![]() |
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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Aug 1, 10:17 am, Denny wrote:
When the camera guy is yelling at the pilot to get here, get there, give me a better angle / / / it makes see and avoid hit and miss... This time they hit... The FAA is unlikely to clamp down on the news choppers (possible but not likely) unless they rain burning parts all over the lawn of the White House or similar, then the reaction will be swift... Anyway, it doesn't matter to me - I don't watch the crap they call news... I don't fly around the city at 200 feet, etc... So, let em go on playing russian roulette as far as I'm concerned... denny - pretty much apathetic today... My first thought was that the viewers got what they tuned in for. -- Gene Seibel Gene & Sue's Aeroplanes - http://pad39a.com/gene/planes.html Because we fly, we envy no one. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Aug 1, 10:39 am, "Al G" wrote:
"Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in oglegroups.com... On Aug 1, 1:52 am, "Hilton" wrote: Al, Exactly. Doesn't matter how often and vocal the 'see and avoid' crowd shouts, the truth is that 'see and avoid' does not work 100% of the time. It obviously really really helps, but for Ol Shy and Bashful to say that it was "SEE AND AVOID - someone screwed up" is nonsense. The NTSB reports are littered with accidents and near misses where the pilots never saw each other, the San Diego midair being a very important one in the history of aviation. Hilton "Al G" wrote in message ... "Hilton" wrote in message et... Do you believe that there are times when 'see and avoid' has its limitations and does not work? Hilton Sure, The San Diego midair comes to mind. Al G "Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in message groups.com... Seems to be some hysteria about the recent collision in Phoenix. It was a pure and simple see and avoid problem. Doesn't matter who had right of way, if they were adhering to FAR's or not, bottom line is two helicopters tried to inhabit the same airspace with the fatal results of four dead simply to cover a news story that was not all that newsworthy. SEE AND AVOID. Someone screwed up. Let the lawsuits begin....................- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Al See and avoid is nonsense? Kid, I've been flying all over the world more than 50 years and see and avoid has kept me alive. Certainly there are occasions when a lapse has caused a mid-air such as the PHX case in point. The moment you stick your head up your ass is when you're gonna get buried that way. I don't care how careful you are, accidents happen and all we can do is try to minimize them. ATC ain't much help, a crew that isn't watching out isn't much help, and a pilot who is so involved in something besides flying the aircraft is a danger to everyone concerned. As for the SAN accident, I was working there at that time and it was a case of everyone doing the right thing but no one was looking outside in a very dangerous area for that particular approach into Lindbergh. The 727 guys were involved in the approach to land, and the guys in the 182 were involved in the missed approach procedures. They simply didn't SEE AND AVOID. I mean, how big is a 727? Impacted near the wing root? Yah **** happens in spite of our efforts................ OL S&B 24,000 hrs and counting Well, first, the nonsense comment wasn't mine. I said: Sure, The San Diego midair comes to mind. Second, Thanks, it has been 50 years since someone called me kid. Pretty soon, they'll start carding me again(senior discount). Third, I've been flying all over the world for more than 35 years and see and avoid has Certainly kept me alive. My habit of scanning everywhere spotted 2 F106's at my 7 o'clock, less than a mile. I avoided them, and the miss was close enough for me to spot the Oakleaf under the plastic on the Major's shoulder. The "picture" down into his cockpit will be with me for a very long time. Fourth, If you read the entire report on the San Diego accident, you'll find that the captain could not see the 152 that was low and to the right, because of the glareshield and the panel. The co-pilot was not in a position to see the traffic either. A windshield post on the right side blocked one eye, and the attach point of his optic nerve blocked the other eye. By the time he moved enough to see the traffic, it was too late to avoid. It is very difficult for slower traffic to scan behind them, as you well know, but that doesn't stop me from trying. My closest calls have all been while