"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

I agree that communication with controlling authority while operating
within MOA joint-use airspace is prudent. Of course, we don't know
that the Air Tractor pilot didn't contact the controlling authority of
the MOA at this point in the investigation. He did apparently have a
handheld communications radio aboard.


The collision did not occur in a MOA.



I fail to see how a 200 knot flight on an IFR flight plan within a MOA
is distinguishable from one outside the MOA's boundaries.


The collision did not occur in a MOA.



I would expect a good likelihood that ATC would have advised the T-37
of the traffic conflict if the Air Tractor had been equipped with a
transponder. The controller might have also done so if he had been
able to see the Air Tractor's primary target on his radar scope. But
the responsibility for seeing and avoiding was clearly on the
shoulders of the T-37 PIC in VMC at the time of the MAC due to the Air
Tractor being on his right.


http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text....2.4.7&idno=14
Title 14: Aeronautics and Space
PART 91-GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES
Subpart B-Flight Rules
General
§ 91.113 Right-of-way rules: Except water operations.

(d) Converging. When aircraft of the same category are converging
at approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly so),
the aircraft to the other's right has the right-of-way.


The Air Tractor had equal responsibility, don't confuse right-of-way with
the responsibility to see and avoid.


§ 91.113 Right-of-way rules: Except water operations.
(b) General. When weather conditions permit, regardless of whether an
operation is conducted under instrument flight rules or visual flight rules,
vigilance shall be maintained by each person operating an aircraft so as to
see and avoid other aircraft. When a rule of this section gives another
aircraft the right-of-way, the pilot shall give way to that aircraft and may
not pass over, under, or ahead of it unless well clear.