F-16 Encounters in MOA

John Smith wrote:
In article
,
"Robert M. Gary" wrote:

On Jul 14, 7:49 am, Gig 601Xl Builder
wrote:

I'm hardly a military basher but in this case the civilian pilot did try
to see an avoid and that is what caused the problem. He was listening to
his TCAS and doing what it said. The F16 pilot should have realized this
when the civilian started maneuvering and broken off the intercept.
Yea, it would seem that the only see-and-avoid you can fault the
civilian pilot with is not having the capability to out perform the
F-16 as he tried to escape the collision alert.

I fail to see how a 90-degree clearing turn would not have brought the
threat into view and provided an escape to resolve the TCAS warning.

I've not flown with a TCAS so if I'm wrong somebody please tell me.

But it's my understanding that if the TCAS give a Climb alert you are
supposed to climb.

In this case in particular a 90 deg turn might have put him right dead
center in front of a much faster jet and caused an collision.

I don't have a problem with fighters practicing intercepts with civilian
aircraft in an MOA but the pilot in question didn't show the good since
to see that his actions were causing the civilian plane to respond and
he didn't break off the intercept. I wonder if this Lt. even knew that
some civilian aircraft had things like TCAS in them.

Mxsmanic wrote:
John Smith writes:

I fail to see how a 90-degree clearing turn would not have brought the
threat into view and provided an escape to resolve the TCAS warning.

Civilian pilots are not normally taught how to recognize and evade "threats."

See there you go Antony. I even took up for you up thread and then you
say something stupid like this.

Civilian pilots from the newest student pilot to the guys flying 747s
are taught to and evade threats.

John Smith wrote:
In article
,
"Robert M. Gary" wrote:

On Jul 14, 7:49 am, Gig 601Xl Builder
wrote:

I'm hardly a military basher but in this case the civilian pilot
did try to see an avoid and that is what caused the problem. He was
listening to his TCAS and doing what it said. The F16 pilot should
have realized this when the civilian started maneuvering and broken
off the intercept.

Yea, it would seem that the only see-and-avoid you can fault the
civilian pilot with is not having the capability to out perform the
F-16 as he tried to escape the collision alert.

I fail to see how a 90-degree clearing turn would not have brought the
threat into view and provided an escape to resolve the TCAS warning.


How often do you do 90 degree clearing turns while enroute?

On Jul 14, 11:50*am, John Smith wrote:
I fail to see how a 90-degree clearing turn would not have brought the
threat into view and provided an escape to resolve the TCAS warning.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote:
Because if my TCAS is saying something behind me is going to hit me
the last thing a reasonable person would do it turn around to look at
it. Civilian pilots aren't trained to engage threats, we're trained to
avoid them.

Both targeted aircraft were traveling in excess of 240kts/4nmpm.
The TA/RA provided by the TCAS provides sufficient time to maneuver and
provides directional cues in advance of a calculated collision to
escape.

If you maneuver and are still receiving a TA/RA, you are most likely
being tracked and no maneuvering you can do will resolve the TA/RA.
Unless you are being tracked by a missile with a transponder (it must
have a transponder for the system to work) or a pilot with a death wish,
you are not in danger.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
news:bd044db7-1f45-4a7d-817b-

Similarly I wonder what the military would think if I entered a MOA
and started chasing their Hueys around with my Mooney.

Sounds like a lose-lose proposition to me g

On Jul 14, 12:52*pm, John Smith wrote:

Both targeted aircraft were traveling in excess of 240kts/4nmpm.
The TA/RA provided by the TCAS provides sufficient time to maneuver and
provides directional cues in advance of a calculated collision to
escape.

What did you say the closure rate was?

If you maneuver and are still receiving a TA/RA, you are most likely
being tracked and no maneuvering you can do will resolve the TA/RA.
Unless you are being tracked by a missile with a transponder (it must
have a transponder for the system to work) or a pilot with a death wish,
you are not in danger.

I still find your proposition unreasonable. The civilian pilot was not
expecting to be chased so he's not thinking he'll just ignore the
warning and hope its a friendly just playing with him. A collision
alarm is not the time to sit around and think about the pro/cons of
ignoring the alarm and assuming someone is just playing with you at
the expense of your life.

-robert

On Jul 14, 12:41*pm, Gig 601Xl Builder
wrote:

I don't have a problem with fighters practicing intercepts with civilian
aircraft in an MOA but the pilot in question didn't show the good since
to see that his actions were causing the civilian plane to respond and
he didn't break off the intercept. I wonder if this Lt. even knew that
some civilian aircraft had things like TCAS in them.

You would also expect he would first *ask* if the civilian pilot
wanted to play this game. Military flying is very dangerous compared
to civilian flying and I suspect that most of us are not willing to
accept a military level of risk while flying around with friends and
family in the back.

-Robert

Gig 601Xl Builder writes:

Civilian pilots from the newest student pilot to the guys flying 747s
are taught to and evade threats.

Hazards, not threats.

In article ,
Gig 601Xl Builder wrote:

I'm hardly a military basher but in this case the civilian pilot did try
to see an avoid and that is what caused the problem. He was listening to
his TCAS and doing what it said. The F16 pilot should have realized this
when the civilian started maneuvering and broken off the intercept.

It seems the USAF agrees with this and hence are spanking the F16 pilot
and changing training methods.

I would have thought the circa 1998 intercept of an airliner off the NJ coast,
with the resulting RAs and complaints, would have resulted in appropriate
training wrt airplanes with TCAS.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

Bob Noel writes:

I would have thought the circa 1998 intercept of an airliner off the NJ coast,
with the resulting RAs and complaints, would have resulted in appropriate
training wrt airplanes with TCAS.

I'm sure people pretended that things would change then, too.