A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Riddle me this, pilots



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old August 19th 03, 09:48 PM
Tom S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Chip Jones" wrote in message
...
This kind of turn can be be counter intuitive to the pilots involved.


Yet in high speed driving school (i.e., Bondurant) they teach you to swerve
BEHIND a car coming across your path. Most drivers will just slam on the
brakes. In fact, in most every situation the vast majority of drivers will
just slam on the brakes rather than maneuver out of the way. It's the
hardest habit the driving instructors have to break (pardon the pun).





Ads
  #52  
Old August 19th 03, 11:42 PM
Michael
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Chip Jones" wrote
In the most professionally bored voice I can muster, I key up and say "Baron
123, traffic alert, traffic two o'clock, two miles converging from the right
indicating 7000, suggest you turn right heading 180 immediately." The Baron
pilot says "We're turning left to 090, no contact."
Given this traffic scenario, would any of you guys have followed my
suggestion to turn to a 180 heading, or was I wasting my breath?


Personally, I've had one of those "Immediately" calls in my life. Two
miles, converging, altitude indicates 4200 (I was IFR at 4000, in and
out of the tops). The controller suggested I descend. Instead I
climbed, figuring I could be out of the tops in just a couple of
seconds and avoid the guy visually. It was the right call - I spotted
and avoided him. My feeling was that if we crashed, I wasn't going to
have to worry about it, and if we didn't, I would claim emergency
authority. I'm betting the Baron pilot figured something similar.

Your explanation makes sense - it explains why turning into the
traffic is reasonable and not nearly as crazy as it initially sounds.
Not having a sailing background, it's the first time I've heard it.

I suspect I would have done exactly what the Baron pilot did - make a
diving left turn. A Baron is way faster than almost anything that's
going to be flying around VFR not talking to anyone, so turning away
and diving still seems like the best plan. I can certainly see what
the Baron pilot was thinking.

Michael
  #53  
Old August 19th 03, 11:49 PM
Mark Evans
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

This whole thread brings back a memory from almost 20 YA. I was training for
my CFII so I was in the right seat of the c172, the "student" was in the
left, and my instructor was in the back.
We were shooting practice approaches at TOI. That day there was a broken
layer at the IAF alt. (2100') so we where in and out of IMC. We had just
shoot one of the published approaches, and where getting vectors for the
other approach when ATC vectored us with a left turn, seconds after
finishing the turn a light twin pops out of a cloud at our 10 o'clock,
flashes in front of us from left to right, with feet to spare. The "student"
was so lucky, he was under the hood and never saw anything, me? My hands
still sweat when I think or talk about it. We reported the near miss to ATC
and they had negative contact with the other plane. I am probably the most
non violent person I know, but if I ever found out who that was I swear I'd
beat the **** out of him.

Mark {still wary of cumulo-aluminous} Evans


"Chip Jones" wrote in message
...
The other day, I had an air traffic situation I wanted to bounce off of

the
group. Those of you who don't know me, I'm a Center controller down here

in
Atlanta. Here's the deal.

I was working a Center departure sector mixing Atlanta terminal departures
of every ilk and kin with enroute overflight traffic north of metro

Atlanta.
The sector weather was typical summer MVFR down here- lots of convection,
hazy, hot, humid etc with building thunderstorms here and there impacting
the sector. I had received my briefing from the previous controller and

had
just assumed responsibility for the airspace. Part of my technique is to

do
one more quick traffic scan *after* I take over (while the previous
controller is still at hand) to ensure we didn't fumble a situation while

we
changed the guard.

I am working a Baron IFR at 7000 flying from Chattanooga TN to Charleston
SC, on course heading of about 110 or so. Doing my scan, I see he has an
IFR off the nose about 15 miles at 6000 and another IFR guy crossing from
the NE at 8000 and 20 miles, so he is separated. I notice additional
traffic for this guy, a VFR indicating 6600 about six miles south, heading
about 055 or so, converging with him. I ask the previous controller if
she had issued traffic, she said she hadn't.

I made the traffic call.. "Baron 123, VFR traffic one to two o'clock, six
miles, northeast bound converging, altitude indicates six thousand six
hundred." The response I get is "Baron 123 is IMC, no contact."

I make a few unrelated routine calls to other traffic, keeping an eye on
this VFR target. His Mode C indicates that he is in a climb, and the
conflict alert activates (both data blocks begin to flash). I make

another
call at four miles. "Baron 123, your traffic now two o'clock, four miles,
northeast bound, altitude indicating six thousand niner hundred VFR,
converging right to left." The Baron responds "123 is IMC, no contact."
The situation now has my undivided attention.

At three miles converging (next update), the traffic is indicating 7000.
The next update, the traffic is still at 7000. This guy is flying VFR

where
one of my IFR's is IMC. I swing into alert mode. The target slashes are

a
mile long each and the radar display is delayed a bit from actual position
so these guys are getting close and closing fast. The Baron needs to yank
it right most ricky tic and get behind this guy.

In the most professionally bored voice I can muster, I key up and say

"Baron
123, traffic alert, traffic two o'clock, two miles converging from the

right
indicating 7000, suggest you turn right heading 180 immediately." The

Baron
pilot says "We're turning left to 090, no contact." I then watch as the
Baron swings into a left turn, prolonging the collision vector another
minute. His left turn away from the traffic puts him wing high with

closing
traffic off the right side. The Baron also descends four hundred feet
during the maneuver as the targets merge. To me, this looks remarkably

like
a TCAS maneuver because of the altitude change. I key up and say "N123,

are
you TCAD equipped, do you have traffic avoidance avionics?" He gives me a
curt "Negative, we do not have the traffic." The targets have merged

thanks
to the left turn, and I cannot distinguish the one from the other.

