upvote

points

by _moof2 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby mlyle2 hours ago|
next
[-]
I don't know. At some point, you need to do all the systems engineering. But "why not just ......" is a perfectly reasonable place to start looking at a problem and sometimes the answers really are that simple.

> Besides, there already are a lot of "simple" fixes in place for this problem, e.g. RWSL

It'll be interesting to hear why RWSL didn't help, as it is supposedly deployed at LGA.

reply
upvoteby dist-epoch2 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
You could put a TCAS on every ground vehicle. It's not rocket science.

Yes, I know it probably costs $300k, surely today you can have a $10k ground version.

You could also show every plane on a screen inside the vehicle and have some loud alarms if they are on a collision path.

You could even just display FlightRadar24, still better than nothing.

You would still get permission for the tower, this would not be an allow system, just a deny system.

reply
upvoteby throw0101d1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
> You could put a TCAS on every ground vehicle. It's not rocket science.

TCAS on planes is disabled below 1000±100' (~300m) AGL (above ground level).

ADS-B on vehicles is already a thing (and FAA certified):

* https://uavionix.com/airports-and-atm/vtu-20/

There are three categories of runway incursion types: operator/ATC error, pilot error, pedestrian/vehicle. Even if someone 'knows' that they need to "hold short runway 12", they can still have a brain fart and go through the hold short line.

Unless you want to argue that all vehicles taxiing have to operate (SAE Level 4) autonomously?

reply