See & Avoid

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....................

This is not a new problem. I remember 25 years ago an article in Rotor &
Wing about a local group of helicopter pilots somewhere (news gathering,
police, air evac) sitting down and formalizing the priorities,
altitudes, direction of orbit, etc. for arrival on the scene of whatever
they were covering. To the best of my knowledge, they were the only ones
who did it. I ask one of the local news pilots where I live if the local
pilots were going to get together and for such a pact. His response was
that his station wouldn't agree to anything like that.

Ol Shy & Bashful wrote:
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 Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:00:19 -0400, john smith wrote
in :

His response was that his station wouldn't agree to anything like that.

Perhaps they'd agree to put a third person, a journalist, aboard to
relieve the pilot from the burden of trying to do the reporting while
s/he maintains situational awareness and complies with the
see-and-avoid regulations. Just a thought.

In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:

His response was that his station wouldn't agree to anything like that.

Perhaps they'd agree to put a third person, a journalist, aboard to
relieve the pilot from the burden of trying to do the reporting while
s/he maintains situational awareness and complies with the
see-and-avoid regulations. Just a thought.

Perhaps it would be better to make that third person the idiot who wouldn't
agree to coordinating with the other stations.

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

Do you believe that there are times when 'see and avoid' has its limitations
and does not work?

Hilton


"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....................

"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 Jul 31, 4:00 pm, john smith wrote:
This is not a new problem. I remember 25 years ago an article in Rotor &
Wing about a local group of helicopter pilots somewhere (news gathering,
police, air evac) sitting down and formalizing the priorities,
altitudes, direction of orbit, etc. for arrival on the scene of whatever
they were covering. To the best of my knowledge, they were the only ones
who did it. I ask one of the local news pilots where I live if the local
pilots were going to get together and for such a pact. His response was
that his station wouldn't agree to anything like that.

Ol Shy & Bashful wrote:



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 -

My experience is pretty old so I dont know how current it is...butwhen
I was in grad school I helped install the avionics on the helo of a
major news channel in ATL. They started out flying with a helo pilot,
a camera tech, Heather the Helicopter Bunny and an engineer. I was
trying to bum rotor wing time so sometimes I did that and babysat the
equipment that was still (then) pretty new.

That worked pretty good, but there was absolutly no coordination
between the three news choppers. The news choppers could and would
coordinate with all the official vehicles and of course ATC, but the
only coordination was between the pilots and it was essentially off
the record.

Eventually I moved on to something else and Heather the Helo babe was
replaced with a "Pilot reporter" and a camera person. The PR "Bruce
the sky pilot" also like to think he was an engineer so eventually
even the station engineer left the helo.

I think that they are now all essentially two people flights.

That was actually (when Iwas riding) some fun. Heather the helo babe
was quite cool and we use to have all sorts of fun for the hour and
one half that we were "up and on call"...nothing like stopping at the
Varsity for some chili cheese dogs...

Robert

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:03:09 -0700, "Hilton" wrote
in :

Do you believe that there are times when 'see and avoid' has its limitations
and does not work?

There is little question that when the 250 knot speed restriction
below 10,000' is not followed, see-and-avoid is an unreasonable method
of separating aircraft:
http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief2.asp?...A028A &akey=1

On Jul 31, 3:25 pm, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:00:19 -0400, john smith wrote
in :

His response was that his station wouldn't agree to anything like that.

Perhaps they'd agree to put a third person, a journalist, aboard to
relieve the pilot from the burden of trying to do the reporting while
s/he maintains situational awareness and complies with the
see-and-avoid regulations. Just a thought.

Unfortunately, that would cost $$$ and station managers hate spending $
$$...

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ
www.pbase.com/flyingphotog

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....................