See & Avoid

Al,

Exactly. Doesn't matter how often and vocal the 'see and avoid' crowd
shouts, the truth is that 'see and avoid' does not work 100% of the time.
It obviously really really helps, but for Ol Shy and Bashful to say that it
was "SEE AND AVOID - someone screwed up" is nonsense. The NTSB reports are
littered with accidents and near misses where the pilots never saw each
other, the San Diego midair being a very important one in the history of
aviation.

Hilton



"Al G" wrote in message
...

"Hilton" wrote in message
t...
Do you believe that there are times when 'see and avoid' has its
limitations and does not work?

Hilton


Sure, The San Diego midair comes to mind.

Al G


"Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in message
oups.com...
Seems to be some hysteria about the recent collision in Phoenix. It
was a pure and simple see and avoid problem. Doesn't matter who had
right of way, if they were adhering to FAR's or not, bottom line is
two helicopters tried to inhabit the same airspace with the fatal
results of four dead simply to cover a news story that was not all
that newsworthy.
SEE AND AVOID.
Someone screwed up. Let the lawsuits begin....................

On Aug 1, 1:52 am, "Hilton" wrote:
Al,

Exactly. Doesn't matter how often and vocal the 'see and avoid' crowd
shouts, the truth is that 'see and avoid' does not work 100% of the time.
It obviously really really helps, but for Ol Shy and Bashful to say that it
was "SEE AND AVOID - someone screwed up" is nonsense. The NTSB reports are
littered with accidents and near misses where the pilots never saw each
other, the San Diego midair being a very important one in the history of
aviation.

Hilton

"Al G" wrote in message

...





"Hilton" wrote in message
et...
Do you believe that there are times when 'see and avoid' has its
limitations and does not work?

Hilton

Sure, The San Diego midair comes to mind.

Al G

"Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in message
groups.com...
Seems to be some hysteria about the recent collision in Phoenix. It
was a pure and simple see and avoid problem. Doesn't matter who had
right of way, if they were adhering to FAR's or not, bottom line is
two helicopters tried to inhabit the same airspace with the fatal
results of four dead simply to cover a news story that was not all
that newsworthy.
SEE AND AVOID.
Someone screwed up. Let the lawsuits begin....................- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Al
See and avoid is nonsense? Kid, I've been flying all over the world
more than 50 years and see and avoid has kept me alive. Certainly
there are occasions when a lapse has caused a mid-air such as the PHX
case in point. The moment you stick your head up your ass is when
you're gonna get buried that way. I don't care how careful you are,
accidents happen and all we can do is try to minimize them. ATC ain't
much help, a crew that isn't watching out isn't much help, and a pilot
who is so involved in something besides flying the aircraft is a
danger to everyone concerned.
As for the SAN accident, I was working there at that time and it was a
case of everyone doing the right thing but no one was looking outside
in a very dangerous area for that particular approach into Lindbergh.
The 727 guys were involved in the approach to land, and the guys in
the 182 were involved in the missed approach procedures. They simply
didn't SEE AND AVOID. I mean, how big is a 727? Impacted near the wing
root?
Yah **** happens in spite of our efforts................
OL S&B 24,000 hrs and counting

Ol Shy & Bashful wrote:

See and avoid is nonsense?
He didn't say that. All he said is that it doesn't work all of the time, for
various reasons.

Adhominem

On Aug 1, 8:35 am, Adhominem wrote:
Ol Shy & Bashful wrote:

See and avoid is nonsense?

He didn't say that. All he said is that it doesn't work all of the time, for
various reasons.

Adhominem

Ad...
snip..."helps, but for Ol Shy and Bashful to say that it
was "SEE AND AVOID - someone screwed up" is nonsense."
Ummmm, which part of that did I miss?
Ol S&B

Ol Shy & Bashful wrote:

"SEE AND AVOID - someone screwed up" is nonsense."

He didn't say that see and avoid is nonsense. He said that your
conclusion "see and avoid failed" - "someone must have screwed up" would
be nonsense, because it might have been that see and avoid failed because
it doesn't always work. That is, nobody screwed up, yet see and avoid still
failed. This is not the same as saying that see and avoid is nonsense, but
it is saying that see and avoid sometimes breaks down even if nobody screws
up.

Adhominem.

On Aug 2, 4:09 am, Adhominem wrote:
Ol Shy & Bashful wrote:

"SEE AND AVOID - someone screwed up" is nonsense."

He didn't say that see and avoid is nonsense. He said that your
conclusion "see and avoid failed" - "someone must have screwed up" would
be nonsense, because it might have been that see and avoid failed because
it doesn't always work. That is, nobody screwed up, yet see and avoid still
failed. This is not the same as saying that see and avoid is nonsense, but
it is saying that see and avoid sometimes breaks down even if nobody screws
up.

Adhominem.

AD
Did you read the quote? I can read and write english fluently. I don't
see the words "conclusion", or "failed" If he meant something else why
not say it in clear english?
I recall another SoCal midair in the early 60's when a C-150 collided
with a Twin Otter near Los Alamitos west of Fullerton CA. It was late
afternoon and both were headed in a westerly direction. The sunlit
haze cut visibility to practically nothing. Were all the flight crews
looking diligently? We'll never know. I knew the instructor of the
C150 and he had about 10,000 hours of flight time. He and his student
died, I don't recall what happened to the ****ter.
I operated in the SoCal area for nearly 20 years mostly doing single
pilot corporate ops - SNA, VNY, SAN, LGB, SMO, FUL, etc.....an
extremely busy area for flight ops. Now I am operating on the Gulf
Coast and have a lot of close encounters with military training
aircraft on a weekly basis. I'll continue to keep my head on a swivel
and do my damndest to SEE AND AVOID to avoid being on the News at 9. I
can only hope every other pilot out there has the same attitude.
Best Regards and fly safe
Ol S&B

On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 03:42:38 -0700, Ol Shy & Bashful
wrote in
.com:

Now I am operating on the Gulf
Coast and have a lot of close encounters with military training
aircraft on a weekly basis. I'll continue to keep my head on a swivel
and do my damndest to SEE AND AVOID to avoid being on the News at 9. I
can only hope every other pilot out there has the same attitude.

I don't know what you're flying, but from the military/civil MACs,
whose NTSB URLs I posted earlier in this message thread, I get the
impression that the military pilots, operating well in excess of the
250 knot speed restriction below 10,000' in their stoutly constructed
fighters and trainers equipped with ejection seats do not have the
same trepidation of colliding with a "LBF" that GA pilots have. After
all, the military pilots survived the MACs without injury.

On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 06:20:38 -0700, Ol Shy & Bashful
wrote in
. com:

Yah **** happens in spite of our efforts................

It also happens when FAA maximum speed regulations below 10,000' are
relaxed for military aircraft:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...13X33340&key=1
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...11X12242&key=1
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...12X22313&key=1

"Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Aug 1, 1:52 am, "Hilton" wrote:
Al,

Exactly. Doesn't matter how often and vocal the 'see and avoid' crowd
shouts, the truth is that 'see and avoid' does not work 100% of the time.
It obviously really really helps, but for Ol Shy and Bashful to say that
it
was "SEE AND AVOID - someone screwed up" is nonsense. The NTSB reports
are
littered with accidents and near misses where the pilots never saw each
other, the San Diego midair being a very important one in the history of
aviation.

Hilton

"Al G" wrote in message

...





"Hilton" wrote in message
et...
Do you believe that there are times when 'see and avoid' has its
limitations and does not work?

Hilton

Sure, The San Diego midair comes to mind.

