Good article on Aviation Consumer about TCAS.
A very exciting and inexpensive unit by Monroy Aerospace Corp. lists for under $800. Check it out at http://www.monroyaero.com/index.html
I wonder if Cirrus would be interested in offering as an option, or at least would be willing to install.
Clyde, thanks for your great site. I check it on a dayly basis.
Paul (pos holder 337)
Paul,
Check out www.avshop.com/tpas.html for a similar device called a Traffic Proximity Alert
System. I’ve ordered one but not yet received it. It promises to alert you if another transponder equiped aircraft enters your 5 or 10 mile shield. It gives you distance but not direction or altitude. It can run off battery or aux. outlet, requires no installation and costs approx. $495. I’ll post a review once I have a chance to fly and check it out. Don Kusenberger#177
Good article on Aviation Consumer about TCAS.
A very exciting and inexpensive unit by Monroy Aerospace Corp. lists for under $800. Check it out at http://www.monroyaero.com/index.html
I wonder if Cirrus would be interested in offering as an option, or at least would be willing to install.
Clyde, thanks for your great site. I check it on a dayly basis.
Paul (pos holder 337)
This is slightly changing the subject, but I recently asked Cirrus whether they would be willing to install a ryan tcad system in my plane, scheduled for 2/01 delivery. (this would be installed by ‘customer service’ i.e. after delivery of the plane). They’re still thinking about it and advised me that I might as well start shopping around local avionics shops while CD decides whether to do the tcad installation.
Here’s a question – has anyone out there had a TCAD unit installed in their SR20? If so, was it a difficult installation? Where did the Ryan display unit go in the panel? Did you interface the unit to one of the 430s? Where did you have the device installed?
For me personally (and it is obviously just a personal opinion) I happen to have a paranoia about midair collisions, so rather than get the “C” package I was thinking about getting, I decided to get the “B” and put the ‘saved’ money toward getting a Ryan system. I have used neither the Ryan-type systems nor the Monroy system you mentioned, but in my opinion the altitude and bearing information provided by the Ryan would be particularly useful in helping to find traffic. I would be concerned that the Monroy system would be going off quite often in congested airspace but wouldn’t really tell you much in terms of where to look for the traffic (i.e. we already know in congested airspace that there’s lots of planes around, so having a box that just basically said “there’s a plane within X miles” might not contribute much additional information)
Just my $0.02 worth…
Steve
I think if they would have had the tpas from surechek at the time of the evaluation they would have picked the tpas. I don’t think there is a better deal out there.
Good article on Aviation Consumer about TCAS.
A very exciting and inexpensive unit by Monroy Aerospace Corp. lists for under $800. Check it out at http://www.monroyaero.com/index.html
I wonder if Cirrus would be interested in offering as an option, or at least would be willing to install.
Clyde, thanks for your great site. I check it on a dayly basis.
Paul (pos holder 337)
This is slightly changing the subject, but I recently asked Cirrus whether they would be willing to install a ryan tcad system in my plane, scheduled for 2/01 delivery. (this would be installed by ‘customer service’ i.e. after delivery of the plane). They’re still thinking about it and advised me that I might as well start shopping around local avionics shops while CD decides whether to do the tcad installation.
Here’s a question – has anyone out there had a TCAD unit installed in their SR20? If so, was it a difficult installation? Where did the Ryan display unit go in the panel? Did you interface the unit to one of the 430s? Where did you have the device installed?
For me personally (and it is obviously just a personal opinion) I happen to have a paranoia about midair collisions, so rather than get the “C” package I was thinking about getting, I decided to get the “B” and put the ‘saved’ money toward getting a Ryan system. I have used neither the Ryan-type systems nor the Monroy system you mentioned, but in my opinion the altitude and bearing information provided by the Ryan would be particularly useful in helping to find traffic. I would be concerned that the Monroy system would be going off quite often in congested airspace but wouldn’t really tell you much in terms of where to look for the traffic (i.e. we already know in congested airspace that there’s lots of planes around, so having a box that just basically said “there’s a plane within X miles” might not contribute much additional information)
Just my $0.02 worth…
Steve
Have you seen the BF Goodrich traffic avoidance system for GA planes?? I think it’s a little better than a Ryan TCAD.
Steve,
I am getting the Ryan 9900BX installed right now, together with Storm-Scope, and Autopilot and Transponder upgrades. The installation is difficult and the wiring must be very precise so I am working with the most highly recommmended shop in my area J&R Electronics at Hayward in Ca.