over 10,000', and in the higher airspeeds. I find my odds are improved if I fly 100' off my VFR altitude, 1/2 mile to the right of an airway, and not directly over a VOR. I try to always use flight following, for what it's worth. When I was instructing full time, I would occasionally take a 172, and sneak up on one of my students in the practice area. I didn't have to get close, just close enough for him to spot me. After seeing an aircraft close by, they always started scanning diligently. See and avoid definitely works, but nothing is 100%. ATC ain't much help, a crew that isn't watching out isn't much help, and a pilot who is so involved in something besides flying the aircraft is a danger to everyone concerned. Amen. Al G CFIAMI 2069297- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Al Sometimes the posts get so fragged its hard to tell who said what and thats why I try to snip the pertinent parts. It would appear we are pretty much in agreement on the subject though. Another near fatal midair over San Diego came to mind from that same time frame. I was an instructor for PSA at that time at Brown Field. A Japanese student (Japan Airline) returning from a filed XC was over the Julian VOR in NE San Diego County at 6,500msl. A Navy F8U coming up out of Miramar eastbound with a steep angle said he saw a flash of something and made a hard left turn to avoid whatever he thought he saw. He reported that he had a potential midair and was RTB. On landing, they found white paint on his extreme wing tip and minor scrapes/gouges. The Japanese student said he felt a bump and thought it was mountain turbulence until he noticed the metal of his left wing had apparently curled forward like a tear. He called in to company radio and said he thought he had hit something but wasn't sure what. Eventually he got back on the ground at Brown Field in south SDiego county where it was discovered his left wing was within honest to god INCHES from being severed. Nearly half the wing spar had been cut just outboard of the landing gear, the hydraulic lines had been bent upwards, and the entire wing had to be replaced. That happened on March 4, 1969. I'm looking at the pics and news article. He was one of my students. Another case of right place, right time, doing the expected right thing and only by the grace of God was a fatal midair avoided. There is simply NO WAY any pilot can afford not to keep their head on a swivel watching for hazards and see and avoid. If there are any pilots out there who feel otherwise, I don't want them anywhere me in any kind of airborne object. Best Professional Regards Al........I figure anyone less than 70 I can call kid...gg Rocky ATP #155XXXX |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in message oups.com... Seems to be some hysteria about the recent collision in Phoenix. It was a pure and simple see and avoid problem. Doesn't matter who had right of way, if they were adhering to FAR's or not, bottom line is two helicopters tried to inhabit the same airspace with the fatal results of four dead simply to cover a news story that was not all that newsworthy. SEE AND AVOID. Someone screwed up. Let the lawsuits begin.................... Seems to me that is the same problem they had in OSH w/the mustangs... |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Aug 1, 4:28 am, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:52:12 -0700, Jay Beckman wrote in om: Unfortunately, that would cost $$$ and station managers hate spending $ $$... I wonder how the TV station managers feel about killing their personnel and facing law suits for negligence by the dead employee's estate? Did I say it was right? No, don't think I did. I'm mearly stating a fact: Station Managers hate spending $$$. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that management in any line of work hates spending $$$. Jay Beckman PP-ASEL Chandler, AZ |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ol Shy & Bashful wrote:
"SEE AND AVOID - someone screwed up" is nonsense." He didn't say that see and avoid is nonsense. He said that your conclusion "see and avoid failed" - "someone must have screwed up" would be nonsense, because it might have been that see and avoid failed because it doesn't always work. That is, nobody screwed up, yet see and avoid still failed. This is not the same as saying that see and avoid is nonsense, but it is saying that see and avoid sometimes breaks down even if nobody screws up. Adhominem. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Aug 2, 4:09 am, Adhominem wrote:
