![]() |
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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
This thread has gotten so long, I including my original reply to ensure that
we are on the same page: I noticed the later posts referenced a set of "rules" for setting up the "error", but absent those, you are back to the same old game of chance. What's to prevent another pilot from picking a corresponding "error" that would still maintain the head-on courses? And I don't know if this is a trick question, but if you are at 6000 (no +500) wouldn't you be on an IFR flight plan, talking to ATC, and receiving traffic advisories? My comments are in the text...4 "Peter Duniho" wrote in message ... "Bill Denton" wrote in message ... The question mark "implied" nothing; it directly indicated that I was asking a question. Fine. As hard as it is to imagine, let's grant your claim regarding the lack of an implication. Then the answer to your question is "yes, assuming you're also above 3000' AGL, but so what?" Emphasis on "so what?" Given that there was no implication intended, what in the world was the point of your original reply? And if the conditions in my question were "true", you would not need to fly an offset on a GPS course, despite GPS improved accuracy, any more than you would need to fly an offset on a VOR course; traffic avoidance would be handled by ATC. In other words, you WOULD "need" to fly an offset, in order to ensure no conflict with other traffic. There is a very real risk of a collision when flying an airway, whether you're using GPS or VOR navigation. In practice, we as pilots generally choose looking out the window over offsetting our course, but the "need" is there nevertheless. As you will note from my original reply, the point was that if everyone is randomly choosing their own offset, you aren't really improving your odds of avoiding a head-on very much. You would probably be better off just flying the centerline; at least you would know where to look for other traffic. You continue to claim (just as your first post implied) that ATC handles traffic avoidance for IFR flights, but that's simply not true. ATC only separates IFR flights from other IFR flights (except in particular kinds of airspace where VFR flights are also given traffic separation...a very small portion of the national airspace system). Aircraft operate under the same traffic principles as automobiles: There is a set of rules. If everyone follows the rules, no problem. But is someone breaks the rules, you have a strong potential for a problem. If you are IFR in IMC you probably will not be able to use "see and avoid". You simply cannot see through the clouds/rain/whatever. You have to look to ATC for separation, which they will provide for all aircraft on IFR flight plans. Aircraft flying under VFR are not supposed to be in IMC. If they are, that's a violation of the rules. And VFR and IFR aircraft are supposed to maintain a 500 foot vertical separtaion above 3000 feet AGL. If the separtion is not maintained, that's a violation of the rules. And when you have a violation of the rules, the accident risk increases. FAR 91.113 (c) mandates that when weather condtions permit, all aircraft, whether flying VFR or IFR, must observe "see and avoid". To sum it up, if you are IFR in IMC, you have to rely on ATC to separate you from other IFR traffic; there should not be any VFR traffic there. If you are in VMC, whether VFR or IFR, you must observe "see and avoid". And all aircraft must maintain the 500 foot separation between VFR and IFR aircraft. Obviously, when aircraft are ascending or descending, the risk of collision increases. But you can only rely on ATC in IMC to reduce this risk, or use "see and avoid" in VMC. And I am aware that there are other IFR separation methods such as takeoff sequencing and timing, maintaining separation via speed, flying your flight plan exactly if something goes wrong, and similar methods, but they aren't really germane to this limited discussion. Pete |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Can GPS be *too* accurate? Do I need some XTE?? | Icebound | Instrument Flight Rules | 82 | November 22nd 04 08:01 PM |
General Zinni on Sixty Minutes | WalterM140 | Military Aviation | 428 | July 1st 04 11:16 PM |
How accurate was B-26 bombing? | ArtKramr | Military Aviation | 59 | March 3rd 04 10:10 PM |
Local TV News ran an accurate story about airframe icing last night | Peter R. | Piloting | 5 | January 29th 04 01:01 AM |
VOR and reverse sensing | Koopas Ly | Piloting | 40 | August 25th 03 01:26 AM |