Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > AMA Discussions
Reload this Page >

Drone VS Aircraft - Mid Air Collisions

Notices
AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.

Drone VS Aircraft - Mid Air Collisions

Old 07-12-2016, 12:43 PM
  #676  
Chris P. Bacon
Banned
My Feedback: (4)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,762
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun View Post
the thread purity police are due back any minute now ......
It's tough to keep up since you abandoned the position.
Old 07-12-2016, 12:44 PM
  #677  
Chris P. Bacon
Banned
My Feedback: (4)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,762
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83 View Post
Physician heal thyself.......
Not soon enough....
Old 07-12-2016, 12:58 PM
  #678  
init4fun
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,880
Received 26 Likes on 21 Posts
Default

...

Last edited by init4fun; 08-15-2016 at 09:12 AM.
Old 07-12-2016, 12:59 PM
  #679  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 8,254
Received 89 Likes on 83 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post
Wow! Too cool for school!

Fact is my 40% Extra 330 would inflict more damage to a full scale aircraft in the event of a collision. I however do not fly it in a location where I expect full scale traffic or where the general public/media can put their spin on it.
Old 07-12-2016, 01:17 PM
  #680  
mike1974
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Canisteo, NY
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
And.........what the general public veiw as the " Evil Drone "
MR's of course. lol Those big ones scare the crap out of me!! lol They are like big freakin blenders with giant blades and no protection flying around!! My 250 with 5" props is scary enough! lol
Old 07-12-2016, 01:21 PM
  #681  
mike1974
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Canisteo, NY
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun View Post
Oh now you've gone and done it , we'll now have two pages of browbeating of how complex they are and that you actually need PHDs in both programming AND aeronautics in order to be able to even take one out of the box .
Well, that is true if you build one from the parts you choose. A family member was showing me their DJI Phantom 2 or 3 they bought on eBay. No previous flying experience. He "flew" it for me. It was actually very cool. Very automated.
Old 07-12-2016, 01:38 PM
  #682  
Chris P. Bacon
Banned
My Feedback: (4)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,762
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun View Post
Not to fret , I'll bet your Amigo's recovery will come about WAY sooner enough than the six or so pages it took for you to finally admit Franklin is right about the second degree burn point of the discussion , congratulations for the breakthrough
Nice try, never said Franklin was wrong.

Did you report the failure to report to the NTSB today are you going to let Franklin do all the work?
Old 07-12-2016, 03:14 PM
  #683  
mongo
My Feedback: (14)
 
mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Midland, TX
Posts: 2,978
Received 27 Likes on 24 Posts
Default

http://www.dronevibes.com/forums/threads/ugcs-2-8-is-now-live.30650/#post-224095


it seems that available ADS is already here, and has been for a while.
at least one unit is shown being flown in a phantom, like yer relative has.

Last edited by Nathan; 07-13-2016 at 06:33 PM.
Old 07-12-2016, 03:22 PM
  #684  
mike1974
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Canisteo, NY
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mongo View Post
http://www.dronevibes.com/forums/thr...1/#post-223099

http://www.dronevibes.com/forums/thr...8/#post-224534

it seems that available ADS is already here, and has been for a while.
at least one unit is shown being flown in a phantom, like yer relative has.
Hi Mongo,

Both those links are not working. I googled trying to find mode c transponder for rc aircraft and fpv aircraft and come up with nothing.

Maybe I was using the wrong terminology. If so I apologize. I believe a mode c transponder is what I would need onboard in order to be seen by radar. Maybe it was ADS-B? to see the transponders.
Old 07-12-2016, 05:43 PM
  #685  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 9,545
Likes: 0
Received 85 Likes on 82 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mike1974 View Post
Ha ha!!! So true. lol. Ya, the commercial license is still 400ft or below and within los. You can fly for profit though and get a waiver to blos and higher than 400ft for a specific job. At least that is my understanding. I am looking for a way to fly blos and break 400ft legally without jumping through 800 hoops and taking 5 weeks for approval.. If there was a way to put a xponder on fpv planes then we could be seen by radar. Problem solved. I just don't get why flying fpv blos is any different than flying around in a Piper Cub or some ultralight with no xponder. They are still flying around the sky with no way to be seen. Oh well.
But they are seen, radar reflects off the metal structure of ALL AIRCRAFT, not just the one's with a transponder. All the transponder does is gives the radar an ID for the aircraft, no more and no less. In fact, the military was using an early form of transponder as far back the WWII. They referred to if as IFF(identity, friend or foe) so the radar operators knew who to send interceptors after at long range or where to point the AA guns at mid to short range. All aircraft, friendly or not, showed up on radar, even then. It was a very good radar operator on the carrier Yorktown that realized that, even without height finding equipment, that some of the planes he saw on his radar were climbing instead of descending prior to an attack by Japanese dive bombers at the Battle of Midway. He reasoned, correctly in this case, that any plane that was climbing had to be an enemy since all the US planes would be descending to land and vectored the CAP accordingly. The result was that less than half of the strike force survived to attack the Yorktown and a third of the remaining ones didn't get back to the Hiryu afterwords. Just for the record, Japanese aircraft from that time had very poor radio equipment(fighter pilots didn't even use the radios they had and strike planes used morse code to transmit and receive) and nothing with a transponder

Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 07-12-2016 at 06:02 PM.
Old 07-12-2016, 08:31 PM
  #686  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
But they are seen, radar reflects off the metal structure of ALL AIRCRAFT, not just the one's with a transponder. All the transponder does is gives the radar an ID for the aircraft, no more and no less. In fact, the military was using an early form of transponder as far back the WWII. They referred to if as IFF(identity, friend or foe) so the radar operators knew who to send interceptors after at long range or where to point the AA guns at mid to short range. All aircraft, friendly or not, showed up on radar, even then. It was a very good radar operator on the carrier Yorktown that realized that, even without height finding equipment, that some of the planes he saw on his radar were climbing instead of descending prior to an attack by Japanese dive bombers at the Battle of Midway. He reasoned, correctly in this case, that any plane that was climbing had to be an enemy since all the US planes would be descending to land and vectored the CAP accordingly. The result was that less than half of the strike force survived to attack the Yorktown and a third of the remaining ones didn't get back to the Hiryu afterwords. Just for the record, Japanese aircraft from that time had very poor radio equipment(fighter pilots didn't even use the radios they had and strike planes used morse code to transmit and receive) and nothing with a transponder
Radar's days are numbered, though will be used for backup and errant aircraft without ADS.
Old 07-12-2016, 09:07 PM
  #687  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 8,254
Received 89 Likes on 83 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post
Radar's days are numbered, though will be used for backup and errant aircraft without ADS.
Thats funny, look up the E2D. Relatively new and operation plans are for minimum of 30 years.
Old 07-12-2016, 09:15 PM
  #688  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 9,545
Likes: 0
Received 85 Likes on 82 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post
Radar's days are numbered, though will be used for backup and errant aircraft without ADS.
And where, pray tell, did you get that from? What do you see being used, IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE, to replace radar? With Phased Array systems being used by the military, I see that being used to replace the present rotating equipment but I don't see radar being phased out during our lifetimes. As I said above, ADS DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF RADAR OR MAKE AN AIRCRAFT VISIBLE TO RADAR. IT ONLY GIVES AN AIRCRAFT AN ID AND MAYBE SOME TELEMETRY ON THE SCREEN FOR THE RADAR OPERATOR TO SEE TO AID SAID OPERATOR IN CONTROLLING AIR TRAFFIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Since it appears some here don't understand how radar and, due to it's similar operation, sonar operates, let me spell it out for you all:
1) Transmitter sends out a signal pulse, radar using high powered radio waves, sonar being sound waves
2) Signal pulse hits object, which is then reflected back to source. An aircraft's ADS return ID signal(on a plane so equipped) is generated upon receiving the radar signal and transmitted in ALL DIRECTIONS AT ONCE
3) Receiving antenna picks up low powered reflected signal and routes it to the receiver/processor. Radar, at the same time also picks up ADS signal(if not through the main receiving antenna, through an auxiliary one)
4) System uses the time from transmission to reception to compute distance and receiving antenna orientation to determine direction
I don't see how ADS is going to take the place of RADAR since IT'S DESIGNED TO WORK WITH RADAR

I can get more technical but I don't see the point since I doubt any of you nay sayers have the technical background to understand the theory behind a radar's operation, hence the basics above

Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 07-12-2016 at 09:26 PM.
Old 07-12-2016, 09:17 PM
  #689  
mongo
My Feedback: (14)
 
mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Midland, TX
Posts: 2,978
Received 27 Likes on 24 Posts
Default

they both refer to ADS-B.
no idea why they do not link properly, other than i am a member there, might be the cause.
when on the site, search for this thread title

UgCS 2.8 is Now Live!

and this one as well

A First?? Mode S/ADS-B Transponder on a small UAV, UgCS


a general search of "ads b" on the site will also list threads to look at

www.dronevibes.com

try this one after removing the quote marks

"http://www.dronevibes.com/forums/threads/ugcs-2-8-is-now-live.30650/#post-224095"

if it will all post now

Last edited by mongo; 07-12-2016 at 09:31 PM. Reason: links problems
Old 07-12-2016, 09:42 PM
  #690  
mongo
My Feedback: (14)
 
mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Midland, TX
Posts: 2,978
Received 27 Likes on 24 Posts
Default

the links in posts 127 and 128 of the
"
Are we as hobbyist UAS users in the clear for now? can we jump for joy? or to soon? "

thread are live.

something about copying them i guess.
Old 07-13-2016, 05:15 AM
  #691  
init4fun
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,880
Received 26 Likes on 21 Posts
Default

...

