This System saves THOUSANDS of Planes, maybe even yours
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 сер 2022
- How do planes avoid each other? What is TCAS? With all the aircraft in the sky, it's amazing that we don't see many mid-air collisions. Now, planes can't just fly anywhere they like. Instead, many intelligent systems watch over all the planes in the sky. Find out in this video how planes avoid each other in the sky, especially if something goes wrong! This is a video about a genious system called TCAS.
✈️ Support the channel here! ✈️
➡️Patreon: / airspace_yt
➡️UA-cam Membership: ua-cam.com/channels/IFp.html...
☕Or just buy me a coffee! www.buymeacoffee.com/airspace ☕
Discord: / discord
___________________________________________
How Planes Avoid Each Other In The Sky
Credits
Music:
Epidemic Sounds
Visuals:
MSFS2020
Storyblocks - Наука та технологія
✈Support the channel here! ✈
➡Patreon: www.patreon.com/airspace_yt
☕Or just buy me a coffee! www.buymeacoffee.com/airspace ☕
TCAS is one technology I always find fascinating. And the fact that a few mid air collision accidents have still occurred after TCAS became standard highlights the importance of how a tool is only as good as the people wielding it. If someone chooses to listen to ATC instead, or to just ignore TCAS, it doesn't solve the problem. So it's good that the industry gave TCAS ultimate priority. Thank you for your ever insightful videos 😊
Nice video and explanation :)
From a controllers perspective (Europe):
o) "Personal Space" consists of 2 calculated zones (DMOD and TAU)
o) Only vertical resolution advisories are issued (climb, descend, level off, increase rate)
o) As a controller, I'm not allowed to issue vertical clearances after the RA report by the pilot (horizontal turns are still allowed, at least in my country) until the pilot reports clear of conflict
o) TCAS can cause some false alarms, especially if high rates of climb or descend are used, because it doesn't take the selected flightlevel into account => then we have to file some paperwork ;)
o) on controllers side, we have STCA (Short term conflict alert), which triggers on our side a bit earlier than TCAS on the pilots side
o) The relative Position of the targets in the PFD sometimes lead some pilots to a false picture of the traffic around them. E.g a perfect 90 degree crossing on a radar screen looks very different in the cockpit display, due to the nature of the relative positions
It's really interesting to get a controller's perspective and which instruments you have at your disposal.
Thank you, very interesting! I didn't know about STCA, but I am aware that the relative positions are not always reliable and raise some eyebrows sometime when it wasn't necessary.
And oh yeah, high rates of climb... one of the RAs I had happened precisely because of that.
Do you work in switzerland too by any chance?
200.000 individual flights are flown every single day? That's actually insane.
i never miss ur amazing video's
Great video! Thanks!
as someone who lives in a busy airspace and sees hundreds of planes on a regular basis, it always amazes me how many there are and how they avoid colliding to each other
Excellent video. Great description of TCAS.
Great video about TCAS. I'm sure many people know about TCAS, but the details, how it appears to the pilots, and the calculations it uses for various warning states is interesting.
Thx for again another very good explanation!
I'm sure even someone with 0 knowledge will understand this after the video.
Very nicely done and reassuring! Strange coincidence though, there was a mid air collision in Watsonville, California a few days ago. Uncontrolled airport, 2 Cessnas, not commercial flights. NTSB is investigating. A flight instructor was interviewed by CBS. He emphasized checklists checklists checklists. They also released conversations between the pilots. Last words were… gonna go around then, because you’re coming at me pretty quick, man.
oh no, that's bad... unfortunately, these small planes usually don't have any traffic awareness systems
@@AirspaceVideos And what's so interesting is that many gliders do. They have a nasty habit of all congregating under the same cloud, of course, so there's a clear need...
@@6yjjk general aviation pilots, manufacturers and all of the industry advocates will spend more to prevent TCAS from being required than it would cost to install it and save lives.
Just another strange reality of the world we live in today.
Indeed! Even some paragliders have it (I take it you are referring to FLARM)
Amazing video Airspace! Love the idea of videos about general aviation rather than just accidents and incidents. I'd love to see one on the various ratings of ETOPS through the years, and the impact it has had on 4-engined, 3-engined and now 2-engined long haul aircraft design.
thanks! Also for the idea, an interesting topic for sure
@@AirspaceVideos I to would like a video on ETOPS when you have time !
