder with a 530W and I sometimes get false positives. Out of nowhere the unit calls "Traffic", shows me right on top of something and I figure I'm about to die- it seems to occur in certain locations. One is a spot in the middle of Penobscot Bay. The TIS display helps to alert me to nearby traffic but even with the position, vector and relative alititude displayed on the 530 it's often difficult to actually see the other plane. In many areas TIS isn't available and I hear the FAA may eliminate it at some point anyway.
 
  Considering the closure rate on a IV I'd like to install a better system when the time comes. At the rate I'm building ADS-B would probably be obsolete but... Would the Ryan be an improvement? What other options would there be? Thanks-  Bill Wade
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 5:36 PM
Subject: [LML] Re: Ryan 9900B

Angier,
 
This could be the start of an interesting discussion.
 
If one primarily flies VFR, TCAS is perhaps more valuable than WAAS (in an FAA approved IFR approach and sole-source navigation box).
 
If one flies more than occasionally under IFR, the WAAS equipment ranks at the top of the list. "Why?" You might ask.  Well.......
 
1. Sole source navigation devices are usable in non-radar environments - such as during terrain challenged aviating above piles of granite.  This also pertains to IFR flights in VFR conditions.
2. There are more GPS approaches with vertical guidance than ILS approaches here in the US and with minimums almost as good as ILS.  This virtually eliminates the need to perform risky circle-to-land procedures.  It also opens up more airports (GPS only) to choose from in nasty weather flying (more and better located alternates).  There are more GPS approaches added continuously at no cost to the Stimulus Plan nor added jobs. 
3. TCAS is less valuable because of ATC traffic separation when flying under IFR rules (or even flight following, conditions permitting).
 
You would have to pry my WAAS device (in my case, a 430W) from my cold dead hands before I would give it up.  GPSS navigation (laterally coupled to auto pilot) and approach vertical guidance is a beautiful thing to behold.  In general, GPS approaches consist of three 5-mile-long legs (most often in a T configuration). IAF to AF = get to correct altitude and approach speed.  AF to FAF = Stabilize approach, check everything twice, hand hovering on gear switch.  FAF to RWY (or missed) = descend on VNAV glide slope, shut off AP at DA, make perfect landing.  OR, one button-push for guidance thru missed approach procedure.  The GPS approaches are so similar that even minimal practice raises one's confidence in a successful outcome during their use, personal limitations, lack of ice build up and all other things considered.
 
However, my cheap Monroy traffic alerter (TCAS like, approximate distance and altitude difference, no azimuth) usually wakes me up once or twice on long VFR trips (no flight plan or following) with a screaming TRAFFIC NEARBY!  and it has saved me from one sure midair, if not more (details released upon any request).
 
You are right to consider disabling TCAS in an airport environment as it can be most distracting (unless is has non-critical traffic suppression).
 
Scott Krueger AKA Grayhawk
Lancair N92EX IO320 SB 89/96
Aurora, IL (KARR)

Pilot not TSO'd, Certificated score only > 70%.
 
 
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster