USAF F-16 Instructor Discusses Flying Into MOAs

"Viperdoc" wrote in
Maybe you can answer the question- can RAPCON or Center
radar even resolve 600 feet (say versus 200 or 800) of two
passing aircraft, assuming the radar sweep paints them at the
instant they are in closest proximity?

No, not to that level.

Somewhere I read that the F16 was part of a two on two exercise. Likely the
engagement was halted for the civil traffic. The same article stated that
only one F16 went in for the VID, which seems unusual IMO.

And the AF released the statement of "never closer than 600 feet", which
seems to be the standard answer for "I kept visual separation at all times,
even while maneuvering for the ID". At 600 feet I doubt any reasonable pilot
would win a claim of "formation flying".

Unless the other 3 AF pilots file, the F16 jock will likely just get a
verbal dressdown only. Something like: "You f***ing idiot, next time turn
your f***ing transponder off".

"Mike Isaksen" wrote:
Unless the other 3 AF pilots file, the F16 jock will likely just get a
verbal dressdown only. Something like: "You f***ing idiot, next time
turn your f***ing transponder off".

With cameras (and other recording equipment) becoming more prevalent on
small aircraft that sort of so-called dressing-down may be self-defeating
for future encounters, as the likelyhood of incriminating evidence becomes
larger.

(And I presume actually turning the transponder off could be used to show
there was a clear intent to violate regs.)

Mike Isaksen writes:

At 600 feet I doubt any reasonable pilot
would win a claim of "formation flying".

At 600 feet it's really hard to ID an aircraft, at least if you want the tail
number.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Mike Isaksen writes:

At 600 feet I doubt any reasonable pilot
would win a claim of "formation flying".

At 600 feet it's really hard to ID an aircraft, at least if you want the tail
number.

Like you've ever been 600 feet from an aircraft in flight.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

Like you've ever been 600 feet from an aircraft in flight.

Not necessary, as the limits are imposed by human physiology. At 600 feet,
you can resolve separations of about 1 inch in perfect conditions with perfect
vision. That makes it very hard to make out the tail number of an aircraft
600 feet away, especially in less than perfect conditions from a moving
aircraft with a moving target.

Mxsmanic wrote in
news
writes:

Like you've ever been 600 feet from an aircraft in flight.

Not necessary, as the limits are imposed by human physiology. At 600
feet, you can resolve separations of about 1 inch in perfect
conditions with perfect vision. That makes it very hard to make out
the tail number of an aircraft 600 feet away, especially in less than
perfect conditions from a moving aircraft with a moving target.


The tail number has to be 12 inches unless its a very old aircraft which
hasn't been repainted in many, many years. Wrong again Anthony. You don't
know **** from shinola.

In article ,
says...
Mike Isaksen writes:

At 600 feet I doubt any reasonable pilot
would win a claim of "formation flying".

At 600 feet it's really hard to ID an aircraft, at least if you want the tail
number.

1,000' - near impossible - 600' - quite easy; 500' - piece of ****.

Where do you source your info from?

Me? I got reported, 18 or 20 years ago, I had just obtained my PPL and I
was doing a scenic - one I'd done several times before. Part of it
involved heading along some coastline at 500 AGL (gives the pax a great
sense of speed). It wasn't the best weather day for flying, 15kt
easterly. It's a local sea breeze. Along the beach that day were some
very low level clouds (about 2/8 ths cover). So I flew at exactly 600
indicated - rather than my planned 500. Someone (blind obviously)
reported me. Part of the description I heard back was that they could
clearly read my tail sign and hence ID me.

I was fully cleared of any wrong-doing, BTW. ATC confirmed my 600 AMSL
altitude and even commented on how accurate it was maintained along the
ten mile of beach we flew along (or was that sideways

--
Duncan

Mxsmanic wrote:
Mike Isaksen writes:

At 600 feet I doubt any reasonable pilot
would win a claim of "formation flying".

At 600 feet it's really hard to ID an aircraft, at least if you want the tail
number.

Are you on dope? Any one with good vision, and F-16 pilots generally
have better than average vision, should be able to read a tail number at
600 feet.

Gig 601Xl Builder writes:

Are you on dope? Any one with good vision, and F-16 pilots generally
have better than average vision, should be able to read a tail number at
600 feet.

Show me.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601Xl Builder writes:

Are you on dope? Any one with good vision, and F-16 pilots generally
have better than average vision, should be able to read a tail number at
600 feet.

Show me.


1. If you don't have 20/20 vision find someone who does.

2. Go to an airport.

3. Find an airplane.

4. Walk up to airplane.

5. Walk 200 steps away from airplane.

6. Turn around face airplane.

7. Read registration.