A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

What's wrong with this idea?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 1st 03, 12:13 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
...

How many enroute mid-air collisions have there been in the past century?


At least one.


  #2  
Old August 3rd 03, 12:25 AM
David
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article link.net,
Steven P. McNicoll writes

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
...

How many enroute mid-air collisions have there been in the past century?


At least one.

I can think of at least four.
One in mid USA over the Grand Canyon. Constellation/ DC-7
One over New York DC-8/ Super Constellation
One over Yugoslavia Trident/ DC-9
One over Switzerland (or that region) quite recently

Flicking through one of my books I spotted a couple of others. Would
include civil/military accidents?

--
-----------------------------------------------------------
David Francis E-Mail reply to
-----------------------------------------------------------
  #3  
Old August 3rd 03, 04:12 AM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"David" wrote in message
...

One over New York DC-8/ Super Constellation


I don't think that one was enroute.


  #4  
Old August 4th 03, 06:12 PM
David
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article nk.net,
Steven P. McNicoll writes

"David" wrote in message
...

One over New York DC-8/ Super Constellation


I don't think that one was enroute.

Depends on how you define enroute I guess! :-) The collision took place
at 5,000ft. But I agree that it might be described as the descent or
initial approach phase.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
David Francis E-Mail reply to
-----------------------------------------------------------
  #5  
Old August 6th 03, 10:11 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"David" wrote in message
...

Depends on how you define enroute I guess! :-) The collision took place
at 5,000ft. But I agree that it might be described as the descent or
initial approach phase.


Well, since the collision occurred at low altitude while the Constellation
was on approach and cleared to land, and the DC-8 cleared to a holding
pattern to await approach clearance, I don't think it fits any reasonable
definition of enroute.


  #6  
Old August 7th 03, 10:22 PM
David
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article et, Steven
P. McNicoll writes

"David" wrote in message
...

Depends on how you define enroute I guess! :-) The collision took place
at 5,000ft. But I agree that it might be described as the descent or
initial approach phase.


Well, since the collision occurred at low altitude while the Constellation
was on approach and cleared to land, and the DC-8 cleared to a holding
pattern to await approach clearance, I don't think it fits any reasonable
definition of enroute.

This is not really a very significant disagreement. :-) My reference
says the last instruction to the Constellation was 'turn left to a
heading of 130'.

Does your reference refer to a clearance to land? Isn't 5000 ft, a bit
high to be cleared to land? La Guardia is pretty close to sea level.

What is the aviation definition of 'enroute' by the way?
Is it the same as 'en route'?
My dictionary gives no help - it just says it means 'on the way'.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
David Francis E-Mail reply to
-----------------------------------------------------------
  #7  
Old August 8th 03, 03:13 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"David" wrote in message
...

This is not really a very significant disagreement. :-) My reference
says the last instruction to the Constellation was 'turn left to a
heading of 130'.

Does your reference refer to a clearance to land?


"A midair collision took place over Staten Island at 5,000 ft. The Connie
was cleared to land at La Guardia Airport on Runway 04 when the United DC-8
struck the Connie tearing it apart. The Connie immediately crashed to the
ground at Miller Army Air Field on Staten Island. One passenger was sucked
out into one of the DC8s jet engines. Other passengers fell from the Connie
as the spinning fuselage fell onto Staten Island. The United jet tried to
make an emergency landing at La Guardia Airport but could not maintain
altitude and crashed into the streets of Brooklyn. Forty-four passengers on
the Constellation and eight-four passengers on the DC-8 were killed. Three
passengers from the DC-8 died shortly after. One young boy, Stephen Baltz
survived several days before succumbing to his injuries. Six people were
also killed on the ground. The United crew entered a low-altitude holding
pattern at 500 miles per hour, twice the speed it should have been going and
flew past the clearance limits and airspace allocated to the flight. One of
2 VORs on the DC-8 was not functioning. Although the crew knew this, they
failed to report this to the ATC, who probably would have provided extra
radar assistance."

http://www.planecrashinfo.com/1960/1960-51.htm



Isn't 5000 ft, a bit high to be cleared to land? La Guardia is pretty

close to sea level.


Not necessarily.



What is the aviation definition of 'enroute' by the way?
Is it the same as 'en route'?


Yes.



My dictionary gives no help - it just says it means 'on the way'.


En route procedures come after departure procedures and before arrival
procedures.

http://www1.faa.gov/atpubs/AIM/chap5toc.htm


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
American nazi pond scum, version two bushite kills bushite Naval Aviation 0 December 21st 04 10:46 PM
ATC says wrong position Greg Esres Instrument Flight Rules 28 April 30th 04 05:37 PM
Were the Tuskeegee Airmen Wrong? Stephen Harding Military Aviation 63 February 14th 04 07:38 PM
A Brilliant Idea nafod40 Home Built 4 September 9th 03 10:33 PM
they took me back in time and the nsa or japan wired my head and now they know the idea came from me so if your back in time and wounder what happen they change tim liverance history for good. I work at rts wright industries and it a time travel trap tim liverance Military Aviation 0 August 18th 03 12:18 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.