F16 vs Cessna 150 collision

Discussion in 'Hangar Talk' started by DaveA, Jul 7, 2015.

  1. Velocity173

    Velocity173 Final Approach PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    8,506
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Velocity173
    The real question is why the controller chose to try a vector the F-16 at such close proximity in the first place. The fist traffic call at 3.25 miles with "CA CA" going off should have been a safety alert and not a normal traffic call. Not to mention, I would have liked to have seen a normal traffic call well before that.

    Actions I'm sure the NTSB will report, but nothing I'd consider gross negligence on the controller's part.
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2017
  2. UngaWunga

    UngaWunga Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2014
    Messages:
    1,133
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    UngaWunga
    This is an important point. It's much more important to keep the radio tuned to the local airport when still in the area than it is to call for FF. I do the same thing. I keep on the local airport frequency until out of the area. I'm MUCH more likely to have a conflict with another flight in/out of the local airport than I am a military jet flying though the same airspace at 3 times my speed.

    Flying out of my home base, we often have to keep an eye out for the KC130 refueling tankers flying pattern laps at the local National Guard base. But ATC keeps them at least 3K' over our field, and they're HUGE compared to a F16. A little easier to see. It would be very disconcerting to see one of them overfly the field at 1600'.

    When I went to a See & Avoid seminar at KPSM, where they also have a National Guard base, they talked about some of the low level routes they used to do through the NH mountains. One route they used went right over a small GA airport at pattern altitude. That got changed after the pilots at that airfield complained.
     
  3. EvilEagle

    EvilEagle Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Messages:
    1,095
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    EvilEagle
    There's nothing in any USAF regulation that would support doing a maximum performance turn at the behest of a controller. If we are on an IFR plan and we get a vector, we turn as if in the weather - usually with the AP on. If there is inflection in the controllers voice and if they say traffic alert, etc it's up to the pilot to decide how to expedite the turn. There's nothing ATC could say to me other than "there's a mountain off your nose for less than a mile, climb NOW!" that would make me max perform my jet in IMC or in/out of clouds. ATC doesn't have anyway to know what a "maximum performance turn" is - it varies greatly based on configuration, speed, fuel weight, etc. Any controller that thinks "turn south immediately" will get a max performance turn while in IMC/IFR flight plan is mistaken.

    As stated, that is normal operating speeds for fighter traffic. 250 is actually slow for us - by regulation we can't get below 230 until we fully configure in the Eagle.
     
    KA550 likes this.
  4. 35 AoA

    35 AoA Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    Messages:
    1,191
    Location:
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    35 AoA
    I don't blame the Cessna pilot either, but I think there are some (understandable) misconceptions here about the reality of flying an instrument approach in a single seat fighter jet. Most have been highlighted, all I would say is that it is a somewhat different experience, and it can be a lot more task saturating depending on conditions/approach than the same in a more properly configured civilian multi piloted aircraft which was built to operate from pt A to pt B shooting precision approaches to mins. These things were designed to drop bombs and shoot missiles, everything else is just an afterthought……..an often poorly implemented one at that.
     
  5. Velocity173

    Velocity173 Final Approach PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    8,506
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Velocity173
    At Bagram the F-15Es used to come in to land hot. Wasn't until a couple years latter when I read a Flying article, I think the pilot said they were landing at 210 indicated. At 5,000 PA and temps in the summer, I can only imagine how high their touchdown speed was.
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2016
  6. timwinters

    timwinters Touchdown! Greaser! PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
    Messages:
    11,394
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    X
    Understood, you guys gotta do what you gotta do, but transitioning thru an airport environment (i.e. w/i 5 miles of a field) at those speeds within 500' of TPA seems quite reckless. There's an article over at AOPA right now about this crash and it looks like they impacted exactly 3 miles from the MKS runway.

    I remember Bobby ( @Graueradler ) telling me about the issues he used to have with C130s when he managed RUE. They'd fly in herds right thru the TP IIRC. Caused havoc, and those are slow movers.

    Edit: I fully understand that it was the controller who put the F16 inside the airport environment. There were a lot of bad assumptions and decisions made by the controller who was at least 75% responsible for this tragedy IMO.
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2016
  7. mscard88

    mscard88 Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2015
    Messages:
    16,771
    Location:
    Alabama
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    Everyone has their opinion, I'm out. :mad2:
     
  8. Cavorter

    Cavorter Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2014
    Messages:
    160
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Robert
    Who cares what these POA "experts" have to say. :D Treat it as entertainment value only.

