So... just a thought as a non-pilot. It's 2015 - we have collision camera's on cars. Given you need to be looking literally every direction to see if something is going to hit you, why aren't planes equipped with similar technology. I feel like at cruising altitude, there aren't really enough false-positives out there that the system would be unusable.
Not necessarily expecting you personally to know. But I feel like the incremental cost to the price of a plane should make this a no-brainer. Did I just come up with a ycombinator 2016 idea?
>It monitors the airspace around an aircraft for other aircraft equipped with a corresponding active transponder, independent of air traffic control, and warns pilots of the presence of other transponder-equipped aircraft which may present a threat of mid-air collision (MAC).
> The next step beyond identifying potential collisions is automatically negotiating a mutual avoidance manoeuver between the two (or more) conflicting aircraft.
For gliders, FLARM is a radio-based system that also takes turning rates into account. It alerts the pilot visually and audibly 20 seconds before a possible impact would happen. In my experience it works great even in very congested airspace such as when circling in a thermal. it's not perfect, but it's a very good complement to looking out the window.
It only tells you about other FLARM-using aircraft, though. (Some also look for transponder-carrying aircraft).
They do. Its called EODAS [0] and fitted to F-35 fighters (and not F-16s) It provides near 360 degree spherical coverage. The 6 imaging sensors are relatively cheap, but the system integration is expensive. It would still cost at least $250k-1m to install a similar system in GA and business jets.
The imaging sensors are available for limited civilian use.
ADS-B [0] is going to be required equipment in all airplanes by 2020. The problem is there are a LOT of general aviation aircraft out there.
Drive by a GA airport and look at all the planes; many of them are 30, 40, sometimes 50+ years old. Now, this is not a big deal in the aviation world. Airplanes are pretty simple compared to most modern cars. They are also required to be inspected once a year by a mechanic (an "annual"), engines are replaced or rebuilt after a certain time interval has passed (usually around 2000 hours), extensive documentation is required to be kept, etc.
But there are just a LOT of them out there, so refitting all of them takes time. Unlike the car world where, if you make a change in the law, you can reasonably expect in 10-15 years the majority of cars would be compliant just because people buy new cars. In the aviation world that isn't the case. New airplanes can easily run $200k+, so people hold on to airplanes for decades.
It's also expensive. Anything involving airplanes is hellishly expensive. :)
You're looking at probably about $5k for equipment + installation costs (which must be done by a mechanic, pilots generally aren't allowed to work on their own aircraft [1]). And that only broadcasts your position; a separate ADS-B receiver must also be purchased if you want to actually see other airplanes around you. The cheapest one I can find is $500, and that also requires a tablet and software.
So yeah, we're going to get there. But it's going to take some time.
You CAN, and that might be suitable for a ground station that's not moving and just providing interesting information to the Internet.
It's an entirely different matter to take that into an airplane and use it in such a way as that my life depends on the accuracy of the information. Has it been extensively tested in actual airplanes in real-life flying? Does it work with and not interfere with other aircraft systems? Does it work with the software I already use and know well?
Yes, $100 < $500. Now, if I built my own airplane (something I've given some thought to doing), I might be a little more willing to experiment with it. But the majority of pilots are not hardware hackers. They're average, everyday people.
I will happily pay $500 for a tested piece of hardware that is guaranteed to provide accurate information and work in my airplane over something I homebrewed using instructions I found on the Internet. My safety is worth the extra $400.
My cousin is an air controller in a little French airport and she told me that when military jets are coming in, everything is more tense. They fly so fast that she has far less time to react and to redirect other airplanes.
So even if you are on a collision course and know it, you might not have time to avoid the collision.
Not necessarily expecting you personally to know. But I feel like the incremental cost to the price of a plane should make this a no-brainer. Did I just come up with a ycombinator 2016 idea?