Near miss on final video

MAKG1 said:
It's not THAT hard. With a procedure turn, the approach plate has a "remain within XX miles of YY" notation (which might be the airport, or a navaid or fix), and a final approach course.

And if the distance isn't known due to task saturation, even just the direction and altitude is helpful. Even during the 180 of a procedure turn, you won't be THAT far off the cardinal direction.

"Podunk traffic puke green Bugsmasher 123XY south of the field at 3000 level, procedure turn inbound Podunk."

Even without the distance, you're level at 3000 and it's going to be a few minutes before you're close to the pattern.
Click to expand...
I don't personally find it hard either and never have any sort of issue giving a good position report, but, I'm not a low time instrument pilot that only does instruments once every couple months.

What I wrote is based on what I see as a flight instructor both teaching new students and performing instrument proficiency checks for instrument rated pilots. Many of them struggle big time giving a good position report, and I certainly help them get better at it when I see that.

I hear a lot of instrument pilots give bad position reports and then hear VFR pilots getting upset about it, thinking the instrument pilot is just being lazy, when the reality is many of them are trying, but..they're not perfect...and neither are many of the VFR pilots I hear give equally terrible position reports.
 
Last edited:
steingar said:
I usually nicely ask for a position report in such circumstances. Given that I utter geek-speak to uncomprehending non pilots, I can't blame an IFR pilot from uttering geek-speak that is incomprehensible to me.
Click to expand...

Yea, but you gotta know your audience... If you are going into an uncontrolled airport on a beautiful VFR day...chances are you are talking to a lot of VFR pilots with no idea how to interpret your form of jibber-jab!
 
Last edited:
Stewartb said:
Radios are not required equipment in uncontrolled airspace. Use your eyes to see others. Make it easy for them to spot you. Don't assume other pilots have radios or know how to use them.
Click to expand...


I run the H.I.D. wingtip wigwags plus I'll pull the two L.E.D. landing lights and my plane is polished and red.

If they can't see me, they're blind. ;)
 
Stewartb said:
Every time I see a video on the internet I figure there's a good chance that it was orchestrated.
Click to expand...

I am at that stage too...

First time I see a U tube video my initial thought is " is it faked ? , and how easy would it be to rig the shot...:redface::redface::redface:
 
jesse said:
I don't personally find it hard either and never have any sort of issue giving a good position report, but, I'm not a low time instrument pilot that only does instruments once every couple months.

What I wrote is based on what I see as a flight instructor both teaching new students and performing instrument proficiency checks for instrument rated pilots. Many of them struggle big time giving a good position report, and I certainly help them get better at it when I see that.

I hear a lot of instrument pilots give bad position reports and then hear VFR pilots getting upset about it, thinking the instrument pilot is just being lazy, when the reality is many of them are trying, but..they're not perfect...and neither are many of the VFR pilots I hear give equally terrible position reports.
Click to expand...

I was gonna bring this up myself, since it's something I've been working on recently. During my instrument training I did the same VOR approach a lot, and to a field I'm very familiar with. However when you're flying blind, trying to dial in your nav equipment, center the needle, do your 6 T's, not go below altitude, and you're concentrating on all the various fixes times and altitudes on your approach plate you get to the point where you don't even know North from South, all you know is that you're on course and altitude. I spent a number of flights calling out "inbound on the VOR approach" because I didn't know what else to say. My instructor, probably like you, asked me if I'd know where to look if I were in the pattern and heard that. Of course not. Now I try to orient myself a bit when I'm setting up for the approach so I can explain it better, but I can totally see why guys flying IFR make crap reports, and it's not laziness.
 
StinkBug said:
I was gonna bring this up myself, since it's something I've been working on recently. During my instrument training I did the same VOR approach a lot, and to a field I'm very familiar with. However when you're flying blind, trying to dial in your nav equipment, center the needle, do your 6 T's, not go below altitude, and you're concentrating on all the various fixes times and altitudes on your approach plate you get to the point where you don't even know North from South, all you know is that you're on course and altitude. I spent a number of flights calling out "inbound on the VOR approach" because I didn't know what else to say. My instructor, probably like you, asked me if I'd know where to look if I were in the pattern and heard that. Of course not. Now I try to orient myself a bit when I'm setting up for the approach so I can explain it better, but I can totally see why guys flying IFR make crap reports, and it's not laziness.
Click to expand...

If I were "in the pattern" and heard anyone announcing a IFR inbound... I would be looking at the final approach alignment " ie, straight in" from about 5 miles out...

