ATC Today

wsuffa

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
23,615
Location
DC Suburbs
Display Name

Display name:
Bill S.
OK, so I was flying along today IFR and I got an unusual request from ATC (Center). "Commander 2 Lima Bravo, do you have binoculars on board?"

Well, I don't carry binoculars... and it was an odd request...

"Negative, Center".

My curiosity was satisfied a few minutes later. "2 Lima Bravo, can you see the ground where you are?"

"Affirmative, clear with fery few clouds"

"OK, 2 Lima Bravo, there is an aircraft at your 1-2 o'clock, 4500 feet, and 10 miles that violated special use airspace. I need you to see if you can see the aircraft and read the N-Numbers on it"

I was at 15,000 feet.... I'd be lucky to see the aircraft, much less read the N-Numbers.

In the end, I never saw the aircraft, and I said so. ATC was appreciative.

Odd request, but heads up, folks.

bill
 
10+ miles away, handheld binocs, you'd be hard pressed to make out type let alone N#s... IF you could spot him... what'd they want you to do, make a strafing run on him?! (I would decline every time unless it was an a/c in trouble)
 
Actually, I do have a small pair of armored, and very nice, binocs that I carry in my flight bag that I used to carry in the service with me. Still, 10 miles???!!! Good grief, I'd need a telescope!

I've got a pair of cheaper binocs that have a digital camera built in. Maybe I could carry those, shoot a pic in the general direction, and let Big Brother see if they can enhance the result. :rofl:
 
I had a request from the tower once to look for an airplane if I broke out soon enough because, "We think we lost the airplane on the approach in front of you." Lost? Oh, he meant crashed, otherwise we wouldn't still be on the ILS approach in IMC with him also milling around up there (I hope). I never did see anything because it was almost dusk in light snow and I was concentrating on my own approach and landing. The NTSB tracked me down through the airplane number and my employer a few days later, though, to ask me various questions about the weather, visibility, icing and various other things.
 
Even if you did have the binos and could find him initially would you be able to hold him in your field of vision? I'll let Lance work the numbers but that other plane would be no bigger than a piece of dust on your lens and any little jiggle you'd lose him.
 
From 15,000 feet there was not a chance to see him at 4500. I suppose with image-satbalized lenses, it might have been possible, but...

OTOH, I do like to offer to help ATC in hopes of recpricol favors.
 
I've gone off course to report a few forest fires here in NJ, but I've never been asked for help.
 
Richard said:
Even if you did have the binos and could find him initially would you be able to hold him in your field of vision? I'll let Lance work the numbers but that other plane would be no bigger than a piece of dust on your lens and any little jiggle you'd lose him.

You rang?

Emperical testing says that a person with "20/20" distance vision can read with good accuracy when high contrast letters and numbers fill an angle of 4-5 arc-minutes. For 12" letters that would be close to 500 ft. With a 10,000 ft vertical separation, you'd need a magnification of at least 20 which is way beyond what could be held stable on the ground let alone in the air. Also you wouldn't be able to read the numbers from 500 ft above unless they were painted on the top rather than the side. At ten miles distant plus the 10K vertical you'd need 120x magnification if the airplane was heading directly across your view. And all this is assuming no loss of resolution due to haze and the refraction plus diffusion of your windows all of which would probably eliminate any possiblity of reading the numbers from that far if you were packing a spare Hubble.

Edit: that was supposed to be arc minutes not seconds. (1 arc-minute = 1/60 degree).
 
Last edited:
Joe Williams said:
Actually, I do have a small pair of armored, and very nice, binocs that I carry in my flight bag that I used to carry in the service with me. Still, 10 miles???!!! Good grief, I'd need a telescope!

I've got a pair of cheaper binocs that have a digital camera built in. Maybe I could carry those, shoot a pic in the general direction, and let Big Brother see if they can enhance the result. :rofl:

Several years ago someone brought a pair of expensive Nikon binos into my store for repair of a damaged focus-track. My repair service reported that it was BER - beyond economical repair. The customer said to, "junk 'em."
It seems that the focus-track is jammed at Infinity; y'all are ahead of me, aren't you? They're nearly perfect for the aircraft. If I need binos at a distance less than Infinity I should have flunked my SODA flight.