Al G

"Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in message
groups.com...
Seems to be some hysteria about the recent collision in Phoenix. It
was a pure and simple see and avoid problem. Doesn't matter who had
right of way, if they were adhering to FAR's or not, bottom line is
two helicopters tried to inhabit the same airspace with the fatal
results of four dead simply to cover a news story that was not all
that newsworthy.
SEE AND AVOID.
Someone screwed up. Let the lawsuits begin....................- Hide
quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Al
See and avoid is nonsense? Kid, I've been flying all over the world
more than 50 years and see and avoid has kept me alive. Certainly
there are occasions when a lapse has caused a mid-air such as the PHX
case in point. The moment you stick your head up your ass is when
you're gonna get buried that way. I don't care how careful you are,
accidents happen and all we can do is try to minimize them. ATC ain't
much help, a crew that isn't watching out isn't much help, and a pilot
who is so involved in something besides flying the aircraft is a
danger to everyone concerned.
As for the SAN accident, I was working there at that time and it was a
case of everyone doing the right thing but no one was looking outside
in a very dangerous area for that particular approach into Lindbergh.
The 727 guys were involved in the approach to land, and the guys in
the 182 were involved in the missed approach procedures. They simply
didn't SEE AND AVOID. I mean, how big is a 727? Impacted near the wing
root?
Yah **** happens in spite of our efforts................
OL S&B 24,000 hrs and counting


Well, first, the nonsense comment wasn't mine. I said:

Sure, The San Diego midair comes to mind.


Second, Thanks, it has been 50 years since someone called me kid.
Pretty soon, they'll start carding me again(senior discount).

Third, I've been flying all over the world for more than 35 years
and see and avoid has Certainly kept me alive. My habit of scanning
everywhere spotted 2 F106's at my 7 o'clock, less than a mile. I avoided
them, and the miss was close enough for me to spot the Oakleaf under the
plastic on the Major's shoulder. The "picture" down into his cockpit will be
with me for a very long time.

Fourth, If you read the entire report on the San Diego accident,
you'll find that the captain could not see the 152 that was low and to the
right, because of the glareshield and the panel. The co-pilot was not in a
position to see the traffic either. A windshield post on the right side
blocked one eye, and the attach point of his optic nerve blocked the other
eye. By the time he moved enough to see the traffic, it was too late to
avoid. It is very difficult for slower traffic to scan behind them, as you
well know, but that doesn't stop me from trying.

My closest calls have all been while over 10,000', and in the higher
airspeeds. I find my odds are improved if I fly 100' off my VFR altitude,
1/2 mile to the right of an airway, and not directly over a VOR. I try to
always use flight following, for what it's worth. When I was instructing
full time, I would occasionally take a 172, and sneak up on one of my
students in the practice area. I didn't have to get close, just close enough
for him to spot me. After seeing an aircraft close by, they always started
scanning diligently. See and avoid definitely works, but nothing is 100%.


ATC ain't
much help, a crew that isn't watching out isn't much help, and a pilot
who is so involved in something besides flying the aircraft is a
danger to everyone concerned.

Amen.



Al G CFIAMI 2069297

On Aug 1, 10:39 am, "Al G" wrote:
"Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in oglegroups.com...





On Aug 1, 1:52 am, "Hilton" wrote:
Al,

Exactly. Doesn't matter how often and vocal the 'see and avoid' crowd
shouts, the truth is that 'see and avoid' does not work 100% of the time.
It obviously really really helps, but for Ol Shy and Bashful to say that
it
was "SEE AND AVOID - someone screwed up" is nonsense. The NTSB reports
are
littered with accidents and near misses where the pilots never saw each
other, the San Diego midair being a very important one in the history of
aviation.

Hilton

"Al G" wrote in message

...

"Hilton" wrote in message
et...
Do you believe that there are times when 'see and avoid' has its
limitations and does not work?

Hilton

Sure, The San Diego midair comes to mind.

