Third Military-Civil MAC Jan. 18, 2005

Larry Dighera:

Thank you for that fact - you are missing the point of 14CFR91.113(f).

I think this is the point most of us have been trying to make - and
most of us are not lawyers, but live by the rules of physics and common
sense, something that many times seems lost on lawyers and congress
critters.

Later,
Steve.T
PP ASEL/Instrument

On 9 Feb 2005 18:31:41 -0800, "Steve.T" wrote
in .com::

It is also very revealing to find that you didn't read the *rest* of
the reg.
(f) Overtaking. Each aircraft that is being overtaken has the
right-of-way and each pilot of an overtaking aircraft shall alter
course to the right.


What does it reveal?

Was one of the aircraft being overtaken from behind in this MAC?

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message ...
On 9 Feb 2005 18:31:41 -0800, "Steve.T" wrote
in .com::

It is also very revealing to find that you didn't read the *rest* of
the reg.
(f) Overtaking. Each aircraft that is being overtaken has the
right-of-way and each pilot of an overtaking aircraft shall alter
course to the right.


What does it reveal?

Was one of the aircraft being overtaken from behind in this MAC?

Doesn't say anything about being overtaken from behind...

"Blueskies" wrote

Doesn't say anything about being overtaken from behind...

By definition, overtaken IS always from some degree of behind. Anything
catching up to you from behind 90 degrees (off the side) of the flight path
qualifies as you being overtaken.
--
Jim in NC

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 23:04:36 -0500, "Morgans"
wrote in ::


"Blueskies" wrote

Doesn't say anything about being overtaken from behind...

By definition, overtaken IS always from some degree of behind. Anything
catching up to you from behind 90 degrees (off the side) of the flight path
qualifies as you being overtaken.


According to the preliminary NTSB report
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...26X00109&key=2


The Air Tractor was destined for Huron, South Dakota from Olney
Municipal Airport, near Olney, Texas, with an intermediate
refueling stop in Hutchinson, Kansas.

The T-37 departed Frederick Municipal Airport (FDR), near
Frederick, Oklahoma, en route back to Sheppard Air Force Base
(located in northern Wichita Falls, Texas) on a heading of 100
degrees.

The T-37B and AT-502B impacted farm fields about 3.5 miles east of
Hollister, Oklahoma.


From this information in conjunction with a sectional chart, one
should be able to deduce the likely headings of each aircraft at the
time of impact. Near as I am able to tell from Mapquest* maps, the
T-37 was east bound and the Air Tractor was north bound.

If that constitutes 'overtaking' as defined by the FAA, I would be
surprised.




* For reference:

T-37 intended leg:
Frederick, OK to Wichita Falls, TX
http://www.mapquest.com/directions/m...d&2v=CITY&2pl=

T-37 actual leg:
Frederick, OK to Hollister, OK:
http://www.mapquest.com/directions/m...2v=C ITY&2pl=

Air Tractor intended leg:
Olney, TX to Hutchinson, KS
http://www.mapquest.com/directions/m...2v=CITY&2pl =

Air Tractor actual leg:
Olney, TX to Hollister, OK:
http://www.mapquest.com/directions/m...2v=CITY&2p l=

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

ATC was found by the NTSB to be contributory to the cause of this MAC.


Well, that doesn't make it so. What ATC error contributed to this accident?
The NTSB brief says "ATC's lack of awareness that there was more than one
F-16 aircraft in the formation flight, which reduced the ATC controllers
ability to detect and resolve the conflict that resulted in the collision."
I'll wager the controller understands very well that EVERY formation flight
has more than one aircraft in it, although the NTSB may not.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
news

The T-37 had been maneuvering in the MOA. It was not apparent from
the NTSB preliminary report if "3.5 miles east of Hollister, Oklahoma"
was within the MOA boundaries or not. Thanks for that information.


The NTSB preliminary report indicates the collision occurred after the
period of airwork in the MOA and after pattern work at Frederick Municipal
Airport. A check of the sectional chart indicates "3.5 miles east of
Hollister, Oklahoma" is not in a MOA.



So you contend (based on the limited information available at this
time*), that the Air Tractor pilot only violated the equivalent Air
Force Instructions (AFI) 11-202, Volume III of § 91.113(b), while the
T-37 PIC violated both § 91.113(b) and § 91.113(d)?

* http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...26X00109&key=1


No, I contend (based on the limited information available at this time),
that the Air Tractor pilot and T-37 crew violated the requirement to
maintain vigilance so as to see and avoid other aircraft. I base that on
the fact that a collision did occur between these aircraft.

"Blueskies" wrote in message
m...

Doesn't say anything about being overtaken from behind...


Overtakes tend to be from behind.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Blueskies" wrote in message
m...

Doesn't say anything about being overtaken from behind...


Overtakes tend to be from behind.


My take on this is anything that catches up with you from the 179° behind the plane is overtaking you.

On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 02:39:59 GMT, "Blueskies"
wrote in
::


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
link.net...

"Blueskies" wrote in message
m...

Doesn't say anything about being overtaken from behind...


Overtakes tend to be from behind.


My take on this is anything that catches up with you from the 179° behind the plane is overtaking you.


Are you attempting to imply, that if aircraft A impacts aircraft B
from a relative bearing from aircraft B of ~90 degrees to 270 degrees,
it constitutes aircraft B being overtaken by aircraft A by authority
of regulation?