|
| 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. |
|
|||||||
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
May 5th 06, 07:29 PM
posted to rec.aviation.piloting
|
|||
|
|||
Scared of mid-airs
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. 
|
|
#2
May 5th 06, 08:09 PM
posted to rec.aviation.piloting
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scared of mid-airs
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"
|
|
#3
May 5th 06, 09:35 PM
posted to rec.aviation.piloting
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scared of mid-airs
You could probably fly on autopilot with
your eyes closed for 100 years, and never even come close to a MAC. So what's wrong with UAVs? Jose -- The price of freedom is... well... freedom. for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
|
|
#5
May 8th 06, 01:14 AM
posted to rec.aviation.piloting
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scared of mid-airs
This is an example of how incredibly difficult it is to see converging
traffic, even if you know where it is and you are looking for it. If I ever bought my own plane my top priorities would be to install ADS-B so I can see all of the traffic around me, and a ballistic recover chut to give me a second chance in case I hit something that didn't show up (like a glider without a transponder). Mike Schumann "Jay Honeck" wrote in message ups.com... 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"
|
|
#6
May 5th 06, 10:17 PM
posted to rec.aviation.piloting
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scared of mid-airs
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
|
|
#7
May 6th 06, 12:28 AM
posted to rec.aviation.piloting
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scared of mid-airs
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? Well, a mathematics professor will tell you - even a zero probability event can occur if you give it enough of a chance. (There is a zero probability that if you pick a random number from zero to one, you will pick 1/2. Nonetheless, that number =is= there, and it =can= be picked.) Jose -- The price of freedom is... well... freedom. for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
|
|
#8
May 6th 06, 01:11 AM
posted to rec.aviation.piloting
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scared of mid-airs
Jose wrote: Well, a mathematics professor will tell you - even a zero probability event can occur if you give it enough of a chance. A mathematics professor will tell you that while there's not that much difference between an infinitesimally small probability and zero probability, there is a difference. The zero probability event can't occur. -R
|
|
#9
May 6th 06, 05:16 AM
posted to rec.aviation.piloting
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scared of mid-airs
The zero probability event can't occur.
True. But the zero probability items are not not there. One half is definately there, right between zero and one. The probability of hitting it is zero. Ok, so you caught me stretching the truth a bit. Just a bit. A wee bit. The probability of catching me in an error is zero, but somehow you did, thus proving my point.  Jose -- The price of freedom is... well... freedom. for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
|
|
#10
May 6th 06, 08:18 PM
posted to rec.aviation.piloting
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scared of mid-airs
Jose wrote:
The zero probability event can't occur. True. But the zero probability items are not not there. One half is definately there, right between zero and one. The probability of hitting it is zero. Your last sentence is wrong. Consider this question: for what value of N does 1/N = 0? (Hint: "infinity" is not a number you can apply numerical operations on and expect valid results so you can't say "infinity", infinity is a concept whereas 1, 2, 3.14, etc. are all values you can use for N.). If you insist on considering infinity a number, consider the problems you encounter - for example, what does infinity/2 evaluate to? How about infinity/3? Or infinity/billion? Or infinity/infinity? You are probably being confused by the statement often used in pre-calculus that: limit 1/N - 0 as N - infinity. The ratio 1/N is never zero, it "merely" tends to zero for ever larger values on N. So the probability of picking 0.5 is infinitesimally small, as Rob points out, but not zero. It is a mathematically important distinction.
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| UBL wants a truce - he's scared of the CIA UAV | John Doe | Aviation Marketplace | 1 | January 19th 06 08:58 PM |
| The kids are scared, was Saddam evacuated | D. Strang | Military Aviation | 0 | April 7th 04 10:36 PM |
| Scared and trigger-happy | John Galt | Military Aviation | 5 | January 31st 04 12:11 AM |
Hybrid Mode