Ol Shy & Bashful wrote: "SEE AND AVOID - someone screwed up" is nonsense." He didn't say that see and avoid is nonsense. He said that your conclusion "see and avoid failed" - "someone must have screwed up" would be nonsense, because it might have been that see and avoid failed because it doesn't always work. That is, nobody screwed up, yet see and avoid still failed. This is not the same as saying that see and avoid is nonsense, but it is saying that see and avoid sometimes breaks down even if nobody screws up. Adhominem. AD Did you read the quote? I can read and write english fluently. I don't see the words "conclusion", or "failed" If he meant something else why not say it in clear english? I recall another SoCal midair in the early 60's when a C-150 collided with a Twin Otter near Los Alamitos west of Fullerton CA. It was late afternoon and both were headed in a westerly direction. The sunlit haze cut visibility to practically nothing. Were all the flight crews looking diligently? We'll never know. I knew the instructor of the C150 and he had about 10,000 hours of flight time. He and his student died, I don't recall what happened to the ****ter. I operated in the SoCal area for nearly 20 years mostly doing single pilot corporate ops - SNA, VNY, SAN, LGB, SMO, FUL, etc.....an extremely busy area for flight ops. Now I am operating on the Gulf Coast and have a lot of close encounters with military training aircraft on a weekly basis. I'll continue to keep my head on a swivel and do my damndest to SEE AND AVOID to avoid being on the News at 9. I can only hope every other pilot out there has the same attitude. Best Regards and fly safe Ol S&B |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 03:42:38 -0700, Ol Shy & Bashful
wrote in .com: Now I am operating on the Gulf Coast and have a lot of close encounters with military training aircraft on a weekly basis. I'll continue to keep my head on a swivel and do my damndest to SEE AND AVOID to avoid being on the News at 9. I can only hope every other pilot out there has the same attitude. I don't know what you're flying, but from the military/civil MACs, whose NTSB URLs I posted earlier in this message thread, I get the impression that the military pilots, operating well in excess of the 250 knot speed restriction below 10,000' in their stoutly constructed fighters and trainers equipped with ejection seats do not have the same trepidation of colliding with a "LBF" that GA pilots have. After all, the military pilots survived the MACs without injury. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Aug 2, 6:30 am, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 03:42:38 -0700, Ol Shy & Bashful wrote in .com: Now I am operating on the Gulf Coast and have a lot of close encounters with military training aircraft on a weekly basis. I'll continue to keep my head on a swivel and do my damndest to SEE AND AVOID to avoid being on the News at 9. I can only hope every other pilot out there has the same attitude. I don't know what you're flying, but from the military/civil MACs, whose NTSB URLs I posted earlier in this message thread, I get the impression that the military pilots, operating well in excess of the 250 knot speed restriction below 10,000' in their stoutly constructed fighters and trainers equipped with ejection seats do not have the same trepidation of colliding with a "LBF" that GA pilots have. After all, the military pilots survived the MACs without injury. Larry All the more reason for heads up huh? Another incident/accident occured in SE Wa state (mid 90's?) when a pair of Navy jets ran over a Grumman Ag Cat from his 6 at about 2-300agl while he was returning from a spray flight. The Navy tried to blame the Ag Cat pilot for the collision! The Cat pilot survived but was pretty badly injured. I can think of a couple times when military jet aircraft were flying over area I was spraying in a Pawnee and it was pretty damned close. I see T-34's and T-6's all over our operating area and the close calls are nearly always with a flight of two in formation. I suspect they are tooo involved in avoiding a mid-air in the formation than they are about colliding with another aircraft? Best Regards Ol S&B |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
See and avoid... | Ramy | Soaring | 22 | January 30th 07 09:18 PM |
See and Avoid Failure | Steve Leonard | Soaring | 3 | October 28th 05 01:54 AM |
See and Avoid applies to both IFR and VFR | Brad Z | Piloting | 14 | July 17th 04 05:48 AM |
Avoid CSA website | F.L. Whiteley | Soaring | 2 | June 23rd 04 10:21 PM |
See and avoid | Kees Mies | Piloting | 39 | March 22nd 04 08:31 PM |