light planes collide over Seattle?

"Seth Masia" wrote in message
...
The AP report is very sensible.

This accident reminds me of last week's thread about spotting floatplanes
over Lake Sammamish.

Was it that recent? Wow...time flies.

In this case the Cessna was in the pattern for Renton and looking into the
sun -- but the Beaver was in a separate pattern for Wiley Post, the
seaplane base off the north end of the Renton runway.

For what it's worth, IMHO this was much more like a "multiple planes at a
point of congestion" (a towered airport, in this case) than it is like the
previous thread about planes around Lake Sammamish.

The towered airport specifically attracts planes to the same spot (even one
like Renton where there are two landing surfaces), while in the case of
operations over an urban lake like Sammamish, landplane traffic really ought
to be above 1000' above the lake (especially when the lake itself is
bordered by developed hills of 200-300'), while the seaplane traffic
operating at the lake is likely to be 1000' or below. And of course, over
an urban lake there is not nearly the same kind of predefined pattern that
would attract to airplanes specifically to the same spot as one would find
at an airport.

Both of these guys should have been talking to the tower and the tower
should have been watching out for both of them.

Both of those guys were talking to the tower (according to the news report),
and yes the tower should have been helping them avoid each other, but the
tower's primary responsibility is to control use of the runway, not the air
around the runway.

It sounds as though the sun might have been a factor, but I also wonder
whether either pilot had been paying attention to radio transmissions to or
from the other aircraft, for the purpose of developing a good sense of
awareness of other traffic in the vicinity. And of course, the sun should
only have been a factor for one of the pilots at most.

That said, reports as to what exactly happened are still conflicting. The
evening news was reporting that the 150 was flying perpendicular to the
flight path of the floatplane, while the web site's article appears to be
saying that the flight paths were nearly parallel, in the same direction.
It probably will be months (or a year) before the NTSB report comes out and
gives us anything close to accurate information as to what actually
happened.

Pete

Seth Masia wrote:
Both of these guys should have been talking to the tower and the tower should
have been watching out for both of them.

My guess is, some attorney will say the exact same thing!

There is no separate pattern, and as far as I know no one who operates in
and out of Renton considers the seaplane base to be separate in any way from
the airport. The Beaver was on downwind for runway 33, intending (according
to news reports) to fly down the runway to the north end and then land in
the water. This is a fairly typical float plane operation at Renton. If you
are suggesting that he should have made a pattern north of the runway,
between it and Mercer Island, it would appear that you know nothing about
float planes.

And, just to save some bandwidth, the school was being torn down because it
contained asbestos...that fact is complicating the examination of the 150's
wreckage because he NTSB folks have to suit up to avoid breathing asbestos
dust.

Bob Gardner

"Seth Masia" wrote in message
...
The AP report is very sensible.

This accident reminds me of last week's thread about spotting floatplanes
over Lake Sammamish. In this case the Cessna was in the pattern for Renton
and looking into the sun -- but the Beaver was in a separate pattern for
Wiley Post, the seaplane base off the north end of the Renton runway.
Both of these guys should have been talking to the tower and the tower
should have been watching out for both of them.

Seth
N8100R


"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...
Oh yeah. We had 0.7 inches of rain in July, and none since the first of
August...the next week or ten days are forecast to be dry, too.

Bob Gardner

wrote in message
ups.com...
Oh, Boy and this is rainy Seattle. Makes the M..gs closure look sounder
every day.
Uncle Bobby RIP.

And that was SPLAT into a SCHOOL BUILDING.

Polarized sunglasses anyone?

JG

Makes the M..gs closure look sounder
every day.


How? Why? Wait, don't bother.

Oh, and tell me again how many people in the school were hurt.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

In article . com,
wet his bed, grabbed an ear of corn and oinked:

Oh, Boy and this is rainy Seattle. Makes the M..gs closure look sounder
every day.
Uncle Bobby RIP.

And that was SPLAT into a SCHOOL BUILDING.

Polarized sunglasses anyone?


Go to hell, "jgrove"! You are acting like a ghoul and jumping with glee
over someone's death.

No -- it DOESN'T make the Meigs closure look sounder, as that action
concentrates, rather than disperses traffic.

wrote in news:1123261687.096684.52900
@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

Snipola
Polarized sunglasses anyone?

Put on a pair of polarized glasses and stare at the sun,
then tell us how much you can see.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism

Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Blog: http://www.skywise711.com/Blog

Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

wrote:
Oh, Boy and this is rainy Seattle. Makes the M..gs closure look sounder
every day.
Uncle Bobby RIP.

For the curious, Uncle Bobby Collins was a local radio host who was
similiarly clipped, and
some wreckage hit a HOSPITAL in Lake County IL.

JG


And that was SPLAT into a SCHOOL BUILDING.

Polarized sunglasses anyone?

JG

In article , Bob Gardner wrote:

Tower-controlled airport, BTW. A contract tower, not an FAA tower.

I have to ask, just out of curiosity... does that make any particular
difference or is of any noteworthy mention, other than what agency
directly signs the employees' paychecks?

-Dan

I would guess that an FAA-employed controller would be in a better position
to answer that question than I am. I do know that ground operations at
Renton differ from what almost all student pilots are taught about
operations at a controlled airport.

Bob Gardner

"Dan Foster" wrote in message
...
In article , Bob Gardner
wrote:

Tower-controlled airport, BTW. A contract tower, not an FAA tower.

I have to ask, just out of curiosity... does that make any particular
difference or is of any noteworthy mention, other than what agency
directly signs the employees' paychecks?

-Dan

Bob Gardner wrote:
I would guess that an FAA-employed controller would be in a better position
to answer that question than I am.


Makes no difference whatsoever.