This is precisely the problem! The majority of the public, including
many pilots and apparently the FAA, believe in "See and Avoid" since
they can often see other aircrafts either from the ground or when
flying. They do not grasp the simple fact that they only see aircrafts
which are not in a collision course with them! This, combined with
multiple blind spots and the various distractions which are part of
the job of piloting an aircraft, makes it a pure luck when someone
actually manage to see and avoid.
If See and Avoid can be relied on, why do we bother with traffic
lights and multiple lanes on the roads? Yet it is much easier to see
and avoid on the road due to significantly slower speed and knowing
where to look.
It is ironic to hear and read about the money and effort which goes
into investigating the cause of those accidents, while the answer is
simply biological limit of our eyes, and the design of our airplanes.
The only reason that aircrafts do not collide with each other all the
time is the big sky theory. Unfortunately the sky is not big enough,
and we loose many good pilots and passengers to GA midairs every
year.
The responsibility lies with the FAA bureaucrats and the rule making
process, which is so slow that we are still using 50 years old
technologies! Imagine if the FAA was run by, say... Apple.
We would all be carrying a small $99 (ok maybe $999) gizmo in all our
aircrafts, which capable of providing real time warnings for any
threat (such as flarm or ADS-B).
And for those who claims that this will create complacency or heads
down - even if you blind fold all the pilots you will get far less
midairs due to the occasional misuse of malfunction of this
technology, verses relying on See and Avoid!
For a good reading on the subject of see and avoid check
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...s/bca0107c.xml

Ramy