Last edited by init4fun; 08-15-2016 at 09:11 AM.
Old 07-13-2016, 05:38 AM
  #692  
mike1974
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Canisteo, NY
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Sorry I messed everyone up with my terminology and understanding of radar.
Old 07-13-2016, 06:15 AM
  #693  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 3,936
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
But they are seen, radar reflects off the metal structure of ALL AIRCRAFT, not just the one's with a transponder. All the transponder does is gives the radar an ID for the aircraft, no more and no less. In fact, the military was using an early form of transponder as far back the WWII. They referred to if as IFF(identity, friend or foe) so the radar operators knew who to send interceptors after at long range or where to point the AA guns at mid to short range. All aircraft, friendly or not, showed up on radar, even then. It was a very good radar operator on the carrier Yorktown that realized that, even without height finding equipment, that some of the planes he saw on his radar were climbing instead of descending prior to an attack by Japanese dive bombers at the Battle of Midway. He reasoned, correctly in this case, that any plane that was climbing had to be an enemy since all the US planes would be descending to land and vectored the CAP accordingly. The result was that less than half of the strike force survived to attack the Yorktown and a third of the remaining ones didn't get back to the Hiryu afterwords. Just for the record, Japanese aircraft from that time had very poor radio equipment(fighter pilots didn't even use the radios they had and strike planes used morse code to transmit and receive) and nothing with a transponder
This is going to be greatly simplified, but I think it will help folks understand some advantages of transponders over primary radar.

Reflected radar energy, measured at the receiver, varies by 1 over the range to the fourth power. Transponders enjoy a 1 over range squared advantage, and they are actually the primary means by which ATC controls aircraft on radar. Why do they do this?

Each primary radar has an transponder interrogator on top of the dish. As the radar sweeps, the transponder interrogator sends a signal. Let's switch to searchlights as a metaphor for radar. Imagine the radar being a green searchlight, with a red searchlight co-mounted and pointing in the same direction. To keep things simple, imagine both are same power, and except for the difference in color, they are the same. So, as the green searchlight sweeps the airspace, so to does the red one. Each hits the aircraft and reflects back to the observer - you.

You see the light as reflected. The intensity of that light varies by 1 over the range to the fourth power. That can be pretty faint. But what if each airplane has a small receiver that when it's hit by a red light, it responds with a flash of yellow light? That yellow light only has to travel one way, and thus the intensity of the light is much brighter to the observer on the ground. Those boxes in the airplanes are a bit fancier, not only do they respond with a yellow light when hit by the red searchlight, they embed a code in that yellow light that you on the ground can see (if you were a radar receiver).

Bottom line, the transponder signal (yellow light) enjoys a significant power advantage as viewed from the receiver as compared to the raw radar (green light). That means less power is required, and longer range is possible. Having multiple "colors" of light provides redundancy, as well as the very narrow band of the red searchlight and yellow response helps avoid interference from other sources. In reality, when the box in the plane sees the red light, the yellow coded response sent contains not just a four digit identifier, but also the altitude - something known as an "altitude encoding transponder, or a transponder with mode "c".

A military IFF is even more complex. If the received red light has to be coded. So if the box in the plane doesn't see the right code in the red light, he yellow light is not sent.

Raw radar is still a good tool, but not foolproof. You want higher frequencies for good range and angular resolution, but higher frequencies are subject to attenuation due to atmospherics. Lower frequencies are less attenuated by atmospherics, but give up too much range resolution. They're also subject to interference from other sources. The raw radar (green light), co-located transponder interrogator (red light), and the aircraft response box (yellow light) provide a good measure of reliability, redundancy, and energy advantage.
Old 07-13-2016, 06:21 AM
  #694  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Thats funny, look up the E2D. Relatively new and operation plans are for minimum of 30 years.
And that will be about it. Future radar may be on satellites but not ground based.
Old 07-13-2016, 06:26 AM
  #695  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun View Post
Good morning gents .

Now , first off , let me preface this with the note that I am NOT asking this question to throw any fuel on the fire here , I'm asking it because I thought i remember reading something somewhere that may be worth mentioning here .

I would swear I remember reading of future plans to replace the present Radar based tracking system with a system based on GPS ? I do recall it being said that it will be some time in coming , as the article did mention the present Radar based system and upgrades it's receiving to make the Radar still effective for the near future , but that ultimately in the long range view Radar's replacement will be GPS .

