23 July OSH accident audio

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...

Ok, let's assume the controller knows there's an accident AND they have
the
time and free mind capacity to say it on the frequency.


What's "free mind capacity"?



Then what?


Then pilots have an idea how long the airport will be closed.



For that
info to be useful, you'd have to know how long it's going to take to clear
up. I'd wager the controllers did not know that.


That info gives pilots of average or better intelligence an idea of how long
the airport will be closed. Then they can decide if they're better off
continuing to hold or diverting to another airport and coming back later.

We know for a fact that any mishap, be it a gear up landing incident or a
real accident that the field will be closed anywhere from half an hour to a
couple of hours. There are a dozen or so airports within spitting distance
of Ripon, and I'd sure prefer to be sitting at one of them monitoring 120.7
than boring holes around Rush or Green Lake, burning up fuel and wasting
engine time. Not to mention the very real chance of a midair in that
gaggle. Just say that there has been an aircraft mishap on the field and
I'll peel off of the inbound right now.

That's all we need -- just a little information and we can deal with it as
we see fit.

Jim




For that
info to be useful, you'd have to know how long it's going to take to
clear
up. I'd wager the controllers did not know that.


That info gives pilots of average or better intelligence an idea of how
long the airport will be closed. Then they can decide if they're better
off continuing to hold or diverting to another airport and coming back
later.

Steven,

What's "free mind capacity"?

I'm not a native speaker. You know what I mean if you want to.

That info gives pilots of average or better intelligence an idea of how long
the airport will be closed. Then they can decide if they're better off
continuing to hold or diverting to another airport and coming back later.

Ah, ok. So I must be below average intelligence, because I have seen/read about
vastly differing times needed for clearing of runways after accidents and would
have NO idea at all what timeframe I could figure for an event like that
without a vast amount of further details beyond "there's been an accident".
Good for you that you are so much smarter, I guess.


--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote:
Steven,


What's "free mind capacity"?


I'm not a native speaker. You know what I mean if you want to.


That info gives pilots of average or better intelligence an idea of how long
the airport will be closed. Then they can decide if they're better off
continuing to hold or diverting to another airport and coming back later.


Ah, ok. So I must be below average intelligence, because I have seen/read about
vastly differing times needed for clearing of runways after accidents and would
have NO idea at all what timeframe I could figure for an event like that
without a vast amount of further details beyond "there's been an accident".
Good for you that you are so much smarter, I guess.

Very few accidents take less than an hour to clear, that is just common
sense. Even raising an airplane after a gear-up landing is likely an
hour event at least. And that assumes no injured pax to clear.


Matt

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...

Steven,


What's "free mind capacity"?


I'm not a native speaker. You know what I mean if you want to.


Not true. I have no idea what you meant, but I do want to know.



That info gives pilots of average or better intelligence an idea of how
long
the airport will be closed. Then they can decide if they're better off
continuing to hold or diverting to another airport and coming back later.


Ah, ok. So I must be below average intelligence, because I have seen/read
about
vastly differing times needed for clearing of runways after accidents and
would
have NO idea at all what timeframe I could figure for an event like that
without a vast amount of further details beyond "there's been an
accident".


That was my conclusion as well.

What's "free mind capacity"?
I'm not a native speaker. You know what I mean if you want to.
Not true. I have no idea what you meant, but I do want to know.

The way I read it, "Free" means "available". "Mind capacity" means
"ability to think". We sometimes refer to it as "processor cycles", by
anaolgy to computing. When one is thinking too much, there is not much
mind capacity left for other tasks, so there is not much "free" mind
capactity, although one's total mind capacity ("intellegence") is unaltered.

The other way to parse it, "free mind" "capacity" (ability to be
freethinking) doesn't fit well, so I went with the first one.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

In article ,
Jose wrote:

The way I read it, "Free" means "available". "Mind capacity" means
"ability to think". We sometimes refer to it as "processor cycles", by
anaolgy to computing. When one is thinking too much, there is not much
mind capacity left for other tasks, so there is not much "free" mind
capactity, although one's total mind capacity ("intellegence") is unaltered.

For MicroSoft Windows users, this would be a buffer overrun error. It's
a common hacker technique to take control of someone else's computer.

"Thomas Borchert" wrote

Ah, ok. So I must be below average intelligence, because I have seen/read
about
vastly differing times needed for clearing of runways after accidents and
would
have NO idea at all what timeframe I could figure for an event like that
without a vast amount of further details beyond "there's been an
accident".
Good for you that you are so much smarter, I guess.

If it were stated that there was a "fatal incident" on the runway, that
would tell everyone that there would be a sizable delay. There is always
extra time taken to investigate, take proper care and respect to remove the
occupants, and remove the aircraft.

If I were put into a hold with that many aircraft, and knew it was not just
a backup due to too many aircraft trying to get in to land all at once, I
would have definitely made the decision to go find somewhere to land, and
come back later.
--
Jim in NC

If it were stated that there was a "fatal incident" on the runway, that
would tell everyone that there would be a sizable delay. There is always
extra time taken to investigate, take proper care and respect to remove the
occupants, and remove the aircraft.

If I were put into a hold with that many aircraft, and knew it was not just
a backup due to too many aircraft trying to get in to land all at once, I
would have definitely made the decision to go find somewhere to land, and
come back later.

I agree.
Having been in that hold over Green Lake, I think (and this is just my
opinion) that this one tidbit of information would have shut up all the
jibber-jabber on the frequency. It had gotten out of hand, and while I
respect the idea that ATC/FAA/EAA might not have wanted to brodcast the
fact that there was a fatal accident, there were still literally
hundreds of airplanes in the air on that Sunday, and people would have
piped down and shut up and made proper decisions about what to do next
if they knew the full scope of what was going on. Call it situational
awareness, but things were teetering on the brink of break down.
Broadcasting what had happened would have helped the guys at FISK get
it back under control, which they were in danger of losing.

People had a bad case of "get-THERE-itis" and wanted to get in. Knowing
what had happened would have helped to calm things down.

Arguing about how long it might take to clear up various types of
accidents is a waste of time. Each situation is a little different. I
remember one (non-fatal, except to the avionics involved) where a
baggage door on a twin opened up while the aircraft rotated on 27 at
OSH. The boxes of avionics then went thru the prop and got shredded
into a million small pieces. It took us probably an hour or two at
least to do the FOD walk and clear the runway.

Ryan Wubben
EAA Flight Line Operations

Thomas Borchert wrote:

Jose,


So pilots can evaluate their bag of alternate plans with an eye to which
would be more appropriate.



Ok, let's assume the controller knows there's an accident AND they have the
time and free mind capacity to say it on the frequency. Then what? For that
info to be useful, you'd have to know how long it's going to take to clear
up. I'd wager the controllers did not know that.

The point is that now the pilots would also know that ATC didn't know,
but they could also surmise that it would be quite some time given the
circumstances. Many likely would have found an alternate thus relieving
some of the congestion.

Matt