KWVI Watsonville MId Air, Multiple Fatalities

All this talk of speeds at 3-5-10 miles out or at a controlled airport is completely irrelevant to this situation.
The one single issue here is the fact this guy was still doing 160mph, give or take, over the numbers as exemplified by the distance after impact, as well as the fact that the aircraft didn’t even slightly cartwheel to the left on impact but continued almost straight ahead for some distance.

The comment that if either of these pilots had been doing what they should have than this wouldn’t have happened, is coming from the same person saying that no regs were broken. Unfortunately it’s illogical to justify two opposing positions at the same time.
 
MauleSkinner said:
No, it works because the tower has a pretty good idea where the airplanes are. Lots of airplanes enter a tower-controlled airport pattern at 200 knots.
Click to expand...
I clearly stated a class D airport. I’ll pull up some info on aircraft in class D and post the percentage of 200kt plus people in the pattern.
I’ll give you a hint. It’s not even close to double digits
 
47PILOT said:
The one single issue here is the fact this guy was still doing 160mph, give or take, over the numbers as exemplified by the distance after impact, as well as the fact that the aircraft didn’t even slightly cartwheel to the left on impact but continued almost straight ahead for some distance.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can infer that much based on the distance after impact when witnesses describe the aircraft attempting to go around after the collision but then suddenly descending and bursting into flames, i.e. I don't think it was all post-impact inertia that got him there.
 
Lindberg said:
Oh no? 91.113(g) doesn't mention categories. Regardless, in this case, a glider pilot would have been just as dead as the 152 pilot.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. If the glider was announcing his position and intentions in the pattern the twin pilot should realize that he has to yield to the glider based on 91.113 (d)(2). Even without a radio, the glider still has the ROW and the twin has to remain clear.

(d) Converging. When aircraft of the same category are converging at approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly so), the aircraft to the other's right has the right-of-way. If the aircraft are of different categories -

(1) A balloon has the right-of-way over any other category of aircraft;

(2) A glider has the right-of-way over an airship, powered parachute, weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, or rotorcraft.

(3) An airship has the right-of-way over a powered parachute, weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, or rotorcraft. [/Quote)
Click to expand...
 
47PILOT said:
I clearly stated a class D airport. I’ll pull up some info on aircraft in class D and post the percentage of 200kt plus people in the pattern.
I’ll give you a hint. It’s not even close to double digits
Click to expand...
I clearly responded with Class D airports.

denial doesn’t change facts.
 
Last edited:
dbahn said:
Not necessarily. If the glider was announcing his position and intentions in the pattern the twin pilot should realize that he has to yield to the glider based on 91.113 (d)(2). Even without a radio, the glider still has the ROW and the twin has to remain clear.
Click to expand...
Why would a glider on base have ROW over an airplane on final?
 
Lindberg said:
Why would a glider on base have ROW over an airplane on final?
Click to expand...
Even an airplane on base doesn't have ROW over another airplane on final. A glider has its own ROW - for good reasons.
 
MauleSkinner said:
I clearly responded with Class D airports.

denial doesn’t change facts.
Click to expand...
Actually you didn’t.
Here is what you responded with. You used the general term “airspace” which could mean any air space some of which would accommodate faster aircraft.
I can include a screenshot if you like.

on a side note. Are you always such a tool or do you only make that accommodation on this board? That’s actually rhetorical FYI
 
47PILOT said:
Actually you didn’t.
Here is what you responded with. You used the general term “airspace” which could mean any air space some of which would accommodate faster aircraft.
I can include a screenshot if you like.
Click to expand...
Allow me…
MauleSkinner said:
No, it works because the tower has a pretty good idea where the airplanes are. Lots of airplanes enter a tower-controlled airport pattern at 200 knots.
Click to expand...

on a side note. Are you always such a tool or do you only make that accommodation on this board? That’s actually rhetorical FYI
Click to expand...
Only for people who continue to argue about things they don’t know.
 
dbahn said:
Even an airplane on base doesn't have ROW over another airplane on final.
Click to expand...
Correct because the specific, 91.113(g), takes precedence over the general, 91.113(d). If it didn't, then an airplane on right base would indeed have right of way over an airplane on final.
A glider has its own ROW - for good reasons.
Click to expand...
Except that 91.113(d), which gives gliders right of way over airplanes and others when converging (except head-on, or nearly so) doesn't apply when approaching to land (see above).

Wow. Talk about ROW. That one's not the slightest bit ambiguous.
Click to expand...
:sosp:
 
Lowflynjack said:
#2 A glider always has the right over an airplane.

