If all midair collisions were eliminated...

On Feb 11, 9:58*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Tom De Moor writes:
Then you live not in a technical world.

True. I live in the real world.

No you don't. Do you turn your head to look out the SIDE window on
MSFS.

Answer NO.

In the split second you turn your head to look out the the side window
to look at the airport environment (I.E wind sock), some NORDO plane
COULD fill up your windscreen.

Pray tell, how do you prevent a mid air in that situation?

On Feb 10, 3:59*pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
Correction!

I wrote:
If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, ~99% of GA aircraft
fatalities would still happen.

That should be ~97%, not ~99%. Corrected number below.

From Nall Report analysis of U.S. NTSB records:

Total fixed wing GA fatalities:
2002: * 518
2003: * 555
2004: * 510
2005: * 491
2006: * 488
Total: 2562

Fatalities due to midair collision:
2002: * * 5

There were 9 fatalities, not 5. There were 5 accidents yielding
fatalities, not 5 fatalities. My misread.

2003: * * 7

Should be 23.

2004: * * 6

Should be 10.

2005: * * 5

Should be 14.

2006: * * 4

Should be 9.

Total: * 27

Should be 65.





http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/03nall.pdf
http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/04nall.pdf
http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/05nall.pdf
http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/06nall.pdf
http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/07nall.pdf- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Jim,

Does this factor in that there may have been more then one fatality in
an occurance?

For example using simple numbers, if you had 100 planes and 3
accidents that lead to 9 fatalities that would be 3 percent fatality
rate based on takeoffs. (97 percent safety rating)

Second example, if you had 100 planes and 1 accident that had 9 people
in the plane, you would have a 1 percent fatality rate based on
takeoffs. (99 percent safety rating)

I am not sure what the survival rate in a mid air is but to assume
everybody died in a mid air would be statistically incorrect if you
had survivors in any of your cites.

On Feb 10, 4:15*pm, cavelamb wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
cavelamb writes:

Exactly HOW do you think you can prevent ANY midair?

Training, standardization, caution, discipline, and other techniques can
greatly reduce the incidence of midair collisions.

Well, if you have been following the other posts in this thread
you'd understand that they already ARE doing just that.

--

Richard Lambhttp://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb/

"The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power
to tell just when the hands will stop, at late or early hour...
Now is the only time you own. Live, love, toil with a will.
Place no faith in time. *For the clock may soon be still."

Not only doing it but have done it down to the point of not only
_diminishing_ returns but almost zero additional benefit.

Harry K

On Feb 10, 4:57*am, brian whatcott wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
Jim Logajan writes:

If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, ~99% of GA aircraft fatalities
would still happen.

If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, 27 people would still be alive,
based on your own cited statistics. Is saving lives not a sufficient
justification for eliminating midair collisions? Is there are threshold of
deaths below which efforts to eliminate midair collisions are not justified?
What cost is there in attempting to eliminate midair collisions that offsets
the loss of life that they entail?

If the US road speed limit were reduced from 70 to 65 mph, perhaps
30,000 lives would be saved annually. Isn't that worthwhile?

* We have apparently decided NOT.

Brian W

Unsupported assertion even noting the weasel words.

Basic fact. Speed does not kill, speed differential kills and highway
design has, and continues, to eliminate as much differential as
possible. Unfortunately, noone has been able to design a way to insure
all drivers operate a vehicle reasonably.

Harry K

wrote in message
...

Jim,

Does this factor in that there may have been more then one fatality in
an occurance?

For example using simple numbers, if you had 100 planes and 3
accidents that lead to 9 fatalities that would be 3 percent fatality
rate based on takeoffs. (97 percent safety rating)

Second example, if you had 100 planes and 1 accident that had 9 people
in the plane, you would have a 1 percent fatality rate based on
takeoffs. (99 percent safety rating)

I am not sure what the survival rate in a mid air is but to assume
everybody died in a mid air would be statistically incorrect if you
had survivors in any of your cites.

-------------begin new post---------------

I don't recall the cite, but have read that a very high percentage of mid
air collisions are actually fender benders. It is not at all unusual for
both of the accident aircraft to land safely.

Peter

writes:

Do you turn your head to look out the SIDE window on
MSFS.

