On Mon, 7 Aug 2006 06:41:29 -0600, "Jeff Crowell"
wrote in :

Jeff Crowell wrote:
Speed of the F-16 at impact was 356 KCAS.

Larry Dighera wrote:

[...]

I never debated that Ninja flight recorded a speed of 450
knots during the flight. I'm simply saying that the speed
that really matters is the speed immediately prior to the
collision.

That conclusion is debatable. If we're discussing time to deconflict,
we'd need to know at what point the Ninja flight achieved 450 knots.

For starters, if the accident investigation report does not
specifically say that the 450 knot speed phases of the
flight were not a proximate cause of the mishap, we can
be sure it was not.


So, you never question the conclusions reached in AIB reports? How
about NTSB reports?

I have not seen any claim other than yours that
Ninja was knocking down 450 knots within that critical
interval. And you are clearly selecting your data to put
your argument in the best possible light.

Perhaps. At any rate, I commend you for taking the time to analyze
all the data available. That has to be an enlightening experience.

Excuse me? Care to say what you mean here?

I mean, from your detailed remarks, it is apparent that you have
applied more than a cursory perusal to the data contained in the AIB
report and the Usenet articles I have written on this subject, and in
so doing, you surely learned a lot about the facts concerning this
MAC. I seriously doubt many other Usenet readers have invested that
degree of effort.


And I'm reassured that by the limited discrepancies you have provided,
the vast majority of what I have said is correct.

That would be just one more example of you making a
conclusion that is not supported by facts. I have been
attempting to limit our discussion to a limited set of data
so that it is easier to keep up.


Keep up?

Feel free to expand your critique. You've got nearly six years of my
comments on this MAC to research.


Similarly, the fact that closure rate was 480 knots of
course has meaning in terms of how much time was
available to both pilots to see and avoid. But to imply or
suggest that this is in any way the same as saying
that Ninja was making almost 500 knots at impact is a
blatant lie.

That conclusion is dependent on malice of intent, which I feel is
unwarranted, and unsupported by the facts. We just choose to
interpret the facts differently.

"Malice of intent"?

For my comment to be considered a "blatant lie" implies that it was a
deliberate attempt to mislead; I had no such intent.


You are convinced, in the face of data to the contrary
(and with no data in support), that the mishap pilot got
up with the specific intention of killing a civil air pilot
that day.

Sir, that is your inference. You will not find, that any of my
comments support that ridiculous conclusion of yours. That statement
causes me to suspect your intentions. Until you are able to present a
quotation of my words that supports your allegation, I will refrain
from further comment on it.

Here's a question (or two) for you:

Why did the USAF wait eight days (per the AIB report) before
administering a medical examination to Parker? Would such a late
medical exam limped the ability to ascertain if he were under the
influence of judgment impairing substances at the time of the MAC?

You cast away entire chunks of data from the mishap
investigation report just because they do not fit with
your preconceived notion.


Which "entire chunks" would those be?

Perhaps you'll be good enough to answer this question:

Can you could explain how Parker could have been unaware of a
chunk of terminal airspace 60 miles in diameter and 10,000' feet
high on a clear day? He surely must have been able to see the
large international airport beneath him. Every pilot knows there
is controlled terminal airspace around such airports.
Additionally, Parker was attempting to contact ATC to obtain a
clearance to enter the Class B airspace immediately before he
chose to descend without the required ATC clearance. Given those
facts, how could Parker possibly have been unaware of what he was
doing?

Lacking an answer to that question, in light of the circumstances,
logic and reason demand, that I conclude, that Parker _deliberately_
chose to violate regulations prohibiting his 450 knot descent into
congested terminal airspace without the required ATC clearance.


And, one last question:

Do you believe that a verbal or written reprimand is a just
sentence for killing the Cessna Pilot?