91.113 Right-of-way rules: Except water operations.
(1) A balloon has the right-of-way over any other category of aircraft;
(2) A glider has the right-of-way over an airship, powered parachute, weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, or rotorcraft.
(3) An airship has the right-of-way over a powered parachute, weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, or rotorcraft.
Click to expand...
Not always. You snipped the important bit that comes right before that:

When aircraft of the same category are converging at approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly so), the aircraft to the other's right has the right-of-way. If the aircraft are of different categories -
Click to expand...

Nothing in 91.113 explicitly says that gliders always have right of way over an airplane.
 
Lindberg said:
Not always. You snipped the important bit that comes right before that:



Nothing in 91.113 explicitly says that gliders always have right of way over an airplane.
Click to expand...
How does “aircraft of the same category” apply to gliders and airplanes?
 
MauleSkinner said:
Allow me…



Only for people who continue to argue about things they don’t know.
Click to expand...
Same principle applies
Here is your quote
“I clearly responded with Class D airports”
As you so kindly highlighted above, that is in fact not how you responded.
Not arguing about things I don’t know, just making you aware of the incorrect statements your making
 
MauleSkinner said:
Beechjets, Hawkers, Falcons, and Citations that I’m directly aware of.
Click to expand...
Can you be more specific? I just looked at a couple Hawker's, Citatation's and Falcons and couldn't find one flying 200kts on short final. Are there some specific models of those jets which fly that fast in the airport area?
 
donjohnston said:
Can you be more specific? I just looked at a couple Hawker's, Citatation's and Falcons and couldn't find one flying 200kts on short final. Are there some specific models of those jets which fly that fast in the airport area?
Click to expand...
You guys are clearly reading things into my statements to suit your arguments, so have a nice day.
 
MauleSkinner said:
91.113(d) doesn’t exclude traffic patterns.
Click to expand...

Lindberg said:
So in a RH traffic pattern, an airplane on base has ROW over one on a longer final?
Click to expand...

MauleSkinner said:
No, but a glider has ROW over powered aircraft.
Click to expand...

Lindberg said:
Why?
Click to expand...

MauleSkinner said:
91.113(d)
Click to expand...
Help me make sense of this. If 91.113(d) does apply in traffic patterns, then an airplane on right base has right of way over an airplane on final. If 91.113(d) doesn't apply in traffic patterns, then a glider on base doesn't have right of way over an airplane on final.

If 91.113(d) only applies to gliders in the traffic pattern, where does it say that?

Or is the regulation ambiguous?
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Because it doesn’t have a ****ing engine. You can’t be seriously asking.

oh. And it’s explicit in the regulations.
Click to expand...
i'm actually confused now. regs only say lower aircraft has ROW. not sure i see anything that takes into account having an engine or not
 
A glider is not going to give you right of way whether you want it or not. In most cases, they couldn't if they wanted to.
 
donjohnston said:
Can you be more specific? I just looked at a couple Hawker's, Citatation's and Falcons and couldn't find one flying 200kts on short final. Are there some specific models of those jets which fly that fast in the airport area?
Click to expand...

I fly a slow jet and will often do 200ish on a visual approach but my Vref is in the 88 KT range so I have to get it slowed down as I get onto <2-3 mile final. It all depends on traffic and ATC expectations. I will not be anywhere near 200 KTS “in the pattern” because it would be very counterproductive as my turns would take up a lot more space and I wouldn’t get to the runway any faster. In the pattern, I’m usually around 130-150 KTS unless I need to slow to accommodate lighter traffic - which I am happy to do. But my straight wing jet is pretty flexible and it is easy for me to delay the slowdown from the arrival (often flown at 250 KIAS) to the final segment where I want to be at Vref + 20 or so. Swept wing jets have higher V speeds and need to be stabilized for longer periods on final.
 
Lindberg said:
Correct because the specific, 91.113(g), takes precedence over the general, 91.113(d). If it didn't, then an airplane on right base would indeed have right of way over an airplane on final.

Except that 91.113(d), which gives gliders right of way over airplanes and others when converging (except head-on, or nearly so) doesn't apply when approaching to land (see above).
Click to expand...
You’re reading things into the reg that aren’t there…specifically, 91.133(d) does not start out with “except as provided in paragraphs (e) through (g) below,” or similar, but it does specifically except paragraph (e) with different verbiage. therefore, gliders have the right of way over airplanes.

I will agree that the FAA SHOULD have written some exceptions…for instance, as written, Traffic entering the left downwind on a 45 has ROW over traffic on a left downwind, pretty much the opposite of what the FAA intends.

And the reg does conflict…as you indicated traffic on a right base has ROW over traffic on final, but the traffic on final also has ROW over the traffic on right base…nobody can land. If you want regs to cover every possible scenario clearly, you’d have Part 91 the size of Encyclopedia Brittanica.