Like, where else would they be...:dunno::dunno::dunno:
 
N801BH said:
If I were "in the pattern" and heard anyone announcing a IFR inbound... I would be looking at the final approach alignment " ie, straight in" from about 5 miles out...

Like, where else would they be...:dunno::dunno::dunno:
Click to expand...

Umm, on a circling approach?

SDF approach?

VOR approach?

Quite a number of approaches don't result in straight ins.

Check out the approaches at Watsonville, KWVI. Rwy 20 is used VFR, virtually all the time. None of the instrument approaches go in that direction, due to terrain about 5 miles out. The VOR approach isn't aligned with any runway, and the others all align in the opposite direction.
 
MAKG1 said:
Umm, on a circling approach?

SDF approach?

VOR approach?

Quite a number of approaches don't result in straight ins.

Check out the approaches at Watsonville, KWVI. Rwy 20 is used VFR, virtually all the time. None of the instrument approaches go in that direction, due to terrain about 5 miles out. The VOR approach isn't aligned with any runway, and the others all align in the opposite direction.
Click to expand...

Ok.. Let's make it 3 miles out.... WAY more then "in the pattern" .....

I have not seen any approach that didn't let a pilot stabilize a final alignment closer then the 2 mile mark...:rolleyes:

Feel free to post a plate showing it...
 
timwinters said:
That's about the only thing that will elicit a smart a$$ed response from me on the radio.

Them: "Harrison Traffic, Bugsmasher 345EB, 2,500', BAKKY, procedure turn outbound."

Me: "And what exactly does that tell the VFR traffic in the area?"
Click to expand...

I normally say this "Hot Springs Traffic, Bugsmasher 345EB is 10 miles southwest at 2500, prodecure turn outbound, practice ILS 5."

I almost got hit by a Cessna last week during my Multi checkride. He crossed the upwind to turn into the downwind while I was taking off.

The only smart ones that day were the two military helos. They stayed on the ground for me while I did my single engine pattern.

I regularly, about daily, have something like that video happen to me at Hot Springs. Combine a very busy two runway uncontrolled field with me shooting approaches against the traffic and it gets quite fun.
 
N801BH said:
Ok.. Let's make it 3 miles out.... WAY more then "in the pattern" .....

I have not seen any approach that didn't let a pilot stabilize a final alignment closer then the 2 mile mark...:rolleyes:

Feel free to post a plate showing it...
Click to expand...

I guess you're not instrument rated.

Any plate with circling minimums expects the pilot to be other than aligned with a runway at the minimum. Often, that's well BELOW pattern altitude. And protected airspace is only 1.3 miles from the nearest runway for aircraft with 1.3*Vs0 less than 90 knots, so people are going to do that real close in.

Once again, all the approaches at Watsonville (KWVI) qualify. That's going to happen for almost any airport with sufficient flat terrain.

Here's a disturbing one for you:

http://skyvector.com/files/tpp/1507/pdf/00805L2.PDF

The circling minimum is 700 feet. That means the pilot is expected to descend to 700 feet and then fly a "pattern" around the airport at that altitude. That puts you very precisely (localizers do that!) into the upwind to crosswind turn for almost all departing VFR traffic. TPA is 1000 feet at this airport.

What pilots typically do is assume a minimum at TPA or higher, and make sure they report they are on the Rwy 2 final. But it's the only localizer approach at that airport, and I've heard people just say that.

It's also a Class G airport, so some schmuck could be flying a VFR pattern NORDO legally at 690 feet, with marine layer down to 700.

At that airport, it's not at all unusual for IFR traffic (particularly turboprops) to land in the opposite direction as VFR traffic. It gets real fun like yesterday, where the southwest side of the airport was clouded and the northeast was clear. That means instrument approaches in the clouds and VFR approaches in the opposite direction in the clear. That's also probably why the straight-in minimum isn't any lower than the circling minimum. Usually localizers are good down to 400 AGL for a straight-in.
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
I guess you're not instrument rated.

Any plate with circling minimums expects the pilot to be other than aligned with a runway at the minimum. Often, that's well BELOW pattern altitude. And protected airspace is only 1.3 miles from the nearest runway, so people are going to do that real close in.

Once again, all the approaches at Watsonville (KWVI) qualify. That's going to happen for almost any airport with sufficient flat terrain.

Here's a disturbing one for you:

http://skyvector.com/files/tpp/1507/pdf/00805L2.PDF

The circling minimum is 700 feet. That means the pilot is expected to descend to 700 feet and then fly a "pattern" around the airport at that altitude. That puts you very precisely (localizers do that!) into the upwind to crosswind turn for almost all departing VFR traffic. TPA is 1000 feet at this airport.