    I just read through the NTSB report. Very interesting and sad. Like so many accidents it looks like it was the combination of several factors (including bad luck for example the wing strut obscuring the view of the 150 pilot until the last second).
     
    mscard88 likes this.
  9. mscard88

    mscard88 Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2015
    Messages:
    16,771
    Location:
    Alabama
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
  10. Velocity173

    Velocity173 Final Approach PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    8,506
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Velocity173
    Similar to the NTSB report, they put most of the blame on the controller. Should've done a safety alert earlier with a climb vs a mandatory turn at the last minute.

    They mention the vector passed MKS as a contributing factor. While not the best place to take a 250 kt fighter, that sort of thing is going to happen. Just down the road at NBC, you've got two airports (HXD & ARW) located in close proximity to common approach paths into the air station. Aircraft pass those fields going 250-400 kts between 1500-3000 ft. The PAR at the air station for rwy 32 goes right over ARW at 1500 ft. There's risk involved in that but it's acceptable. Like MTRs (IR-18 & VR-1040) that go in close proximity to uncontrolled fields. You just got to be on the lookout for fast movers.
     
  11. ircphoenix

    ircphoenix Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2016
    Messages:
    2,364
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, CA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    ircphoenix
    Seems to follow with the previous comments that the controller vectored the F-16 directly into the 150. Ouch.
     
  12. Sac Arrow

    Sac Arrow Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 11, 2010
    Messages:
    14,165
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Eight Balla
  13. Checkout_my_Six

    Checkout_my_Six Final Approach

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Messages:
    6,912
    Location:
    Maryland
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Check_my_Six
    Not the first time for that.....:(
     
  14. Joshuajayg

    Joshuajayg Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2015
    Messages:
    901
    Location:
    'Merica
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Joshua
    Of all people, I think mscard88 knows this. He is the master of opinions and entertainment on POA. Am I right or am I right, @mscard88 ?
     
    mscard88 likes this.
  15. mscard88

    mscard88 Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2015
    Messages:
    16,771
    Location:
    Alabama
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    You you mean POA isn't the gospel truth? I'm so confused.... ;) :D
     
  16. Clark1961

    Clark1961 Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    Messages:
    15,652
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Throttle
    You just think you're confused...
     
    mscard88 likes this.
  17. Kiddo's Driver

    Kiddo's Driver Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,400
    Location:
    Fayetteville, TN
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jim
  18. Anthony

    Anthony Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    18,611
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Anthony
    Maybe I missed it but what happened to the F-16 pilots? Was he held partially responsible? It sounds like it was ATC all the way, but they did throw in that the aircraft should have used equipment on board to avoid the collision. I'm assuming they mean the F-16's radar, or IFF?
     
  19. Fearless Tower

    Fearless Tower Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2010
    Messages:
    13,681
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Fearless Tower
    You'll likely never know. Unless the pilot was an O5 or above, or unit CO, you are unlikely to ever see the results of any punitive action.
     
  20. Velocity173

    Velocity173 Final Approach PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    8,506
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Velocity173
    Most likely nothing to the pilot. The NTSB partially blamed the "inherent limitations of the see and avoid concept," on both pilots.

    The F-16 was using radar in search mode but AF personnel have stated it would likely not pick up a small, slow moving target. It's not known if the pilot had its IFF detection equipment on but even if it were, the report states it doesn't provide a precise location. Don't think either technology would have benefited the F-16 pilot in this accident. The NTSB does say that an in the cockpit display (TCAS), could have helped the F-16 pilot avoid the collision.

    A late traffic call followed by a bad safety alert and the pilots failing in the see and avoid concept.
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2017
    Hacker likes this.
  21. wsuffa

    wsuffa Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    21,034
    Location:
    DC Suburbs
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Bill S.
    Hmmm....

     
  22. Fearless Tower

    Fearless Tower Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2010
    Messages:
    13,681
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Fearless Tower
    Scary Mary has a new job.....
     
  23. Hacker

    Hacker Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2017
    Messages:
    116
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Hacker
    What leads you to believe that such equipment wasn't being used or, if it was, was being used improperly?
     
  24. SkyDog58

    SkyDog58 Final Approach

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2015
    Messages:
    7,600
    Location:
    Charlotte, NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    SkyDog58
    Yeah. She would not want me on a jury. I am afraid my bias against her would lead me to be unable to weigh the evidence impartially.
     
  25. 3393RP

    3393RP Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,312
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    3393RP
    Awww Jeez...she needs to go away. Every time I see her on TV I cringe, wondering what stupidity is about to escape from her mouth.
     
  26. JimNtexas

    JimNtexas Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,196
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jim - In Texas!
    If the F-16 radar is like that of other look-down-shoot-down radars then it may reject targets with less than ~80 knots of groundspeed.