But these conflicts are easily resolved by seeing and avoiding and exercising a modicum of judgment and courtesy.
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
You guys are clearly reading things into my statements to suit your arguments, so have a nice day.
Click to expand...
The ONLY thing that I'm reading is what was written. And what do you think my "argument" is?

MauleSkinner: Lots of airplanes enter a tower-controlled airport pattern at 200 knots.

Jeff Oslick: Really? Which ones?

MauleSkinner: Beechjets, Hawkers, Falcons, and Citations that I’m directly aware of.

Me: Can you be more specific? I just looked at a couple Hawker's, Citatation's and Falcons and couldn't find one flying 200kts on short final. Are there some specific models of those jets which fly that fast in the airport area?

To be fair, I did say "short final" and not "tower-controlled airport pattern". So I will apologize for that and re-ask the question because I couldn't find any of those flying 200kts on downwind, base or long final. I also don't know what the exact parameters of "tower-controlled airport pattern" are.
 
Salty said:
A glider is not going to give you right of way whether you want it or not. In most cases, they couldn't if they wanted to.
Click to expand...
I don't know about you, but I'm not fighting anyone for right of way even I'm flying a glider. In a glider, I'm a lot more vulnerable and flexible than some douche in a Bonanza screaming down final. If I have to, I can sidestep to the grass or the taxiway or the grass in between the taxiways. I can suck in the spoilers and land past him or throw them out and slip and land behind him. The only thing I can't do is go around. Of course I'm not going to offer any of those things, but if someone's clearly coming in regardless of my presence I'm going to do what I need to do and not fight over final while in the air.
 
Last edited:
Lindberg said:
Nothing in 91.113 explicitly says that gliders always have right of way over an airplane.
Click to expand...

LOL. I would love to be there when a person flying an airplane explains to the FAA why he refused to yield to a glider because it wasn't specific enough for him in the regulation, even though it actually is. Yikes.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Gliders are explicitly given right away over other aircraft.
Click to expand...
but according to what? i don't disagree with you, if i come up against a glider in pretty much any situation i'm giving them the right of way because i have an engine and they don't. but from what i see they only have legal ROW when converging at the same altitude. for landing, the lower aircraft has ROW and it says nothing about engines or gliders or anything
 
MauleSkinner said:
You’re reading things into the reg that aren’t there…
Click to expand...
On the contrary, I am reading exactly what it says.
specifically, 91.133(d) does not start out with “except as provided in paragraphs (e) through (g) below,” or similar, but it does specifically except paragraph (e) with different verbiage. therefore, gliders have the right of way over airplanes.
Click to expand...
You are correct that 91.113(d) doesn't except (e) though (g), it's even more restrictive than that. By its own terms, 91.113(d), applies only "[w]hen aircraft [] are converging at approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly so) . . . ." Now, when one aircraft is on base and another is on a longer final, they are converging at approximately the same altitude and are not head-on or nearly so. So does 91.113(d) apply? No, it doesn't because of the doctrine of statutory construction called lex specialis. The specific provision governs over the general. And 91.113(g) is a more specific provision that governs aircraft approaching an airport to land. That's why 91.113(d)'s provision regarding aircraft of the same category doesn't apply and why its provisions regarding aircraft of different categories doesn't either. There's no principle of statutory construction that would have only 91.113(d)(2) override 91.113(g).

Still disagree? Then how do you apply 91.113(e) & (f) to gliders? Can a glider run over slower airplanes from behind with impunity? Can it hold course and play chicken with a head-on airship?

But these conflicts are easily resolved by seeing and avoiding and exercising a modicum of judgment and courtesy.
Click to expand...
And that's what 91.113(b) says.
 
Lindberg said:
On the contrary, I am reading exactly what it says.

You are correct that 91.113(d) doesn't except (e) though (g), it's even more restrictive than that. By its own terms, 91.113(d), applies only "[w]hen aircraft [] are converging at approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly so) . . . ." Now, when one aircraft is on base and another is on a longer final, they are converging at approximately the same altitude and are not head-on or nearly so. So does 91.113(d) apply? No, it doesn't because of the doctrine of statutory construction called lex specialis. The specific provision governs over the general. And 91.113(g) is a more specific provision that governs aircraft approaching an airport to land. That's why 91.113(d)'s provision regarding aircraft of the same category doesn't apply and why its provisions regarding aircraft of different categories doesn't either. There's no principle of statutory construction that would have only 91.113(d)(2) override 91.113(g).

Still disagree? Then how do you apply 91.113(e) & (f) to gliders? Can a glider run over slower airplanes from behind with impunity? Can it hold course and play chicken with a head-on airship?

And that's what 91.113(b) says.
Click to expand...
Good news is, the FAA gets to interpret their regs however they want. Maybe asking them those questions would be more productive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top