We are interfacing to the Garmin 430 for now, but laying the wires to the Arnav for when their interface software is ready (Arnav est. is 12/00).
I am not sure where they are putting the Ryan anunciator (not many choices) or where the electronics boxes are being placed; I will check.
Scott K.
Good article on Aviation Consumer about TCAS.
A very exciting and inexpensive unit by Monroy Aerospace Corp. lists for under $800. Check it out at http://www.monroyaero.com/index.html
I wonder if Cirrus would be interested in offering as an option, or at least would be willing to install.
Clyde, thanks for your great site. I check it on a dayly basis.
Paul (pos holder 337)
This is slightly changing the subject, but I recently asked Cirrus whether they would be willing to install a ryan tcad system in my plane, scheduled for 2/01 delivery. (this would be installed by ‘customer service’ i.e. after delivery of the plane). They’re still thinking about it and advised me that I might as well start shopping around local avionics shops while CD decides whether to do the tcad installation.
Here’s a question – has anyone out there had a TCAD unit installed in their SR20? If so, was it a difficult installation? Where did the Ryan display unit go in the panel? Did you interface the unit to one of the 430s? Where did you have the device installed?
For me personally (and it is obviously just a personal opinion) I happen to have a paranoia about midair collisions, so rather than get the “C” package I was thinking about getting, I decided to get the “B” and put the ‘saved’ money toward getting a Ryan system. I have used neither the Ryan-type systems nor the Monroy system you mentioned, but in my opinion the altitude and bearing information provided by the Ryan would be particularly useful in helping to find traffic. I would be concerned that the Monroy system would be going off quite often in congested airspace but wouldn’t really tell you much in terms of where to look for the traffic (i.e. we already know in congested airspace that there’s lots of planes around, so having a box that just basically said “there’s a plane within X miles” might not contribute much additional information)
Just my $0.02 worth…
Steve
Good article on Aviation Consumer about TCAS.
A very exciting and inexpensive unit by Monroy Aerospace Corp. lists for under $800. Check it out at http://www.monroyaero.com/index.html
I wonder if Cirrus would be interested in offering as an option, or at least would be willing to install.
Clyde, thanks for your great site. I check it on a dayly basis.
Paul (pos holder 337)
This is slightly changing the subject, but I recently asked Cirrus whether they would be willing to install a ryan tcad system in my plane, scheduled for 2/01 delivery. (this would be installed by ‘customer service’ i.e. after delivery of the plane). They’re still thinking about it and advised me that I might as well start shopping around local avionics shops while CD decides whether to do the tcad installation.
Here’s a question – has anyone out there had a TCAD unit installed in their SR20? If so, was it a difficult installation? Where did the Ryan display unit go in the panel? Did you interface the unit to one of the 430s? Where did you have the device installed?
For me personally (and it is obviously just a personal opinion) I happen to have a paranoia about midair collisions, so rather than get the “C” package I was thinking about getting, I decided to get the “B” and put the ‘saved’ money toward getting a Ryan system. I have used neither the Ryan-type systems nor the Monroy system you mentioned, but in my opinion the altitude and bearing information provided by the Ryan would be particularly useful in helping to find traffic. I would be concerned that the Monroy system would be going off quite often in congested airspace but wouldn’t really tell you much in terms of where to look for the traffic (i.e. we already know in congested airspace that there’s lots of planes around, so having a box that just basically said “there’s a plane within X miles” might not contribute much additional information)
Just my $0.02 worth…
Steve
Hello Steve,
Those $0.02 were worth more then that.
The best way would be a HUD Heads Up Display, the main reason is the eye is supposed to be pointed to the outside not on the cockpit.
I would like to see more people installing those things in the airplanes. It is like an insurance policy that “WE” get to collet on, not our beneficiaries.
Have a great day,
Woor
Good article on Aviation Consumer about TCAS.
A very exciting and inexpensive unit by Monroy Aerospace Corp. lists for under $800. Check it out at http://www.monroyaero.com/index.html
I wonder if Cirrus would be interested in offering as an option, or at least would be willing to install.
Steve,
I use the Monroy device. It works well, and I feel that it is worth the $800. However, when I own my own plane, I don’t think it would be worth it to me to install it. Given the hassle and cost of installing things, I’d go ahead and get something more capabable, like the BF Goodrich system.
