A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

ATC of Near-Miss over BOS



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #25  
Old August 29th 05, 04:18 AM
Warren Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:79uQe.2271$LK.187@trndny09...
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
A Near Midair Collision (NMAC) is "an incident involving one or more
aircraft in which a hazard or a perceived potential hazard to safety is
involved."


In that case, we have a NMAC here because the MD-80 pilot perceived a
potential hazard to safety.

George Patterson


Actually, what we have is a a report of a NMAC. During the subsequent
investigation, the MD80 pilot's perception of the potential hazard to
safety, based apparently on his TCAS interpretation of the event, will
probably not correlate with the voice and radar tapes, nor with the witness
reports from ATC and the Learjet crew. The AAL was heading 150 at 6000.
The Learjet was launching out of BOS on a 070 heading climbing to 5000.
Visual contact was aquired between the Lear and the MD80. The controller
used correct phraseology to provide for visual separation. The MD80 driver
starts an on-air ****ing contest with the Lear driver. "That's bogus. You
were 300 feet below us." How does he know the Lear was 300 feet below him?
TCAS. And why does it matter? The Learjet was the maneuvering aircraft,
and climbing visually through the MD80. The vertical distance between
aircraft is irrelevent to flight safety in this event. A risk of collision
did not actually exist.

In my view, this situation will not be elevated into an NMAC incident
because it does not meet the definition of anything other than a "No
Hazzard" event. The MD80 did not have to maneuver to avoid the Learjet.
Even if he had maneuvered, he couldn't have hit the Learjet with a
sidewinder. The Learjet was maneuvering on a visual separation climb
clearance under positive ATC control. The weather was VFR. The Bankair was
turned behind the AAL before the visual sep clearance was issued. Doesn't
sound hazardous except maybe to the TCAS on the MD80. A risk of collision
did not actually exist.

More than likely, this event at BOS will not be classified as an NMAC
incident, but rather as a non-hazardous event.

Chip, ZTL


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Miss DJ for sale! Doug Jacobs Soaring 0 September 14th 04 10:32 PM
Miss May 2004. Capt.Doug Piloting 8 March 31st 04 04:00 AM
Why an NDB approach with a miss to an intersection? Ben Jackson Instrument Flight Rules 10 March 25th 04 03:53 AM
Miss May 2004 Capt.Doug Home Built 2 March 21st 04 09:48 PM
HE & HEI Rounds that miss, was British cannon ammunition James Lerch Military Aviation 2 December 29th 03 11:07 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.