Anything
I say now about the traffic would be a dangerous guess because I have lost
the flick between these two aircraft. Instead of responding to the Baron,

I
issue a vector to the IFR traffic at 6000 to get him away from Baron 123
(who is now well below assigned IFR altitude). At the next position

update,
I have tail to tail between the baron and the VFR. I tell the Baron,
"Traffic no factor, maintain 7000." He responds "We never saw him..."

[The
unknown SOB in the VFR remains at 7000 for the next fifty miles- his

profile
never changed and I have every reason to believe that he never saw the

IFR,
IMC Baron].

My question for the group is about the Baron pilot's decision to disregard
my suggestion to yank it towards the traffic and instead to turn away from
him. From a controller's perspective, the quickest way to achieve "Oh

Sh*t"
lateral separation with crossing traffic is to aim one airplane right at

the
other. The idea is that as both aircraft are moving through space, the
maneuvering aircraft is steering for a point where the traffic *used* to

be
but no longer is. Once the nose of the turning aircraft swings through

his
traffic's vector, every additional second buys additional separation.

When
we do this with IFR traffic, we call this a "Wimpy Crossover" or a "Bubba
Turn". If an aircraft turns away from conflicting crossing traffic, every
additional second of turn sees the targets get closer until either they
merge or else they *finally* get to the point of course divergence. The
closer the targets are when an away turn is initiated, the less effective

an
"away" turn is.

Given this traffic scenario, would any of you guys have followed my
suggestion to turn to a 180 heading, or was I wasting my breath?

Chip, ZTL








----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet

News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000

Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption

=---


  #54  
Old August 20th 03, 12:01 AM
Gary L. Drescher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Chip Jones" wrote in message
...
In the most professionally bored voice I can muster, I key up and say

"Baron
123, traffic alert, traffic two o'clock, two miles converging from the

right
indicating 7000, suggest you turn right heading 180 immediately."


A question just occurred to me, Chip. Might it not get a slightly quicker
response from the pilot if your voice sounded urgent rather than
professionally-bored? This is a human-factors question that I don't know
the answer to, but it seems plausible that an urgent tone would be helpful,
especially for the typical low-time pilot who has read about traffic alerts
but never actually received one before.

By the same token, if I get momentarily overloaded when flying IFR, I
usually avoid trying to affect an unflustered tone when I talk to ATC
(though I still try to be clear and concise, of course). Pride aside, I
figure it's better if they can tell that I'm having a little difficulty
keeping up.

--Gary


  #55  
Old August 20th 03, 12:32 AM
Roy Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Gary L. Drescher" wrote:
A question just occurred to me, Chip. Might it not get a slightly quicker
response from the pilot if your voice sounded urgent rather than
professionally-bored?


One of the most imporant things in a crisis is to stay calm, and to
project an aura of calmness so others do the same. Once you let your
voice start to show emotion, it's all over.

Didn't you ever see Apollo-13? The whole damn spaceship is falling
apart around them and they're doing their "Houston, we've got a problem"
thing in the same tone of voice they'd use to report what they had for
lunch.

This is a human-factors question that I don't know
the answer to, but it seems plausible that an urgent tone would be helpful


You're right, it is a human factors thing. There is a certain "calm,
cool, in command of the situation" persona that you want to project,
because that's what people react best to.

especially for the typical low-time pilot who has read about traffic alerts
but never actually received one before.


Quick lesson in ATC-speak. Words like "alert" and "immediately" are not
to be taken lightly.
  #57  
Old August 20th 03, 02:13 AM
Snowbird
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Peter R. wrote in message eds.com...

I believe he was referring to the stolen Cessna 182 thread, where the 182's
N number was N2504R. Sort of a funny scenario, having the stolen C182 be
involved in this thread, too.


Got it. Me dense.

Coulda been. Shoulda tracked that sucka.

Cheers,
Sydney
  #58  
Old August 20th 03, 02:16 AM
Snowbird
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stan Gosnell wrote in message ...

Any similarity between logic and government regulations is purely
coincidental and completely unintended. But if you ever see me heading for
another aircraft, please point me somewhere else, whatever phraseology you
can come up with that will satisfy 7110.65. If we have a midair, you'll be
down there blameless in the FAA's eyes, but I'll come back and haunt you.
;-)


Stan,

Doesn't this sound like a good title for a thriller?

"The Haunted Controller"

Best,
Sydney
  #59  
Old August 20th 03, 02:16 AM
Capt. Doug
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Steven P. McNicoll wrote in message Mercury-Atlas 7 was flown by Scott
Carpenter.


Yeah, he didn't like it when I called him a Chimpanzee either.

D. :-)


  #60  
Old August 20th 03, 02:16 AM
Capt. Doug
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Chip Jones wrote in message Good point, D. I've actually seen a talking
Jackass work an ATC sector down here, now that you mention it. :-)

Seems to happen everytime I request direct to OKK from JOHNN. :-)

D. (pilots vs. controllers- what a softball game that would be!)


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 03:26 PM
Bush Pilots Fly-In. South Africa. Bush Air Home Built 0 May 25th 04 06:18 AM
Any Pitts S-1 pilots in this group? Kai Glaesner Aerobatics 4 April 12th 04 12:10 AM
Photographer seeking 2 pilots / warbirds for photo shoot Wings Of Fury Aerobatics 0 February 26th 04 06:59 PM
Pilot's Brains Develop Differently Badwater Bill Home Built 3 August 22nd 03 04:48 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2021 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.