I’ve used the BF Goodrich system for about 23 hours of flying and loved it. It is so much better to know where the other A/C are and their trends.
I think both the Garmin 430’s and the Sandel interface to the BF Goodrich Sky Watch, so there is no need for an extra display (but I’m not certain about the interface capabilities).
I do wish the voice annunciator for Sky Watch was less dramatic. It is a commanding male voice saying “Traffic!”. Given how often there are alerts, I wish it were a female voice, like in the Monroy and it were softer. No matter how softly I hear “Traffic Nearby”, I’ll for sure look for it (on the display and out the window).
Given the fequency of alerts, I only use the Monroy in “near” mode, and then only after I’ve gotten a mile from the airport. I don’t take its alerts so much as a warning as “this would be a good time to do a scan for traffic”. I usually spot no traffic after getting an alert, perhaps because the Monroy is fairly undescriminating. E.g., it doesn’t care what the altitude separation is. I also almost always get flight following.
I spoke with Ian Bentley at Cirrus about a number of things, including collision avoidance gear. He said that if they offered any system, it would be the BF Goodrich, I think because there were more displays that could talk to it (but I’m not certain about this being the reason).
For those people who say “if you are going to spend $20,000 on something to make you safer, you’d be better off spending it on something else” I say: “I already spend money on a number of safety items and there aren’t a whole lot left that I’m not already getting (like great training). Also, although mid airs are not that common, the idea of them is terrifying to some of us and in part, spending this money is about making myself and my wife feel more comfortable flying small a/c in very dense airspaces of the SF Bay Area, and especially SoCal”.
Robert Bedichek
Have you seen the BF Goodrich traffic avoidance system for GA planes?? I think it’s a little better than a Ryan TCAD.
Hi Mario,
Thanks for the suggestion – I had looked at the goodrich system a little bit. The reasons I am leaning toward the Ryan area as follows:
the goodrich system is more expensive
the Ryan 9900BX has active interrogation, which was the one really useful advantage I saw in the goodrich system over the earlier ryan systems
the ryan system can interface to the Garmin 430/420 now, whereas I believe the Goodrich system needs to have its own display unit
When the Arnav unit supports traffic (maybe I should say “if”?), it is supposed to support the Ryan unit, so my hope is to eventually move over the display from the Garmin to the Arnav.
If you don’t mind my asking, why do you think the goodrich system is better? Perhaps I missed something when I was looking at it…
Thanks,
Steve
Have you seen the BF Goodrich traffic avoidance system for GA planes?? I think it’s a little better than a Ryan TCAD.
Hi Mario,
Thanks for the suggestion – I had looked at the goodrich system a little bit. The reasons I am leaning toward the Ryan area as follows:
- the goodrich system is more expensive
- the Ryan 9900BX has active interrogation, which was the one really useful advantage I saw in the goodrich system over the earlier ryan systems
- the ryan system can interface to the Garmin 430/420 now, whereas I believe the Goodrich system needs to have its own display unit
- When the Arnav unit supports traffic (maybe I should say “if”?), it is supposed to support the Ryan unit, so my hope is to eventually move over the display from the Garmin to the Arnav.
If you don’t mind my asking, why do you think the goodrich system is better? Perhaps I missed something when I was looking at it…
Thanks,
Steve
Hi Steve,
I preferred the BF Goodrich system only because of its moving display screen. But, yes, it is a lot more expensive. Currently, the C-172S that I’m using has a Ryan Tcas and it sure does wonders especially in the Los Angeles Class B airspace.
Mario,
the Ryan TCAD in your 172S, does this give you altitude plus distance of the traffic, or do you have the expensive one with altitude, distance plus direction arrow? - If you donot have the direction info or arrow, is it still a good device? And, do you feel the altitude or the distance info the more important for collison avoidance?
Thanks, Timm
I preferred the BF Goodrich system only because of its moving display screen. But, yes, it is a lot more expensive. Currently, the C-172S that I’m using has a Ryan Tcas and it sure does wonders especially in the Los Angeles Class B airspace.
Mario,
the Ryan TCAD in your 172S, does this give you altitude plus distance of the traffic, or do you have the expensive one with altitude, distance plus direction arrow? - If you donot have the direction info or arrow, is it still a good device? And, do you feel the altitude or the distance info the more important for collison avoidance?