HR
 
lancefisher said:
You rang?

Emperical testing says that a person with "20/20" distance vision can read with good accuracy when high contrast letters and numbers fill an angle of 4-5 arcseconds. For 12" letters that would be close to 500 ft. With a 10,000 ft vertical separation, you'd need a magnification of at least 20 which is way beyond what could be held stable on the ground let alone in the air. Also you wouldn't be able to read the numbers from 500 ft above unless they were painted on the top rather than the side. At ten miles distant plus the 10K vertical you'd need 120x magnification if the airplane was heading directly across your view. And all this is assuming no loss of resolution due to haze and the refraction plus diffusion of your windows all of which would probably eliminate any possiblity of reading the numbers from that far if you were packing a spare Hubble.


This raises the question of the N number size. In the begining they were huge and painted on the wings. I don't know why this changed, but what if they FAA wants it changed back?
 
Why would we mind huge letters on the plane?

I can only think of two reasons:

1. Aesthetics (take that, spell check!)
2. Yahoos on the ground reporting "nuisance" flights that really aren't
 
This all raises an interesting question, one that I will again pose here for all to ponder.

Even if you could see that N number, would you want to report that person? Or would you be inclined to say "unable"?

If it was a minor airspace bust, who hasn't either done that or come close at some point? And been grateful that it is not that easy to grab you for it? You know, the 100 foot too low over a non-busy delta or clip the distant corner of some quiet class C?

In light of recent ADIZ events, I guess there are probably some safety violations or bad airspace violations for which I would be willing to turn informant. But for some minor bust, especially if it sounded like an accident to me, I think I would be inclined to not be able to read the number. Now, if it was some yahoo who tried to swap paint with me, or did something really stupid right on top of me, then... I guess I would

I have never been asked so far.

Opinions? Incidents that you all have had where this has come up?

Jim G
 
grattonja said:
This all raises an interesting question, one that I will again pose here for all to ponder.

Even if you could see that N number, would you want to report that person? Or would you be inclined to say "unable"?

If it was a minor airspace bust, who hasn't either done that or come close at some point? And been grateful that it is not that easy to grab you for it? You know, the 100 foot too low over a non-busy delta or clip the distant corner of some quiet class C?

In light of recent ADIZ events, I guess there are probably some safety violations or bad airspace violations for which I would be willing to turn informant. But for some minor bust, especially if it sounded like an accident to me, I think I would be inclined to not be able to read the number. Now, if it was some yahoo who tried to swap paint with me, or did something really stupid right on top of me, then... I guess I would

I have never been asked so far.

Opinions? Incidents that you all have had where this has come up?

Jim G

Hasn't been neccessary for me so far, but I see no reason or positive gain for any of us to protect obvious idiots. Protecting them is part of what's wrong with our whole society right now.
 
grattonja said:
This all raises an interesting question, one that I will again pose here for all to ponder.

Even if you could see that N number, would you want to report that person? Or would you be inclined to say "unable"?

If it was a minor airspace bust, who hasn't either done that or come close at some point? And been grateful that it is not that easy to grab you for it? You know, the 100 foot too low over a non-busy delta or clip the distant corner of some quiet class C?

In light of recent ADIZ events, I guess there are probably some safety violations or bad airspace violations for which I would be willing to turn informant. But for some minor bust, especially if it sounded like an accident to me, I think I would be inclined to not be able to read the number. Now, if it was some yahoo who tried to swap paint with me, or did something really stupid right on top of me, then... I guess I would

I have never been asked so far.

Opinions? Incidents that you all have had where this has come up?

Jim G

I'd turn 'em in if I could. Every day, we all run the risk of being grounded by such pilots. Times have changed, and I don't want to be grounded by pilots who can't comply with basic rules. If it's truly minor, they'll get the retraining they need, and we'll all be better off for it.
 
Back
Top