4 ms·
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. Y
by dist-epoch 7mo ago
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.
- throw0101d 7mo ago> 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/ 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?
- dist-epoch 7mo agoHaving emergency braking is different than SAE Level 4. Exactly my point with only denying access versus also allowing it.