Thanks, Timm
Hi Timm,
The C-172s that I use has the RYAN TCAD 9900. It gives you the altitude of the “target” in relation to you and the direction (it uses an arrow)from you. I believe, as a low time pilot, that the altitude and distance are the most important feature since it instantly tells you were to look. If you want to know more check out the RYAN TCAD WEBSITE.
Have Fun
Mario
I preferred the BF Goodrich system only because of its moving display screen. But, yes, it is a lot more expensive. Currently, the C-172S that I’m using has a Ryan Tcas and it sure does wonders especially in the Los Angeles Class B airspace.
Steve,
I am getting the Ryan 9900BX installed right now, together with Storm-Scope, and Autopilot and Transponder upgrades. The installation is difficult and the wiring must be very precise so I am working with the most highly recommmended shop in my area J&R Electronics at Hayward in Ca.
Scott, thanks for the information – I was flying out of Palo Alto until moving out here to the east coast earlier this year so I guess we were near neighbors. 
However, since I am on the east coast now I think it makes J&R a little less practical.
We are interfacing to the Garmin 430 for now, but laying the wires to the Arnav for when their interface software is ready (Arnav est. is 12/00).
I am not sure where they are putting the Ryan anunciator (not many choices) or where the electronics boxes are being placed; I will check.
That’s exactly what I was planning to do, run the Ryan into the 430 (actually probably the 420 as I have the B package) but get it set up for future interface to the Arnav. When you said Arnav est 12/00, did you mean it? (i.e. next month) or did you mean 12/01?
If you don’t mind, I might contact you via email around the time I pick up the plane (current estimate between 1/15 and 2/15/01) to see if whatever shop I end up using might be able to get some hints from your shop, thus saving me a little time & money?
Thanks again,
Steve
Good article on Aviation Consumer about TCAS.
A very exciting and inexpensive unit by Monroy Aerospace Corp. lists for under $800. Check it out at http://www.monroyaero.com/index.html
I wonder if Cirrus would be interested in offering as an option, or at least would be willing to install.
Clyde, thanks for your great site. I check it on a dayly basis.
Paul (pos holder 337)
This is slightly changing the subject, but I recently asked Cirrus whether they would be willing to install a ryan tcad system in my plane, scheduled for 2/01 delivery. (this would be installed by ‘customer service’ i.e. after delivery of the plane). They’re still thinking about it and advised me that I might as well start shopping around local avionics shops while CD decides whether to do the tcad installation.
Here’s a question – has anyone out there had a TCAD unit installed in their SR20? If so, was it a difficult installation? Where did the Ryan display unit go in the panel? Did you interface the unit to one of the 430s? Where did you have the device installed?
For me personally (and it is obviously just a personal opinion) I happen to have a paranoia about midair collisions, so rather than get the “C” package I was thinking about getting, I decided to get the “B” and put the ‘saved’ money toward getting a Ryan system. I have used neither the Ryan-type systems nor the Monroy system you mentioned, but in my opinion the altitude and bearing information provided by the Ryan would be particularly useful in helping to find traffic. I would be concerned that the Monroy system would be going off quite often in congested airspace but wouldn’t really tell you much in terms of where to look for the traffic (i.e. we already know in congested airspace that there’s lots of planes around, so having a box that just basically said “there’s a plane within X miles” might not contribute much additional information)
Just my $0.02 worth…
Steve
Hello Steve,
Those $0.02 were worth more then that.
The best way would be a HUD Heads Up Display, the main reason is the eye is supposed to be pointed to the outside not in the cockpit.
I would like to see more people installing those things in the airplanes. It is like an insurance policy that “WE” get to collect on, not our beneficiaries.
Have a great day,
Woor
I think I ate too much… sorry
Good article on Aviation Consumer about TCAS.
A very exciting and inexpensive unit by Monroy Aerospace Corp. lists for under $800. Check it out at http://www.monroyaero.com/index.html
I wonder if Cirrus would be interested in offering as an option, or at least would be willing to install.
Steve,
I use the Monroy device. It works well, and I feel that it is worth the $800. However, when I own my own plane, I don’t think it would be worth it to me to install it. Given the hassle and cost of installing things, I’d go ahead and get something more capabable, like the BF Goodrich system.
I’ve used the BF Goodrich system for about 23 hours of flying and loved it. It is so much better to know where the other A/C are and their trends.
I think both the Garmin 430’s and the Sandel interface to the BF Goodrich Sky Watch, so there is no need for an extra display (but I’m not certain about the interface capabilities).