@@AirspaceVideos If you take the time to do this topic, there are some nice images floating around the interwebs that show the evolution of ETOPS in terms of range on a world map. It doesn't only show the changes to ETOPS rules, but is also a nice way to visualize the massive improvements in aviation technology over just a few decades. But since they are so incremental, the improvements go a little bit unnoticed IMHO.
I mean how many people know the failure rate of engines or other system? And their evolution through time? Almost no one, and ETOPS is a nice way to catch that enormous amount of variables and shrink it down to only one. (Stupid politics aside ofc)
I remember watching a video about a mid air collision where the pilots of one plane didn’t listen to TCAS and went down instead of pull up, and the other pilots listened to it and went down also. Something like that
It was the Überlingen mid-air collision referred in this video.
@@JL-db2yc it would probably be a good idea for me to pay better attention lol
TCAS is the first and perhaps most understood technology i had ever seen in aviation. Mayday's re-enactment on the Uberlingen Collision helps in understanding it in depth.
I just found your channel today! I’m fascinated by some of the aviation technology I didn’t know about😅
Great video thanks!
😎 If "self driving" cars are ever to work correctly..something like TCAS would have to required on every vehicle.
Thanks Airspace !
already knew alot about TCAS but you kept me engaged the whole time. Exceptional video dude 👍
Great video, a very clear explanation of TCAS. Ages back I suggested a look at the Grand Canyon air collision, and how it affected air safety. Now I know! Thank you 😎
thank you :)
Excellent video 😍
We in the aviation industry believes that all accidents are preventable, when there’s new technology, we will always find a way to implement said technology to improve the safety of aviation. SOPs are good, redundancies are great.
nice video
Incredible video. Very informative! Thank you for the detailed explanation of one of the greatest aviation tools ever created!! 👍✈✈👍
thank you!
I was on a flight to Manchester from Dusseldorf with Eurowings last Friday and another plane passed over us VERY close - certainly appeared to be inside the allowed 1000ft. Bizarrely our plane was climbing at that point as the cabin crew were pulling the trolley up the aisle...
distances can be very deceiving at altitude :) if you didn't feel any strange acceleration, chances are that all was well :)
I drive ships at sea, and this is something I'm surprised hasn't been integrated yet into our AIS systems. It would likely prevent many collisions on the water at well. Especially amongst larger seafaring vessels.
Are ship collisions on the open water a thing that actually happens from time to time?
@@AirspaceVideos surprisingly yes. Especially in many congested traffic routes or maritime choke points like Straits. There could be a lot of crisscrossing traffic or traffic traveling in opposite directions. A "TURN LEFT/RIGHT" command to either ship could be useful.
Huh, I wouldn't have expected that, but it makes sense. And yes, such a system would help for sure!
Very interesting
😂 The video under this one is about the mid-air collision in Watsonville. It makes me laugh. We have Airspace’s video and title, followed by a video about two planes colliding in mid-air. Just made me laugh. 😂😂😂
Firstly I love your channel, it is terrific to see more crew like yourself appearing on UA-cam, I wish the very best of success. I've only recently discovered your channel. I have subscribed and am binge watching as many of your productions as possible. Liking and commenting to hopefully help boost your metrics.
I am a former onboard manager of many years and flight safety instructor/researcher. I have a fairly broad understanding for the majority of SOPs and flight technical subject matter, but would never claim to know everything 😉, so my question is a bit 'out of the ballpark' with seeking understanding of redundancies, for less likely but still possible scenarios.
I am interested to know how a third conflicting aircraft would be addressed.
In this hypothetical event where an RA has been issued in dense airspace. Two aircraft are in conflict of each other a FL320, naturally one is advised to climb, while conversely the other descends.
However in complying with the RA the climbing aircraft begins to encroach additional conflicting traffic at FL330 as a new 'interceptor' begins top of descent within close proximity creating a new likelihood of collision with moments, or similar event.
TCAS when initially assessing the safest RA outcome is unaware of the third aircraft's intention to descend from its assigned altitude?
I've always been aware of the flight level adjustment advisories, though is there a scenario where the safest action is to change course and altitude to clear the secondary conflict subsequently issuing an RA such as "BANK LEFT AND CLIMB"?
