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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
On Feb 11, 9:58*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Tom De Moor writes: Then you live not in a technical world. True. I live in the real world. No you don't. Do you turn your head to look out the SIDE window on MSFS. Answer NO. In the split second you turn your head to look out the the side window to look at the airport environment (I.E wind sock), some NORDO plane COULD fill up your windscreen. Pray tell, how do you prevent a mid air in that situation? |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
On Feb 10, 3:59*pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
Correction! I wrote: If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, ~99% of GA aircraft fatalities would still happen. That should be ~97%, not ~99%. Corrected number below. From Nall Report analysis of U.S. NTSB records: Total fixed wing GA fatalities: 2002: * 518 2003: * 555 2004: * 510 2005: * 491 2006: * 488 Total: 2562 Fatalities due to midair collision: 2002: * * 5 There were 9 fatalities, not 5. There were 5 accidents yielding fatalities, not 5 fatalities. My misread. 2003: * * 7 Should be 23. 2004: * * 6 Should be 10. 2005: * * 5 Should be 14. 2006: * * 4 Should be 9. Total: * 27 Should be 65. http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/03nall.pdf http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/04nall.pdf http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/05nall.pdf http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/06nall.pdf http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/07nall.pdf- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Jim, Does this factor in that there may have been more then one fatality in an occurance? For example using simple numbers, if you had 100 planes and 3 accidents that lead to 9 fatalities that would be 3 percent fatality rate based on takeoffs. (97 percent safety rating) Second example, if you had 100 planes and 1 accident that had 9 people in the plane, you would have a 1 percent fatality rate based on takeoffs. (99 percent safety rating) I am not sure what the survival rate in a mid air is but to assume everybody died in a mid air would be statistically incorrect if you had survivors in any of your cites. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
On Feb 10, 4:15*pm, cavelamb wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote: cavelamb writes: Exactly HOW do you think you can prevent ANY midair? Training, standardization, caution, discipline, and other techniques can greatly reduce the incidence of midair collisions. Well, if you have been following the other posts in this thread you'd understand that they already ARE doing just that. -- Richard Lambhttp://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb/ "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop, at late or early hour... Now is the only time you own. Live, love, toil with a will. Place no faith in time. *For the clock may soon be still." Not only doing it but have done it down to the point of not only _diminishing_ returns but almost zero additional benefit. Harry K |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
On Feb 10, 4:57*am, brian whatcott wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote: Jim Logajan writes: If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, ~99% of GA aircraft fatalities would still happen. If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, 27 people would still be alive, based on your own cited statistics. Is saving lives not a sufficient justification for eliminating midair collisions? Is there are threshold of deaths below which efforts to eliminate midair collisions are not justified? What cost is there in attempting to eliminate midair collisions that offsets the loss of life that they entail? If the US road speed limit were reduced from 70 to 65 mph, perhaps 30,000 lives would be saved annually. Isn't that worthwhile? * We have apparently decided NOT. Brian W Unsupported assertion even noting the weasel words. Basic fact. Speed does not kill, speed differential kills and highway design has, and continues, to eliminate as much differential as possible. Unfortunately, noone has been able to design a way to insure all drivers operate a vehicle reasonably. Harry K |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
wrote in message
... Jim, Does this factor in that there may have been more then one fatality in an occurance? For example using simple numbers, if you had 100 planes and 3 accidents that lead to 9 fatalities that would be 3 percent fatality rate based on takeoffs. (97 percent safety rating) Second example, if you had 100 planes and 1 accident that had 9 people in the plane, you would have a 1 percent fatality rate based on takeoffs. (99 percent safety rating) I am not sure what the survival rate in a mid air is but to assume everybody died in a mid air would be statistically incorrect if you had survivors in any of your cites. -------------begin new post--------------- I don't recall the cite, but have read that a very high percentage of mid air collisions are actually fender benders. It is not at all unusual for both of the accident aircraft to land safely. Peter |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
On Feb 11, 11:15*am, "Peter Dohm" wrote:
wrote in message ... Jim, Does this factor in that there may have been more then one fatality in an occurance? For example using simple numbers, if you had 100 planes and 3 accidents that lead to 9 fatalities that would be 3 percent fatality rate based on takeoffs. (97 percent safety rating) Second example, if you had 100 planes and 1 accident that had 9 people in the plane, you would have a 1 percent fatality rate based on takeoffs. *(99 percent safety rating) I am not sure what the survival rate in a mid air is but to assume everybody died in a mid air would be statistically incorrect if you had survivors in any of your cites. -------------begin new post--------------- I don't recall the cite, but have read that a very high percentage of mid air collisions are actually fender benders. *It is not at all unusual for both of the accident aircraft to land safely. Peter Peter, You bring out a good point that I didn't even consider. I just figured the worst case scenario So, if this is the case, then pretty good chance his 99 percent of GA fatal accidents sans mid air would be right? |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
On Feb 11, 11:21*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Yes, if I need to watch for traffic. You have a monitor at your 9 and 3 oclock to turn your head to look out the window?? Post a picture of your MSFS setup or you just spewing your typical bull again. Using arrow keys to turn the view of MSFS is NOT turning your head. Digital cameras are cheap and plenty of free picture hosting sites. You have a website, put it on your website. In the split second you turn your head to look out the the side window to look at the airport environment (I.E wind sock), some NORDO plane COULD fill up your windscreen. Highly unlikely if your situational awareness is good. WRONG. Did you read the NORDO part. I don't hear him talking on the radio, how can I be situationally aware? Oh, I forgot, you don't have NORDO traffic on MSFS. Pray tell, how do you prevent a mid air in that situation? See above. See above. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
On Feb 11, 1:36*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes: No, I have a control that lets me swing the view in either direction. I usually only look for traffic when it is pointed out to me or when I see something on TCAS, since sim traffic is very light. Translation YOU DON"T FLY IN THE REAL WORLD. Try flying at KMBO with 4 school planes in the pattern as well as NORDO CAF planes working the pattern. And I fly a lot IFR, in which case I can't see traffic, anyway. You DON"T FLY IFR. YOU SIMULATE FLYING IFR in MSFS. Do the best you can. *Look for other traffic, and listen to the radio. What part do you not understand. YOU DON"T HEAR NORDO traffic. Again I ask, please answer the question I ASKED ON MY FIRST RESPONSE TO YOU. In the split second you turn your head to look out the the side window to look at the airport environment (I.E wind sock), some NORDO plane COULD fill up your windscreen. Pray tell, how do you prevent a mid air in that situation? ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOVE. HOW DO YOU PREVENT A MID AIR in that situation. YOUR RADIO IS USELESS. and YOU CAN"T be situationally aware on something you didn't see or hear!!! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mid Air Collisions | Sukumar Kirloskar | Soaring | 2 | July 3rd 08 02:42 PM |
FAA Soaring Forecasts being eliminated? | David Neptune | Soaring | 6 | July 15th 06 05:47 AM |
Kids and Aviation records. I thought these were supposed to be eliminated. | Roger Halstead | Piloting | 2 | September 27th 04 07:20 PM |
Mid-Air Collisions | JJ Sinclair | Soaring | 26 | April 19th 04 08:52 AM |
MID AIR COLLISIONS | Vorsanger1 | Soaring | 2 | April 16th 04 04:17 AM |