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

Collision alert!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 16th 06, 02:02 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Greg Copeland[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 54
Default Collision alert!

"Collision alert! Collision alert! Collision alert!"

Needless to say, I doubled my scan to see if the voice on the radio was
talking to me. I didn't see anything but continue to scan until I heard
more. I had never heard this before, so I was curious as to the situation
in which some poor pilot had found himself.

Having spent most of my brief flying life in '80K, I was relieved to hear
the voice come back with, "'95X, collision alert! NORDOR traffic at 11 to
12 'o clock, traveling west bound, at 3600 feet! You have traffic at
your 11 to 12 'o clock and we do not have radio contact!" It only took
some fraction of a second to recall that I was, in fact, in '95X; a plane
I had only flown three times before. It was also at this time I finally
spotted the other plane. Sure enough, he's at my altitude and we were
converging to a single point in space; me south bound and him west bound.

The flight had started some 20 minutes or so earlier from KDTO. This
flight was my madian flight into class bravo as a private pilot. My wife
and youngest son were both on board. Both of which are fairly new to
flying in spam cans. Needless to say I carried a little trepidation
flying into class bravo, knowing full well high expectations follow such a
privilege. The trepidation came from both the lack of experience on my
part but also the desire to not have my family experience any loss of
confidence in their pilot; in the event I stumble handling the demands of
class bravo.

I promptly jumped on the assigned heading and altitude given to me by
Dallas Departure. I was flying along at 3500 feet on a heading of 170.
Several traffic advisories had been given and the usual "contact" or "no
joy" banter went back and forth. I was content and continued to stay on
heading, hold my altitude, and work the radios. I was happy and so were
my passengers.

"Collision alert! Collision alert! Collision alert!"

Having finally spotted the aircraft and realizing I was not flying '80K,
whos callsign had become second nature to me, I replied back on the radio.
We still had some time to react without acting rashly. After all, I
didn't want to upset the "cargo".

"95X, I have contact." Not wanting to compound the situation in the event
other traffic was near I asked if they wanted me to climb or descend.
"Your prerogative." I started to climb with full throttle and even
traded some airspeed for altitude. "95X, climbing to 4500", was my reply.
Had I to do it over again, I would would have descended. As I climed, the
nose obscured the view of the other aircraft. Not wanting to worsen
things with confusing signals (climbing...no wait...descending), I
decided to stick with my climb.

As I leveled off, it became clear the other aircraft had decided to climb
too. Needless to say, when I lowered the nose, I wasn't pleased to see
the other aircraft had followed me up to 4500 feet. In fact, now, we were
really getting close and I was starting to get a little concerned. We
were still converging and the other aircraft was noticeably larger now.
Uncomfortably larger now.

This time, I did not bother with the radio. I decided I would alter my
course to pass behind the other aircraft. Simple solution. Only, as soon
as I finished rolling into my new course, the other aircraft started to
turn toward us. I mean straight, head-on, same altitude, toward us! Now,
once again, I was very surprised. Without delay, I altered course once
again. This time, altering course to the right via a 20-25 degree bank.
I figured, if need be, I still had time to sharpen the bank angle.
Surely this guy has seen us and he'll do the same.

At this point, we're less than a mile away and he's still flying head on.
Just as I start to push forward to dive and begin a steep turn, the other
plane finally begins his turn to his right. I shallow my turn just
slightly so I can maintain visual contact as long as possible. I'd
estimate at our closest point, we were less than half mile away. Once I
lost sight of him behind me, I resumed my assigned course. "95X,
descending to 3500. Can you confirm the NORDO's position? He's flying very
erratic and I no longer have visual."

"95X, we have him at your six. He is following you to 3500." Needless to
say, I'm now wondering if this guy is trying to commit suicide with an air
to air. Almost a full minute later (well, I'm sure it wasn't...but
seemed like...) and glued to the radio, "95X, the plane has resume his
course to the west. He is no longer on your six."

The rest of the flight went like clock work. The hand-offs to Waco
Approach, Houston Approach, and finally KDWH were both painless and
professional by all parties involved. Even the landing went well.
Unfortunately, because of the bank angles, and angles of aircraft in the
turns, we never were able to get the tail number of the idiot flying
NORDO, in class bravo.

I can't help but wonder if they will bother to try to track the idiot down
and hold him accountable.


Greg

  #2  
Old August 16th 06, 02:05 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Emily[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 632
Default Collision alert!

Greg Copeland wrote:
snip

I can't help but wonder if they will bother to try to track the idiot down
and hold him accountable.


You never know. I knew a guy in college who blundered right through
Indy's airspace, apparently oblivious to the fact that he was even IN an
airplane. Approach watched him land at UMP then called the FBO on the
field and told them to tell the next guy to walk in to call them. So
yeah, sometimes they do.
  #3  
Old August 16th 06, 11:25 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jon Kraus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 194
Default Collision alert!

Hey Emily... I'm based at UMP and think I remember the incident.... ;-)

Jon Kraus
'79 Mooney 201
4443H @ UMP

Emily wrote:

Greg Copeland wrote:
snip


I can't help but wonder if they will bother to try to track the idiot
down
and hold him accountable.



You never know. I knew a guy in college who blundered right through
Indy's airspace, apparently oblivious to the fact that he was even IN an
airplane. Approach watched him land at UMP then called the FBO on the
field and told them to tell the next guy to walk in to call them. So
yeah, sometimes they do.

  #4  
Old August 16th 06, 02:49 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Ron Natalie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,175
Default Collision alert!

