Scared of mid-airs

However, during the past 3 years or so, I've constantly been overly alert
towards the possibility of hitting something in the sky.

We all treat risk differently, and many of us have little foibles and
phobias. I've found that we also go through "phases" where different
things bother us differently.

I've gone through times when the risk of flying was more worrisome than
others. Nothing specific, like you're going through, but more of a
generalized concern (not quite "fear") about flying in general. When
this happened I found myself hyper-alert, gripping the yoke a bit too
hard, and, in general, not enjoying myself much.

That phase passed -- and came back, and passed again -- over time.
I've not found a correlation between anything in my life or flying to
match up with this hyper-alertness, but it's annoying. However, it may
even be healthy.

Mary is going through a phase right now where turbulence really bothers
her. When we're getting bounced around, especially on climb-out, she's
white-knuckled all the way, and trying to get her to relax only
aggravates the situation.

She *knows* we're not going to fall out of the sky -- just like you
*know* you're not about to hit anyone -- but that doesn't matter much.
Unfortunately, things like this don't always follow logic. You just
have to work your way through them.

And you will.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

You're right to be concerned. You're wrong to be obsessive about it. The
awareness problem associated with flying is that over concentration on any
single area opens a huge door to potential problems in other areas. In other
words, there is just no room in flying for a mental state that involves an
overpowering obsession with any single factor involved with that flying.
The ideal mental state for a pilot is one of TOTAL awareness. We call it
"situational awareness".
As for your specific "problem", I'll assume you know how to scan for
traffic, and know the blind spots of the specific aircraft you are flying so
I'll simply leave it on the "total awareness" point and hope you see the
importance implied.
Best of luck to you.
Dudley Henriques


"Frode Berg" wrote in message
...
Hi!

I am a PPL, and co owner of an Arrow.

I have just over 250 hours total time, vfr only, and lot's of cross
country.

However, during the past 3 years or so, I've constantly been overly alert
towards the possibility of hitting something in the sky.

I know the sky is big, and probability is not very high, but still it nags
me to the point that I feel I would be a better pilot if I could just let
it go. Off course still keeping a proper scan etc.

Now, I'm constantly looking for traffic, instead of relaxing, calmly doing
the checklists etc.

I bought one of the passive collision devices, and every time something
shows up there, I try to figure out where it is, especially if I get a
reading around 1-2 nm away within +-500 feet. I know these things are not
excactly dead on most of the time, but they do tell you somethings out
there.

Maybe it's just adding to my nercousness not seeing most of the traffic it
detects.

Anyone else had "mid-air-ities" and how did you deal with it?

Before I started on my PPL, I witnessed a midair from a cruise ship in
France. Maybe that's why I'm a bit obsessed with it.

I mean, what are the probabilities of hitting someone?

How easy is it really to see another AC once it get's closer than normal?
I'm thinking if it getæs real close it will be rather obvious, since most
traffic I'm able to spot now is 1-2 nm away, and look really small and
hard to see.


Thanks for any input on this.

Frode

On Fri, 5 May 2006 01:32:30 +0200, "Frode Berg"
wrote:

Hi!

I am a PPL, and co owner of an Arrow.

I have just over 250 hours total time, vfr only, and lot's of cross country.

However, during the past 3 years or so, I've constantly been overly alert
towards the possibility of hitting something in the sky.

It is an intimidating feeling, especially if you are flying VFR in a
heavily traffic'd airspace. I fly near Chicago, and my head is on a
swivel at all times.

As a reference, ~12 yrs of flying, and I have had one near mid-air.
We were descending from cruise altitude in a Seneca, and a Bonanza was
either in a slow climb or cruising in the opposite direction. The
rate of closure between the two planes was over 300kts.

There was snow on the ground and it was daytime. The brightness of
the snow made it very difficult to pick out the (white) Bonanza.

There were two pilots in the Seneca (and one more in the rear seat)
and none of us saw the Bonanza until the last few seconds. We were
slightly above, so we each grabbed the yoke and cranked back. We
missed by about 20 feet. The other pilot never altered course, so who
knows if he ever saw us.

The next flight for the Seneca was to the avionics shop to get a TCAD
installed. That doesn't guarantee traffic detection, but it does help
with 99% of it.

The real problem with mid-airs and see/avoid theory is that the human
eye is good at detecting changes in motion. When you are on a
collision course with an object, the position of the colliding object
does not change... The object just gets slightly bigger until the
last few seconds, when it gets big in a hurry.

-Nathan

Nathan Young wrote:

The next flight for the Seneca was to the avionics shop to get a TCAD
installed. That doesn't guarantee traffic detection, but it does help
with 99% of it.

Do you ask for traffic advisories or VFR flight following from ATC?