Yes, if I need to watch for traffic.

In the split second you turn your head to look out the the side window
to look at the airport environment (I.E wind sock), some NORDO plane
COULD fill up your windscreen.

Highly unlikely if your situational awareness is good.

Pray tell, how do you prevent a mid air in that situation?

See above.

On Feb 11, 11:15*am, "Peter Dohm" wrote:
wrote in message

...

Jim,

Does this factor in that there may have been more then one fatality in
an occurance?

For example using simple numbers, if you had 100 planes and 3
accidents that lead to 9 fatalities that would be 3 percent fatality
rate based on takeoffs. (97 percent safety rating)

Second example, if you had 100 planes and 1 accident that had 9 people
in the plane, you would have a 1 percent fatality rate based on
takeoffs. *(99 percent safety rating)

I am not sure what the survival rate in a mid air is but to assume
everybody died in a mid air would be statistically incorrect if you
had survivors in any of your cites.

-------------begin new post---------------

I don't recall the cite, but have read that a very high percentage of mid
air collisions are actually fender benders. *It is not at all unusual for
both of the accident aircraft to land safely.

Peter

Peter,

You bring out a good point that I didn't even consider. I just
figured the worst case scenario

So, if this is the case, then pretty good chance his 99 percent of GA
fatal accidents sans mid air would be right?

On Feb 11, 11:21*am, Mxsmanic wrote:

Yes, if I need to watch for traffic.

You have a monitor at your 9 and 3 oclock to turn your head to look
out the window?? Post a picture of your MSFS setup or you just
spewing your typical bull again. Using arrow keys to turn the view of
MSFS is NOT turning your head.

Digital cameras are cheap and plenty of free picture hosting sites.
You have a website, put it on your website.

In the split second you turn your head to look out the the side window
to look at the airport environment (I.E wind sock), some NORDO plane
COULD fill up your windscreen.

Highly unlikely if your situational awareness is good.

WRONG. Did you read the NORDO part. I don't hear him talking on the
radio, how can I be situationally aware? Oh, I forgot, you don't have
NORDO traffic on MSFS.

Pray tell, how do you prevent a mid air in that situation?

See above.

See above.

writes:

You have a monitor at your 9 and 3 oclock to turn your head to look
out the window??

No, I have a control that lets me swing the view in either direction. I
usually only look for traffic when it is pointed out to me or when I see
something on TCAS, since sim traffic is very light. And I fly a lot IFR, in
which case I can't see traffic, anyway.

I do look around more when flying a pattern, just for orientation rather than
for traffic.

WRONG. Did you read the NORDO part. I don't hear him talking on the
radio, how can I be situationally aware?

Do the best you can. Look for other traffic, and listen to the radio.

NORDO traffic nearby makes me very nervous.

Oh, I forgot, you don't have NORDO traffic on MSFS.

You can, but it's rare. Traffic in general tends to be light except at
important gatherings. It can get fairly busy at some airports. NORDO is not
allowed on the network I prefer, which is an easy way to get around the NORDO
issue (I disagree with it, but it's not my network).

On Feb 11, 1:36*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

No, I have a control that lets me swing the view in either direction. I
usually only look for traffic when it is pointed out to me or when I see
something on TCAS, since sim traffic is very light.

Translation YOU DON"T FLY IN THE REAL WORLD. Try flying at KMBO with
4 school planes in the pattern as well as NORDO CAF planes working the
pattern.

And I fly a lot IFR, in
which case I can't see traffic, anyway.

You DON"T FLY IFR. YOU SIMULATE FLYING IFR in MSFS.

Do the best you can. *Look for other traffic, and listen to the radio.

What part do you not understand. YOU DON"T HEAR NORDO traffic. Again
I ask, please answer the question I ASKED ON MY FIRST RESPONSE TO YOU.

In the split second you turn your head to look out the the side window
to look at the airport environment (I.E wind sock), some NORDO plane
COULD fill up your windscreen.

Pray tell, how do you prevent a mid air in that situation?

ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOVE. HOW DO YOU PREVENT A MID AIR in that
situation. YOUR RADIO IS USELESS. and YOU CAN"T be situationally
aware on something you didn't see or hear!!!