On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:28:02 -0500, Jim Logajan
wrote:

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2008 13:18:46 -0700 (PDT), buttman
wrote:

On Apr 4, 11:17*am, Larry Dighera wrote:

While I can appreciate the AF's frustration at having their training
exercises interrupted, I doubt that that gives them license to violate
FAR 91.111(b) by flying in formation with a civilian aircraft without
prior arrangement.

The military doesn't have to obey the FARs. They have their own rules
they go by.

That is true. However AIR FORCE INSTRUCTION 11-202 pretty much
parallels the FARs.

http://www.f-16.net/downloads_file25.html

It doesn't merely parallel the FARs, it _incorporates_ them:

"1.1.2. This AFI is a common source of flight directives that include:
1.1.2.1. Air Force-specific guidance.
1.1.2.2. Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs).
[...]
1.2.1. The PIC will ensure compliance with the following:
[...]
1.2.1.3. The FARs when operating within the United States including
the airspace overlying the waters out to 12 miles from the US
coast, unless the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has
excluded military operations."

So it would appear that the F-16 pilot in this case violated
regulations when he formed up on the Pilatus.

The problem with military regulations violations is, that the military
doesn't discipline their ranks commensurate with the violation(s).
Consider flight-lead Parker who lead his wingman into a fatal MAC with
a Cessna 172 on November 16, 2000. He failed to comply with
regulations to brief the terminal airspace, failed to obtain the
required ATC clearance to enter congested Class B and C terminal
airspace, and a list of other violations, but he only received a
verbal reprimand. In another incident, an A4 on a MTR hit a glider,
and the Navy and NTH found the glider at fault despite its having the
right-of-way. And with the current administration, you can expect a
further decline in justice in our fair nation.