Now , I pretend to be no Radar expert , I am only asking a question about something I thought I remember reading , now that the subject has been brought up . Does anyone else remember seeing such mention of a future GPS replacement of Radar ?
Yes that is correct. The radar systems will still need to be in place as back up for say a bad ADS-B transponder. Of course the military will still need them because an attacker will not have his ADS-B on or may not have one in the case of a missile. There are long range plans to put radar on satellite as well.
Old 07-13-2016, 06:28 AM
  #696  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
And where, pray tell, did you get that from? What do you see being used, IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE, to replace radar? With Phased Array systems being used by the military, I see that being used to replace the present rotating equipment but I don't see radar being phased out during our lifetimes. As I said above, ADS DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF RADAR OR MAKE AN AIRCRAFT VISIBLE TO RADAR. IT ONLY GIVES AN AIRCRAFT AN ID AND MAYBE SOME TELEMETRY ON THE SCREEN FOR THE RADAR OPERATOR TO SEE TO AID SAID OPERATOR IN CONTROLLING AIR TRAFFIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Since it appears some here don't understand how radar and, due to it's similar operation, sonar operates, let me spell it out for you all:
1) Transmitter sends out a signal pulse, radar using high powered radio waves, sonar being sound waves
2) Signal pulse hits object, which is then reflected back to source. An aircraft's ADS return ID signal(on a plane so equipped) is generated upon receiving the radar signal and transmitted in ALL DIRECTIONS AT ONCE
3) Receiving antenna picks up low powered reflected signal and routes it to the receiver/processor. Radar, at the same time also picks up ADS signal(if not through the main receiving antenna, through an auxiliary one)
4) System uses the time from transmission to reception to compute distance and receiving antenna orientation to determine direction
I don't see how ADS is going to take the place of RADAR since IT'S DESIGNED TO WORK WITH RADAR

I can get more technical but I don't see the point since I doubt any of you nay sayers have the technical background to understand the theory behind a radar's operation, hence the basics above
ADS is part of the NextGen system and yes it will replace the existing radar tracking system using GPS. ADS does not use radar. Radar will be for backup.
Old 07-13-2016, 08:10 AM
  #697  
init4fun
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,880
Received 26 Likes on 21 Posts
Default

...

Last edited by init4fun; 08-15-2016 at 09:11 AM.
Old 07-13-2016, 09:15 AM
  #698  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 3,936
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun View Post
Thank You to both Sport and Franklin for the descriptions . And Sport , yea I can see where there will always need to be a means to track craft that for whatever reason aren't sending out their signals , I agree that an attacker isn't going to announce his coming with a transponder . The missing Malaysian craft was sending no signals except for the ones the engines were sending that couldn't be switched off in flight , so there was a perfect example of how a craft could still need to be tracked by external means . I guess today's Radar doesn't have the ability to track an errant aircraft over the vastness of the south asian seas ? I had always (obviously wrongly) thought that there was no where on the planet that wasn't tracked in one way or another , be it radar , spy satellites , and so on .
I've done three trans-oceanic flights in tactical aircraft (with associated inflight refueling) and I can say there's large swaths of the earth that are not covered by ground based radar. Even if location is within range, you can be what's called "below the radar horizon," and not visible. There's also things like atmospheric ducting that can work for you or against you. That said, there's been a surprising number of times I've had a stateside controller tell me "we don't have real good coverage in that area." Granted, usually a combination of lower than normal altitude and terrain masking, but it happens in the US more often than you'd think. Satellites though open up some real opportunities.

I could see ICAO or FAA mandating by regulation that these automatic reports be enabled as a condition of certification. Maybe a reduced data set for governmental use, but on all the time, and functional on emergency power systems. For Search And Rescue purposes alone, I'd think it'd be a no brainer for trans-oceanic flying.
Old 07-13-2016, 03:00 PM
  #699  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 9,545
Likes: 0
Received 85 Likes on 82 Posts
Default

Okay guys, you see a GPS based ATC system. That's all fine and dandy except GPS is far from perfect. I've seen many expensive GPS systems that have given faulty results. Hell, even my Tahoe's nav system, also GPS driven, is far from fool proof. On more than one occasion, it's had me MILES AWAY from my actual location. Do I trust a GPS system? At this point, only for reference as it's too far from perfect to base a global system, carrying millions of people, on. Give me the tried and true for the foreseeable future. It's not perfect either but, with 80 years of development time, it's a known commodity
Old 07-13-2016, 03:17 PM
  #700  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
Okay guys, you see a GPS based ATC system. That's all fine and dandy except GPS is far from perfect. I've seen many expensive GPS systems that have given faulty results. Hell, even my Tahoe's nav system, also GPS driven, is far from fool proof. On more than one occasion, it's had me MILES AWAY from my actual location. Do I trust a GPS system? At this point, only for reference as it's too far from perfect to base a global system, carrying millions of people, on. Give me the tried and true for the foreseeable future. It's not perfect either but, with 80 years of development time, it's a known commodity
Sounds like the AMA......lol. Sorry, couldn't resist.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.