Al G

"Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in message
groups.com...
Seems to be some hysteria about the recent collision in Phoenix. It
was a pure and simple see and avoid problem. Doesn't matter who had
right of way, if they were adhering to FAR's or not, bottom line is
two helicopters tried to inhabit the same airspace with the fatal
results of four dead simply to cover a news story that was not all
that newsworthy.
SEE AND AVOID.
Someone screwed up. Let the lawsuits begin....................- Hide
quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Al
See and avoid is nonsense? Kid, I've been flying all over the world
more than 50 years and see and avoid has kept me alive. Certainly
there are occasions when a lapse has caused a mid-air such as the PHX
case in point. The moment you stick your head up your ass is when
you're gonna get buried that way. I don't care how careful you are,
accidents happen and all we can do is try to minimize them. ATC ain't
much help, a crew that isn't watching out isn't much help, and a pilot
who is so involved in something besides flying the aircraft is a
danger to everyone concerned.
As for the SAN accident, I was working there at that time and it was a
case of everyone doing the right thing but no one was looking outside
in a very dangerous area for that particular approach into Lindbergh.
The 727 guys were involved in the approach to land, and the guys in
the 182 were involved in the missed approach procedures. They simply
didn't SEE AND AVOID. I mean, how big is a 727? Impacted near the wing
root?
Yah **** happens in spite of our efforts................
OL S&B 24,000 hrs and counting

Well, first, the nonsense comment wasn't mine. I said:

Sure, The San Diego midair comes to mind.

Second, Thanks, it has been 50 years since someone called me kid.
Pretty soon, they'll start carding me again(senior discount).

Third, I've been flying all over the world for more than 35 years
and see and avoid has Certainly kept me alive. My habit of scanning
everywhere spotted 2 F106's at my 7 o'clock, less than a mile. I avoided
them, and the miss was close enough for me to spot the Oakleaf under the
plastic on the Major's shoulder. The "picture" down into his cockpit will be
with me for a very long time.

Fourth, If you read the entire report on the San Diego accident,
you'll find that the captain could not see the 152 that was low and to the
right, because of the glareshield and the panel. The co-pilot was not in a
position to see the traffic either. A windshield post on the right side
blocked one eye, and the attach point of his optic nerve blocked the other
eye. By the time he moved enough to see the traffic, it was too late to
avoid. It is very difficult for slower traffic to scan behind them, as you
well know, but that doesn't stop me from trying.

My closest calls have all been while over 10,000', and in the higher
airspeeds. I find my odds are improved if I fly 100' off my VFR altitude,
1/2 mile to the right of an airway, and not directly over a VOR. I try to
always use flight following, for what it's worth. When I was instructing
full time, I would occasionally take a 172, and sneak up on one of my
students in the practice area. I didn't have to get close, just close enough
for him to spot me. After seeing an aircraft close by, they always started
scanning diligently. See and avoid definitely works, but nothing is 100%.

ATC ain't
much help, a crew that isn't watching out isn't much help, and a pilot
who is so involved in something besides flying the aircraft is a
danger to everyone concerned.

Amen.

Al G CFIAMI 2069297- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Al
Sometimes the posts get so fragged its hard to tell who said what and
thats why I try to snip the pertinent parts. It would appear we are
pretty much in agreement on the subject though.
Another near fatal midair over San Diego came to mind from that same
time frame. I was an instructor for PSA at that time at Brown Field. A
Japanese student (Japan Airline) returning from a filed XC was over
the Julian VOR in NE San Diego County at 6,500msl. A Navy F8U coming
up out of Miramar eastbound with a steep angle said he saw a flash of
something and made a hard left turn to avoid whatever he thought he
saw. He reported that he had a potential midair and was RTB. On
landing, they found white paint on his extreme wing tip and minor
scrapes/gouges.
The Japanese student said he felt a bump and thought it was mountain
turbulence until he noticed the metal of his left wing had apparently
curled forward like a tear. He called in to company radio and said he
thought he had hit something but wasn't sure what. Eventually he got
back on the ground at Brown Field in south SDiego county where it was
discovered his left wing was within honest to god INCHES from being
severed. Nearly half the wing spar had been cut just outboard of the
landing gear, the hydraulic lines had been bent upwards, and the
entire wing had to be replaced.
That happened on March 4, 1969. I'm looking at the pics and news
article. He was one of my students. Another case of right place, right
time, doing the expected right thing and only by the grace of God was
a fatal midair avoided.
There is simply NO WAY any pilot can afford not to keep their head on
a swivel watching for hazards and see and avoid. If there are any
pilots out there who feel otherwise, I don't want them anywhere me in
any kind of airborne object.
Best Professional Regards Al........I figure anyone less than 70 I can
call kid...gg
Rocky ATP #155XXXX