For ease of reference, I'll paste the text of the Board's summary here :
The Board established that there did not appear to be any
conflicting traffic on radar and that no TCAS alerts or advisories had been issued.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't we talking about two
different radar systems here?
The Air traffic control radar tracks objects from the ground radar and will issue alerts if they detect impending collisions, right?
In addition, doesn't the A320 have its own onboard radar and independent TCAS? (Traffic collision avoidance system). I thought it did and I found
this in a search:
Airbus has chosen the ACSS T3CAS traffic management computer as the standard surveillance avionics suite for the Airbus single-aisle narrowbody
family of aircraft (A318, A319, A320 and A321). T3CAS combines–in a single LRU–key surveillance avionics, including traffic alert and collision
avoidance system (Tcas)
Modern radar isn't as shabby as it once was, so the chances of two radar systems failing to detect an impending collision points to two possibilities
that I can think of:
1. Either the object was so small or otherwise had such a low radar reflection that it was below the detection threshold of the radar systems, which
doesn't sound entirely consistent with the sighting of an apparently metallic object, visible at a great enough distance to sense an impending
2. As the board suggested in the report, perhaps it was some kind of reflection or other illusion. This would explain the lack of radar evidence of an
Now for my next question, I would like to preface it with something I learned when the object from space (meteroid) impacted the Chelyabinsk area,
when I subsequently saw dash cam video of the event and learned that dash cams had become quite popular in that area, due to things like insurance
So it occurs to me that people are operating small motor vehicles with at most a few passengers and have recording devices of what the driver sees out
of the windshield. My question is, would it make sense for commercial airliners which have much bigger safety/liability issues due to their much
larger passenger loads to have at least what the drivers in Chelyabinsk had to record what is seen out of the cockpit?
I don't know the answer, but an event like this causes me to ask the question. It's a bit unsatisfactory that there's no real resolution to this
Also, can anyone explain what the "degree of Risk: D" means at the end of the report? I tried a quick search and got some risk stuff but nothing
about that particular report.