172/Dutchess Near Miss

This popped up in my FB feed. Its old but its the first time I've seen it. I did some searching but I didn't find a thread on it here.

 

Unicom, uh, yeah, could you have a pair of clean underwear ready for me when I land?

 

Apparently this was a towered airport. 172 guy was student on first solo. Tower told him he was number 3 to land. He saw one of the other two turn base to final, told tower he had the traffic and kind of stopped looking for the other one.

 

Ooh...his first wake turbulence encounter, too!

 

Classic high wing under and low wing over. Had a few scares like that myself. They've become far less common with the advent of ADSB.

 

So true. You never see the close calls when you are looking at an iPad.

 

No, you get forewarned that aircraft are in your vicinity. You should try it some time, instead of being a luddite.

 

Low wing, high wing. Blind to each other. Bad juju.

 

At least he was passing on the left ...

 

Very true. Last weekend I noticed someone my altitude heading towards me after a glance at the tablet. I turned right a little, and eventually saw him a mile off.
I also recognize not everyone out here will have ADSB, as there's only three bits of airspace here where it's required, so I still look for traffic.

 

You should always look for traffic as if its out there not squawkin' or talkin'. I don't think anyone disputes that. And I'm pretty sure those who poo poo ADSB still glance down at regular intervals to verify their airspeed and altitude.

It baffles my mind that they can do that and not have an issue with it but feel that hearing an alarm and glancing down at a screen for 1.5 seconds to see that the potential conflict is in close at your 1 o clock moving toward you and then looking outside at that exact portion of the sky to find said traffic is somehow more dangerous than blindly scanning a full 180+ degrees of sky constantly while still glancing inside at regular intervals to make sure you're still somewhere close to being on altitude and course.

 

Anyone that talks down the saftey benefit of ADS-B either hasn't used it, or has a hatred of progress

 

Or has personally witnessed people who over use it as if they are playing flight simulator.

 

Interesting choice of words.

 

Or a sense of humor.

 

I do get that. Like all aspects of aviation, this is a tool that needs to be used properly. But I've seen lots of posts over the past few years from people asserting that the technology is bad because someone out there has misused it. That's pretty foolish, it is an amazing safety aid. Probably the biggest single enhancement to aviation safety since GPS.

 

Seat belts are another amazing safety aid. Want to talk about mobile phone bans in automobiles causing safety.

There is technology, and there is legislation. Every time they are used in concert EVERYONE loses. Nothing foolish there.

 

Can't say I follow you here. Are you suggesting that there shouldn't be seatbelt laws, or laws against mobile phone distractions on the road? Should there not be mode-c transponder requirements in busy airspace? I doubt you'd argue for those things...

ADS-B is cheap (in airplane terms), effective, and a good example of the government actually getting something pretty right. All IMO of course..

-G

 

All in your opinion covers it all.

Seat belts make sense. No law needed. No one outside your vehicle will be impacted. (pun intended)
Distracted driving is bad. No law needed, but feel free to rip out the stereos, gps navigators, drive thru restaurants that ALSO lead to distracted driving while you're at it. Ah, but those are okay.
Transponders seemed to be doing their job without turning the plane into a video game.

But, those are just alternate opinions.

 

Oh I see, you actually are arguing that seatbelt laws are bad. Ok, at least we understand each other, but I suspect we won't agree on much beyond that. Thanks for the conversation though.

-G

 

In the words of Dalton, "Opinions vary."


I agree wholeheartedly with the assertion that adsb-in is a tremendous tool for safety, and that its worth for heightened awareness of traffic is enhanced by an increasingly larger percentage of the fleet equipping with adsb-out. There are plenty of aspects of adsb already discussed in other threads where many of us have pointed out where the government most assuredly did not get it right.

 

Seatbelt good. Law bad. How hard is that?

if you don’t want to avail yourself of a good thing it’s not for society to mandate it.

God forbid speed limits, perceived safety laws, are enforced, right?

 

It's not hard at all, I just disagree.

 

A good reminder of how Class D airports present special challenges, particularly if you're not aware that the controller's job is sequencing--not separation. Letting one's guard down and not using situational awareness to create a picture of the traffic in the area can be deadly.

 

Didn't realize ADS-B was required in class D. Good to know. You can all keep your eyes 100% inside now.

 

Some hate it because they don't like the idea of being tracked real time and then are concerned with someone finding out their address or location based on the info on flightaware and other sources.

I think it needs to be expanded. I know of guys that have moved just outside the Ohare mode c veil because they didn't want to install the ads-b out. Now the airport is so far away they don't fly nearly as often.

 

The biggest problem with ADS-B is the number of aircraft that don't have it.

 

Even bigger problem is the number of geese that do not have it...

 

Or seen it become a distraction when there’s 12 in the pattern and the alerts are constantly going off.

Most of them don’t have a reasonable implementation of a “shut up” button/mode for that scenario. They should.

Sterile cockpit, Computer George... I’m trying to listen to where the controller is putting everyone in this fustercluck.

 

I had a Bonanza overtake me directly overhead on final to KAPC, and it was much closer than that. Like maybe four or five feet. I had some words over the radio. I was cleared number 1. He was cleared number 2.

 

Luddites don't get flight following.

 

In the words of George Carlin

"Here's a phrase that apparently the airlines simply made up: near miss. They say that if 2 planes almost collide, it's a near miss. ********, my friend. It's a near hit! A collision is a near miss."

 

I had that same situation happen to me while flying to Casa Grande. The 182 flew from behind me at my 5 o'clock, directly under me and then entered the pattern lower and ahead of me. Although I started announcing 5 miles out and monitoring Unicom much further, I never heard a word from the Asian student until I said something on the radio in the downwind. "The 182 that just entered the downwind flew directly under me at about forty feet." No reply, no announcement about entering the downwind..nothing. As I was at the point of MY base turn still following the 182 on the downwind who decided to fly the bomber pattern, "Hey 182, you planning on turning base anytime soon?" An American voice quickly answered, "we're turning base now."

I haven't been back there since.

 

I made a stop there while I was in Tucson. Flew a practice approach in with ATC and as soon as they switched me over I hear someone asking if the plane on the approach is on the radio. I answered yes and he gave me some crap about not following protocol for the airport.

Then the same guy, I presume an instructor came on no less than three times to ***** at someone for making their calls too long and tying up the frequency. He tied up the frequency more than they did. I told him to mind his own business and his reply was “it is my business”. Gotta love instructors using the radio to teach good radio etiquette.

I’ll definitely avoid that place in the future.

 

Sorry you had that experience while here Salty and sorry my shifts didn't coincide for a meet up. Casa Grande is a weird airport to fly into. The wind favors 23 yet you have a stack of students making ILS approaches to 5. I've rolled out on 23 to see another airplane short final to 5. It's a stupid way to fly, therefore I don't fly there. Its a shame because the gas prices are lower there than at Tucson.

 

I'm a guilty party as I've enjoyed ADSB "in" for a good while now.

I just ordered the ADSB "out" parts for my experimental aircraft. So It will be a few more days before I join the ranks of those that think it's great for safety but quite imposing on the right to privacy.

But I carry an iPhone that knows more about where I go and where I am than I do so what do I really have to complain about?

 

this part of training with instrument students is very deficient.. they'll make one radio call "on the VOR ALPHA practice approach" .. what the hell is that? Even a 20,000 hr IR pilot shouldn't be expected to have all the approaches memorized and ready when they're just doing a vfr burger run

Let's try "5 miles to the south, on a long final to rwy X, remaining above 1,500, then departing to the northwest when over the field" - at least now the others know what the hell you're doing