What pilots typically do is assume a minimum at TPA or higher, and make sure they report they are on the Rwy 2 final. But it's the only localizer approach at that airport, and I've heard people just say that.

It's also a Class G airport, so some schmuck could be flying a VFR pattern NORDO legally at 690 feet, with marine layer down to 700.

At that airport, it's not at all unusual for IFR traffic (particularly turboprops) to land in the opposite direction as VFR traffic. It gets real fun like yesterday, where the southwest side of the airport was clouded and the northeast was clear. That means instrument approaches in the clouds and VFR approaches in the opposite direction in the clear. That's also probably why the straight-in minimum isn't any lower than the circling minimum. Usually localizers are good down to 400 AGL for a straight-in.
Click to expand...

I try not to fly around " Schmucks"...;);););)
 
MAKG1 said:
Well, so do we all, but sometimes they hide well.

I've seen people blast through that airport's traffic pattern below TPA, as though it weren't even there.
Click to expand...


Just another reason NOT to fly in California....:rolleyes:......:redface:
 
N801BH said:
Just another reason NOT to fly in California....:rolleyes:......:redface:
Click to expand...

If you say so…

It's not like you don't have ag and pipeline ops in Wyoming. Well, maybe not in a tourist town like Jackson Hole. Watsonville is a real working airport, not a place for the excessively rich to park their Gulfstreams while they go skiing.
 
N801BH said:
I am at that stage too...

First time I see a U tube video my initial thought is " is it faked ? , and how easy would it be to rig the shot...:redface::redface::redface:
Click to expand...

That cat video? That was definitely faked. You can see the pixels if you squint closely. :lol:
 
N801BH said:
That was close....:eek::yikes:....

I would have slowed it way down and landed behind the guy, showed him the video and shared a few cuss words...:rolleyes::mad:
Click to expand...

+1 Yeah, there would have been an interesting conversation...:yes::yes::yes:
 
Pretty close, this provides a good example of why to be where people expect you to be. He was on som 15° or so entry to short final. Either head for the pattern or head for the FAF which is what it looked like the Seminole was doing.
 
N801BH said:
Ok.. Let's make it 3 miles out.... WAY more then "in the pattern" .....

I have not seen any approach that didn't let a pilot stabilize a final alignment closer then the 2 mile mark...:rolleyes:

Feel free to post a plate showing it...
Click to expand...


Here you go.

http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1507/05666VA.PDF

Brings you in at roughly a 45 to the runway, and the missed approach point is directly over mid-field and your approach at MDA would be only about 100' above TPA and on the same side as the normal VFR pattern. Final approach fix is only 3.4 miles away so theres basically zero chance that you'd be aligned with the runway at 3 miles out. In fact if you're gonna actually land in a typical GA aircraft you'd need to do all of your circling within 1.3nm.

This is also the exact approach I was flying when my instructor asked me that question in the post you quoted. Never was I ever aligned with the runway at any point, and if you were looking at a 3 mile final you'd nearly have had your back to me.

VOR-A to KCRQ also brings you in nearly perpendicular to the runway, though unless you're flying it after 10pm you'll have a tower helping out.
 
Last edited:
StinkBug said:
Here you go.

http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1507/05666VA.PDF

Brings you in at roughly a 45 to the runway, and the missed approach point is directly over mid-field and your approach at MDA would be only about 100' above TPA and on the same side as the normal VFR pattern. Final approach fix is only 3.4 miles away so theres basically zero chance that you'd be aligned with the runway at 3 miles out. In fact if you're gonna actually land in a typical GA aircraft you'd need to do all of your circling within 1.3nm.

VOR-A to KCRQ also brings you in nearly perpendicular to the runway, though unless you're flying it after 10pm you'll have a tower helping out.
Click to expand...


Great example... But .... Who is flying VFR when someone is shooting a IFR approach to minimums???:dunno::dunno::confused:
 
The discussion was about traffic calls. When I'm under the hood I might as well be in the clouds, even if you're not. Yes I have a safety pilot looking out the windows for see and avoid, but that doesn't help your situational awareness any when I call that I'm on the VOR-A approach and you look in the opposite direction now does it? IFR doesn't mean IMC, and I've shot that approach to minimums about 50 times, and never in IMC.
 
N801BH said:
Great example... But .... Who is flying VFR when someone is shooting a IFR approach to minimums???:dunno::dunno::confused:
Click to expand...

You almost always practice IFR approaches to minimums in VMC. If you screw up, you don't bust, among other things.