I do wish the voice annunciator for Sky Watch was less dramatic. It is a commanding male voice saying “Traffic!”. Given how often there are alerts, I wish it were a female voice, like in the Monroy and it were softer. No matter how softly I hear “Traffic Nearby”, I’ll for sure look for it (on the display and out the window).
Given the fequency of alerts, I only use the Monroy in “near” mode, and then only after I’ve gotten a mile from the airport. I don’t take its alerts so much as a warning as “this would be a good time to do a scan for traffic”. I usually spot no traffic after getting an alert, perhaps because the Monroy is fairly undescriminating. E.g., it doesn’t care what the altitude separation is. I also almost always get flight following.
I spoke with Ian Bentley at Cirrus about a number of things, including collision avoidance gear. He said that if they offered any system, it would be the BF Goodrich, I think because there were more displays that could talk to it (but I’m not certain about this being the reason).
For those people who say “if you are going to spend $20,000 on something to make you safer, you’d be better off spending it on something else” I say: “I already spend money on a number of safety items and there aren’t a whole lot left that I’m not already getting (like great training). Also, although mid airs are not that common, the idea of them is terrifying to some of us and in part, spending this money is about making myself and my wife feel more comfortable flying small a/c in very dense airspaces of the SF Bay Area, and especially SoCal”.
Robert Bedichek
Aviation Consumer reports this month on the various airborne collision avoidance options. The advantage of the BF Goodrich Skywatch product is that it alerts based on altitude and course trends of your airplane vs. the target(s). This results in far fewer alarms than a more simple proximity-based system. The Skywatch is essentially a scaled down version of the system used in the airliners.
Steve,
I use the Monroy device. It works well, and I feel that it is worth the $800. However, when I own my own plane, I don’t think it would be worth it to me to install it. Given the hassle and cost of installing things, I’d go ahead and get something more capabable, like the BF Goodrich system.
I’ve used the BF Goodrich system for about 23 hours of flying and loved it. It is so much better to know where the other A/C are and their trends.
I think both the Garmin 430’s and the Sandel interface to the BF Goodrich Sky Watch, so there is no need for an extra display (but I’m not certain about the interface capabilities).
I do wish the voice annunciator for Sky Watch was less dramatic. It is a commanding male voice saying “Traffic!”. Given how often there are alerts, I wish it were a female voice, like in the Monroy and it were softer. No matter how softly I hear “Traffic Nearby”, I’ll for sure look for it (on the display and out the window).
Given the fequency of alerts, I only use the Monroy in “near” mode, and then only after I’ve gotten a mile from the airport. I don’t take its alerts so much as a warning as “this would be a good time to do a scan for traffic”. I usually spot no traffic after getting an alert, perhaps because the Monroy is fairly undescriminating. E.g., it doesn’t care what the altitude separation is. I also almost always get flight following.
I spoke with Ian Bentley at Cirrus about a number of things, including collision avoidance gear. He said that if they offered any system, it would be the BF Goodrich, I think because there were more displays that could talk to it (but I’m not certain about this being the reason).
For those people who say “if you are going to spend $20,000 on something to make you safer, you’d be better off spending it on something else” I say: “I already spend money on a number of safety items and there aren’t a whole lot left that I’m not already getting (like great training). Also, although mid airs are not that common, the idea of them is terrifying to some of us and in part, spending this money is about making myself and my wife feel more comfortable flying small a/c in very dense airspaces of the SF Bay Area, and especially SoCal”.
Robert,
Thanks for the input! I agree with spending the money for some kind of collision avoidance system. Having flown in the bay area for a while, and now in the dc/baltimore area, it does sometimes concern me about the number of a/c in the area. However, interestingly enough, the scariest “near” midair I had was while leaving the class D airspace of a towered field in the middle of Indiana. Just goes to show that it can happen anywhere.
When did you talk to Ian about Cirrus using the BF Goodrich system? I talked with Bruce Gunter over the summer and then Chris Dixon in the last couple weeks, and both mentioned that Arnav (and thus by extension, Cirrus) was going to support interfacing to the Ryan system, and that the Ryan system would probably be offered soon after Arnav works out the interface. That was one of the reasons I was leaning toward the Ryan system. If it’s true that the Arnav & Cirrus are going to go with the Goodrich solution then I should probably also reconsider it.
Thanks,
Steve