Incidentally purely out of interest, I respect you can not say which carrier you are with, can you share the type of equipment you are on? Thank so much in advance. Cheers, Anton
Hi Anton, thank you very much for you comment and your question! I have wondered about this myself. Just recently, a chain-RA happened in Madrid in Spain, with no less than 5 involved aircraft. I have no idea how TCAS solves conflicts with multiple aircraft, and a short google search just showed that indeed, it is able to do so. The function is called MTE or multiple threat encounter.
Currently, TCAS can only issue vertical commands, so a scenario like BANK AND CLIMB NOW is currently not available. But who knows, maybe in a future update?
I am a first officer on the Airbus A330 :) If you want to know a little more about me, check out my Q&A video!
Cheers, Airspace
@@AirspaceVideos Hi, I am so sorry I wrote this reply 8 days ago! I just opened it now to read some details from your message only to find this still here in ‘edit’ form and unposed! Again sorry. I don’t wish to appear ignorant or ungrateful.
Thanks so much for your response, I am very grateful for the information you have taken the time to share.
This is lengthy, but I hope it will be of some interest to you. I’ve included an interesting incident on one of our B747s, some info about the aircraft type and a suggestion to include in one of your productions (if you are open to that).
The comments are in a wider, easier to read format if you open the original posted video page, rather than this narrow, long scrolling dropdown page.
It is interesting to know that there are redundancies in TCAS for multiple aircraft conflicts. May it NEVER happen.
I wonder what the resolution advisories would be in a multi aircraft three dimensional event vs a two aircraft conflict with the simpler altitude adjustment advisory?
I hope it does not take a multi aircraft conflict incident for there to be a revised approach/update and subsequent sim training.
I hoped ‘tombstone technology’ was a thing of the past by now, but Boeing proved it still exists, after being exposed they ignored their engineers and test pilots regarding failures and concerns with the MAX project.
Arrogance has no place in aviation safety.
Formerly, in addition to being an onboard manager I was an emergency procedures instructor and line trainer for a major airline. I also undertook tertiary studies towards a degree in aviation safety which involved researching a number of commercial aviation incidents and accidents. If ever you are looking for ideas for new material I would be glad to help. I suspect you would likely already have a lengthy list though?
One issue that I would love to see presented by a channel like yours is a correct explanation of events surrounding an explosive/rapid depressurisation event.
So many UA-cam aviation specialists have presented material on fuselage breech accidents/incidents but continue to perpetuate the myth the cabin contents (incl human occupants) are ‘sucked’ out.
When teaching new crew or endorsing them out on line, when in came to the subject of cabin decompression, most believed that is what happens.
I’ve always explained it using the analogy of an unopened soda can.
If shaken and a hole is pierced, does the liquid spray out under pressure or is it being sucked out? If it were shot from a canon creating a high speed slip stream, the same would also be true.
It helped them make better sense that cabin contents are expelled or ejected, not sucked.
To clarify for them the duration of a depressurisation using the same analogy, the liquid under pressure will continue to spray out until the pressure has equalised with the atmosphere outside the can, then the rest of the liquid remains with no other force to expel it, which is also true for a cabin depressurisation.
The larger the breech the faster the cabin equalises, there will also be a greater rapid force ejecting a larger volume of unsecured items.
Some new crew also raised concerns over an unstable passenger opening a cabin door precipitating an event. Explaining the psi force against the door due to the cabin being pressurised, it would be impossible.
Calculating the psi and the area of a cabin door there is 15, 717Kg pushing against it, the equivalent weight of a Dash-8 aircraft sitting on each door.
Then showing them how and why a plug type door is effective, before it can open it must first move into the cabin, which will not budge a fraction with that incredible force against it. Also the operating handle on a B747 door is designed to break at a specific force loading if anyone exceptionally strong tries to really force it open.
That combined information seemed to paint a clearer picture for them.
I’ve included a link below to the accident report which shows some impressive photographs regarding the incident I’ve described below.
One of our 747s had an oxygen bottle in the bank of cylinders housed in the forward cargo hold rupture at the neck. This caused the regulator valve assembly at the top of the cylinder to shoot upwards through the cabin floor and graze past the door bustle and knocking into and rotating the door operating handle through nearly 120 degrees. The valve assembly continued on its flight through the cabin ceiling above R2 and was caught between the ceiling and fuselage crown (immensely capacious area).
The door operating handle snapped at the handle’s rotating assembly neck per the design, and the door remained closed and in situ, though it rendered it a blocked exit for an evacuation with no way of opening it.
