On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 08:17:59 -0500, Greg Copeland
wrote in :

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 21:09:51 -0700, tjd wrote:


From the story, it sounds like both pilots saw each other and both were
trying to take evasive action, but they kept getting unlucky and making
corresponding maneuvers. So, it's not clear if the guy violated any
right of way rules. Was he definitely in class B without a clearance?
~20min, assuming ~40nm south of KDTO looks like you could be clear or
under the 4000MSL shelf at that point?


[...]

We were on the south side of Dallas, well within class B. I was flying at
the **assigned** altitude, as indicated by the story. We were not under the
40000 shelf....I had checked the GPS only moments before. We were in the
3000' shelf; squarely placing both of us *within* class B's 3000' shelf. I
just went back and verified on my GPS we were *in* the 3000' shelf.

Based on the voice's tone on the radio, I did get the impression he was
not supposed to be there but that's hardly authorative. He did say he was
not squawking ("with no squawk"), which also makes me think he was not
suppose to be there.

If the NORDO aircraft's transponder was not in operation, it begs the
question, how did ATC know its altitude? It is possible the
controller's "with no squawk" statement may have meant the NORDO
aircraft was not squawking an assigned beacon code, but 1200 or 7600,
or, more likely, it could have meant there was no beacon being
transmitted from the NORDO aircraft. ATC's statement is a bit
ambiguous.


Would it make you feel better if I said it happened about 15-minutes into
flight. [?] I had throttled back waiting for clearance.

It would have made the situation much clearer if you had definitely
stated that both aircraft were within Class B airspace.

Shesh. I think some may be over analyzing...a lot!

How is over analysis possible? The prudent pilot considers as many
factors as possible, right?


I also read several posts which seem to assert I yielded PIC authority.

That is your inference. That notion may have been implicit in my
citing the PIC's responsibility for controlling his flight, but ...

I dumbfounded as to how anyone could come to that conclussion.

I did not mean to imply that you had actually "yielded PIC authority,"
but your statement:

Not wanting to compound the situation in the event other traffic
was near I asked if they wanted me to climb or descend.

could be construed as expecting the controller to provide instructions
for you to evade the other aircraft.

While the section of FAA Order 7110.65 I cited does indicate that the
controller could provide such instructions as part of the alert, it is
the PIC who is in command of the flight. I think it was prudent of
you to query the controller for a suggestion for the reasons you
mention, but that query could also be construed as relinquishing some
PIC authority/responsiblity.

Please don't take this personal critizum. It was merely an attempt to
objectively scrutinize all the possibilities, and stands as an example
of how it might be viewd by an ALJ.

The initial sighting was by no means sure death in the next second. I did the
responsible thing by keeping the controller in the loop by ensuring I
didn't compound the problem with other traffic in the area. When time did
not allow for it, I didn't do it. I fail to understand how improving
situational awareness is a bad thing; contrary to the opinion asserted by
others here.

I don't know to which opinion you are referring, but I agree, quearing
the controller was a prudent thing to do at that time.

What I'm having trouble with is the controllers ability to accurately
determine the NORDO aircraft's altitude apparently from a primary
radar target.