Greg Copeland:
I promptly jumped on the assigned heading and altitude given to me by
Dallas Departure. I was flying along at 3500 feet on a heading of 170.
Several traffic advisories had been given and the usual "contact" or "no
joy" banter went back and forth. I was content and continued to stay on
heading, hold my altitude, and work the radios. I was happy and so were
my passengers.


The proper terminology is "NEGATIVE CONTACT" or "TRAFFIC IN SIGHT"
"Contact" is wrong and so is "No Joy." Banter is not conducive
to effective communcations.



This time, I did not bother with the radio.


Very good. Avigate, Navigate, Communicate (or the corollary: "It's
Bernoulli not Marconi that makes it fly). Your duty in visual
conditions is to avoid the other aircraft regardless of what services
you are receiving from ATC.
  #5  
Old August 16th 06, 11:29 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jon Kraus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 194
Default Collision alert!

What's incorrect about No Joy? It is only two syllables instead of the
seven for Negative Contact and not considered "banter" at all.

Ron Natalie wrote:

Greg Copeland:

I promptly jumped on the assigned heading and altitude given to me by
Dallas Departure. I was flying along at 3500 feet on a heading of
170. Several traffic advisories had been given and the usual "contact"
or "no
joy" banter went back and forth. I was content and continued to stay on
heading, hold my altitude, and work the radios. I was happy and so were
my passengers.



The proper terminology is "NEGATIVE CONTACT" or "TRAFFIC IN SIGHT"
"Contact" is wrong and so is "No Joy." Banter is not conducive
to effective communcations.



This time, I did not bother with the radio.



Very good. Avigate, Navigate, Communicate (or the corollary: "It's
Bernoulli not Marconi that makes it fly). Your duty in visual
conditions is to avoid the other aircraft regardless of what services
you are receiving from ATC.

  #6  
Old August 16th 06, 11:33 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jon Kraus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 194
Default Collision alert!

Correction... Negative Contact is only 5 syllables.... Should have had
my coffee first before replying.. ;-)

Jon Kraus wrote:

What's incorrect about No Joy? It is only two syllables instead of the
seven for Negative Contact and not considered "banter" at all.

Ron Natalie wrote:

Greg Copeland:

I promptly jumped on the assigned heading and altitude given to me by
Dallas Departure. I was flying along at 3500 feet on a heading of
170. Several traffic advisories had been given and the usual
"contact" or "no
joy" banter went back and forth. I was content and continued to stay on
heading, hold my altitude, and work the radios. I was happy and so were
my passengers.




The proper terminology is "NEGATIVE CONTACT" or "TRAFFIC IN SIGHT"
"Contact" is wrong and so is "No Joy." Banter is not conducive
to effective communcations.



This time, I did not bother with the radio.




Very good. Avigate, Navigate, Communicate (or the corollary: "It's
Bernoulli not Marconi that makes it fly). Your duty in visual
conditions is to avoid the other aircraft regardless of what services
you are receiving from ATC.

  #7  
Old August 16th 06, 12:16 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Denny
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 562
Default Collision alert!


Greg, ya did good... Yup, the descending turn is the best way, so you
can keep the other plane in sight... Other than that the only
suggestion I can make is to stop worrying about the self loading cargo
(passengers) and if (when) you get another converging situation
maneuver decisively to get him off your nose... Don't waste time
talking to ATC until you have it under control... Don't worry about
the controller... Your PIC responsibility is take the evasive maneuvers
needed, NOW... You can listen to the guy drinking coffee in an
air-conditioned cab, whine about all his problems later...

cheers ... denny

  #8  
Old August 16th 06, 12:00 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Thomas Borchert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,749
Default Collision alert!

Jon,

What's incorrect about No Joy?


It's not standard phraseology. There are pilots out there who have not
served in the Royal Airforce in WW2 (with apologies to Bob Gardner).
They (and a lot of Americans, and the majority of foreign pilots) will
have no clue what you are talking about when you use phrases like that.
Which lowers the overall safety of flight operations.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

  #9  
Old August 16th 06, 02:17 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
The Visitor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 231
Default Collision alert!



Thomas Borchert wrote:

They (and a lot of Americans, and the majority of foreign pilots) will
have no clue what you are talking about when you use phrases like that.


"no clue"?
I couldn't name one, or even imagine one.

Not that I am endorsing the phrase.

If the frequency is busy I just say, "Looking."

John

  #10  
Old August 16th 06, 02:24 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Greg Copeland[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 54
Default Collision alert!

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:17:01 -0400, The Visitor wrote:



Thomas Borchert wrote:

They (and a lot of Americans, and the majority of foreign pilots) will
have no clue what you are talking about when you use phrases like that.


"no clue"?
I couldn't name one, or even imagine one.

Not that I am endorsing the phrase.

If the frequency is busy I just say, "Looking."

John


Interesting. I hear it used just about every time I fly. I had no idea
people would hear common radio terminology and blissfully ignore it.

Just the same, point well taken.


Greg


 




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
Air Force One Had to Intercept Some Inadvertent Flyers / How? Rick Umali Piloting 29 February 15th 06 05:40 AM
Nearly had my life terminated today Michelle P Piloting 11 September 3rd 05 02:37 AM
Third Military-Civil MAC Jan. 18, 2005 Larry Dighera Piloting 37 February 14th 05 04:21 PM
interesting collision alert device Steve / Sperry Soaring 1 March 19th 04 11:31 PM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.