The vast majority of mid airs are near airports. Your device will help
you away from airports, but I wonder how much help it will be near
airports. Also, it helps to be aware of how the IFR approaches interact
with the VFR pattern because sometimes they conflict.

The big sky theory WILL protect you a lot away from airports. Helps
even in close. We've all had close calls though. (I've had 3 and they
were all either in the pattern (2), or on the "normal" approach path 5
miles or so out. The device you have would have helped with the 5 miles
out one.

On 5 May 2006 10:48:34 -0700, "Doug"
wrote in .com::

The big sky theory WILL protect you a lot away from airports.

That notion is absurd. I disagree completely.

The 'big sky theory' is good at lulling pilots into a FALSE feeling of
security.

Any pilot operating within a hundred miles of LAX will soon learn
that.

Please explain how the 'big sky theory' will PROTECT you from a MAC.

Please explain how the 'big sky theory' will PROTECT you from a MAC.

It won't protect you from it -- but the odds of a mid-air collision
happening in many areas are so incredibly small as to be virtually
zero.

Example: If you fly in the mid-levels (4 - 8K feet) over rural Iowa,
your odds of being hit by a meteor are probably greater than your odds
of hitting another aircraft. You could probably fly on autopilot with
your eyes closed for 100 years, and never even come close to a MAC.

Even in the busy airspace around Chicago, the odds are still greatly in
your favor. I read somewhere once (and someone here will have the
exact figure, I'm sure) that if you put EVERY aircraft in America in
the air at once, they would still only occupy a few cubic miles of sky,
with ample air space in between aircraft.

Which is not to say that you shouldn't keep your eyes outside, and that
weird stuff doesn't happen. We were flying over middle-of-no-where
South Dakota once when ATC called out traffic at our altitude (10,500
feet), on a converging course. ATC told the other guy the same thing,
and we gradually merged into a single dot on ATC's radar. In the end,
we were talking to each other on Center frequency, trying to give each
other cues as to our location. ("I'm over that blue water tower at the
intersection -- you see that?")

Nothing worked. ATC eventually gave us different altitudes and
headings -- and we never did see each other. It was very, very
strange.

But, of course, the bottom line: We didn't hit. The "Big Sky" theory
worked again.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Larry Dighera wrote:
Please explain how the 'big sky theory' will PROTECT you from a MAC.


Easy enough. As an old environmental biology professor once said to me:
"Dilution is the solution to pollution". What are the chances of another
aircraft occupying the exact same airspace at the exact same time as mine?

The odds go way up near natural collecting points such as airports and airways
but go way down out in the middle of nowhere. Certain altitudes are better than
others as well. I find relatively little traffic at 8,000 feet simply because
it's too low for jets to hang around at and higher than most normally aspirated
aircraft bother to climb (at least in this part of the world).

I apply the same theory when I consider whether to worry about getting on a
airliner that may be hijacked. What are the odds that an airliner that *I* am
getting on will be hijacked today? Out of all the airliners flying all day long
from all the places on earth? My airliner?

Only a stupid person totally discounts the possibility. Only a phobic person
focuses on it all the time. I fly VFR with my eyes out as much as possible and
use flight following if I can get it. I do not worry particularly that I might
hit someone.

It's the same thinking I apply in keeping a gun in the car and a fire
extinguisher in my kitchen and garage.

I've only had one near miss and that was on a prearranged formation photo
flight. The other pilot turned into me at the end of the photo portion flight
of the flight, expecting the superior performance of his C-421 to pull him
around my C-210. It did, but only after my standard rate turn to the left
became a maximum effort left turn on my part. My windshield was completely
filled with C-421. Scared the everliving **** out of me....

That is the only near miss since I started flying in 1978.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

On Fri, 05 May 2006 17:40:18 GMT, B A R R Y
wrote in ::

Do you ask for traffic advisories or VFR flight following from ATC?

I do on EVERY flight at an altitude that permits ATC to provide Radar
Traffic Advisory Service.

--

For instance, a pilot who has no fear of a mid-air is an idiot.
A pilot who flies without being constantly aware that he/she is
the main aspect of the mid-air avoidance equation is misguided.
--Dudley Henriques

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Fri, 05 May 2006 17:40:18 GMT, B A R R Y
wrote in ::

Do you ask for traffic advisories or VFR flight following from ATC?

I do on EVERY flight at an altitude that permits ATC to provide Radar
Traffic Advisory Service.


Same here, hence my asking... G

I've been told by controllers that even they prefer that we ask for
advisories, 'cause that makes one more aircraft talking to them and not
squawking 1200 and flying in the space incommunicato.

I even use them for sightseeing and practice (stalls, steep turns,
etc...) flights. Only once have I been denied due to workload.