The cylinder itself blasted out of its brackets downwards and out through the fuselage skin, taking a large section of the leading edge wing fairing. The cabin depressurised subsequent to the breech in the cabin floor and fuselage skin. As expected an emergency descent and diversion were executed.
B747s use gaseous supply for PSU drop sown masks and not chemical generators. When the cylinder blew its top it wiped out a number of the gas supply lines to the cabin. When the PSU masks deployed there were a couple of cabin zones where no oxygen flowed after the masks were pulled.
To provide enough oxygen for a 747 pax payload, crew and also for medical use, In the forward hold there are several cylinders lined up against the hold wall between each frame on both sides. Photographs in the report show it clearly. The flight deck supply is from separate cylinders further forward.
The only available oxygen supplied to the cabin during this incident were from the cylinders on the port side. The starboard cylinder that ruptured was immediately below the R2 door and valve assembly and debris came through the cabin floor between the jumpseat and door hence the R2 door handle suffering the damage it did.
I’m not sure if you’re aware of this bit of 747 trivia; the B747 is the only aircraft type that has an FCOM/CCOM procedure and cabin equipment to OPEN two doors INFLIGHT to evacuate smoke following an extinguished inflight fire!
The aircraft descends below FL100 (I don’t recall the airspeed of the top of my head, I can find it though if you’re interested).
The doors typically used are one of doors 3 and the opposite side doors 4, when given the clearance from the flight deck the door operating handle is rotated to the 12o’clock position and held in place with a specially designed strap that slips over the top of the handle (like a sleeve) then the two straps are secure to the door assist handles on either side of the door on the cabin wall.
There is also a smoke hood that pulls across top of the stairs on the upper deck, to prevent smoke from migrating up to the upper deck crown and into the flight deck.
Very lengthy, sorry, I thought you might be interested.
Link to the report including photographs:
www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2008/aair/ao-2008-053.aspx
Hi Anton, thanks for your lengthy reply, I enjoyed reading through all of that! I don't know if you've realized, I even have a video on the case :)
ua-cam.com/video/kXTryPUsln8/v-deo.html&t
Interesting to learn about all these enginnering quirks on the 747, too! Opening doors in flight seems rather adventurous to me and I wouldn't want to be the poor flight attendant who has to do it, haha!
Thank you so much for being a viewer and providing all these suggestions. If you ever want to contact me directy, you'll find my email address in the 'about' section on my channel page :)
Also on this channel: How planes crash into each other!
well, yes 🙈😄
@@AirspaceVideos Doh! You changed the title, now my comment isn't as cool :(
What isn't mentioned here is the additional 10% - 20% more aircraft up that are military. If you use adsb exchange and use the "U" function you can single out civilian flights and see mil only.
I loved the video, and found out a lot more that I didn't know existed. I still have questions though. How big are those bubbles in 3d, atleast for the sides and back? Can we have some examples of the front end bubble length? 200knots is 5000' ahead for the first ring? It was a great video and I can't wait for the next!
Thank you so much! Unfortunately, I can't answer your question with a distance number. As far as I know, the threshold for a TA is 40secs to impact, RA is 25sec.
@@AirspaceVideos It's interesting it turns into a seconds measurement when I feel like so much of aviation is about distance measurements. Then again, I'm not a pilot and have barely any knowledge. Thanks for answering!
Anytime :) I guess the seconds make sense - that way, ghe bubbles grow and shrink with speed!
What's the difference between squares and circles on the display?
Is there any explanation for why TCAS needs to intervene so incredibly frequently?
High rates of human error? Technical issues? Etc?
a bit of everything, mostly pilot/atc errors I presume
The most interesting question is: would we see TCAS installed on even the smallest propeller aircraft?
Usually it is not. However, TCAS can see all aircraft equipped with a C Mode transponder. So flying a passenger aircraft you'd be able to see absolutely all aircraft on the TCAS screen. In the meantime a small propeller aircraft pilot won't see anything.
There is no technical reason why they cannot, the issue is only the thickness of the owner's wallet.
I'm pretty sure every aircraft that can sit over 6 people have to have it installed
So TCAS recommendations goes before ATC?
yup
it's a stupid question, but can't there be a situation where the aircraft are just unable to negotiate who climbs and who descends? like they just keep talking over eachother or something, like two people trying to pass eachother in the hallway and keep going on the same side
no, that should be impossible
The system has NO flaws we have seen yet. Human lunacy can’t be blamed on the system.