Not training to minimums is a bit like practicing landings at 200 AGL. It's right at the minimums where the difficult stuff is, especially on an ILS, localizer, or an on-field VOR approach. Things are different at 200 AGL when you can't see out the windows.

It's not to practice landings, but rather to practice not landing so you don't pull an Aspen.
 
Stewartb said:
Radios are not required equipment in uncontrolled airspace. Use your eyes to see others. Make it easy for them to spot you. Don't assume other pilots have radios or know how to use them.
Click to expand...

noobJohn said:
Making position announcements on the radio doesn't preclude looking out the window.
Click to expand...

OK, show me the part in the video where this guy isn't looking out the window. Seriously, this "Just look out the window and you'll be fine" is crap. Technology can and does help.
 
MAKG1 said:
You almost always practice IFR approaches to minimums in VMC. If you screw up, you don't bust, among other things.

Not training to minimums is a bit like practicing landings at 200 AGL. It's right at the minimums where the difficult stuff is, especially on an ILS, localizer, or an on-field VOR approach. Things are different at 200 AGL when you can't see out the windows.

It's not to practice landings, but rather to practice not landing so you don't pull an Aspen.
Click to expand...

Agreed... But , I thought practice approaches need a safety pilot on board to watch for traffic and assist in radio calls..:confused::confused::dunno:
 
N801BH said:
Agreed... But , I thought practice approaches need a safety pilot on board to watch for traffic and assist in radio calls..:confused::confused::dunno:
Click to expand...

Well, you could do the CRM that way, but if the point is to practice single pilot IFR, the safety pilot shouldn't be making radio calls.
 
ARFlyer said:
I normally say this "Hot Springs Traffic, Bugsmasher 345EB is 10 miles southwest at 2500, prodecure turn outbound, practice ILS 5."

I almost got hit by a Cessna last week during my Multi checkride. He crossed the upwind to turn into the downwind while I was taking off.

The only smart ones that day were the two military helos. They stayed on the ground for me while I did my single engine pattern.

I regularly, about daily, have something like that video happen to me at Hot Springs. Combine a very busy two runway uncontrolled field with me shooting approaches against the traffic and it gets quite fun.
Click to expand...
Well, I was planning to stop at HOT for gas on the way to OSH, but I may reconsider that now lol

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk
 
Straight in approaches seem dangerous. Yeah I would have had to change my pants
 
so are six airplanes headed to the same spot at the same altitude from six different directions to join on the 45. bottom line is airplanes are trying to get to the same piece of real estate and sometimes it breaks down. use the tools you have to fly any arrival as safe as you can. a well planned straight in is no more dangerous than a poorly executed 45 to downwind that is flow 5 miles from the airport and a 4 mile final.
 
brian109 said:
Straight in approaches seem dangerous.
Click to expand...

I think straight-in approaches can be made safer by doing shallow S-turns. That makes it less likely that you and another plane will stay in each other's blind spots. S-turns may be similarly helpful when approaching the pattern from any direction.
 
S turns make you easier to see, yes. But so do 90* pattern turns, and those, used as clearing turns, make it easier to see others.
 
acrophile said:
I think straight-in approaches can be made safer by doing shallow S-turns. That makes it less likely that you and another plane will stay in each other's blind spots. S-turns may be similarly helpful when approaching the pattern from any direction.
Click to expand...

It would be much easier to just get in the pattern like everyone else.
 
Watched this earlier this week and thought, "hmm. I've had one closer than that..."

Both aircraft inbound KAPA from the southeast on different bearings. Almost matched speeds but I was overtaking. Angle made the relative motion go away, though.

Still outside the controlled airspace by miles, but we were both generally wandering toward a line-up for a straight in to Runway 28.

Me in the 182 and one of the many Goboshes around here.

Almost no relative motion to see, same altitude. We both saw each other when the "size bloom" happened at about the same distance as the twin passed in the video.

I was basically in a left side fingertip formation spot but angled toward them by about fifteen degrees. Problem is, momentum... and time to change direction.

If it were any closer, a vertical maneuver would have been the only "out". As it was...

We both went wing up on the inside wing at the same time, so I knew he saw me too. I could see him ok with my inside wing up.

He now has his wing in the way and couldn't see me anymore. I wonder how nervous he was that he was about to get run over by a 182.

I held the bank and pulled a bit and waited to see if the closure rate stopped or if he went up or down so I'd know which way to go if my horizontal options ran out.

He lost a little altitude so I pulled back a bit. Never ended up over the top of him but we ended up about where a comfortable but close formation flight number two would end up at the closest with me slightly high.

I could tell what brand of headsets they were wearing until their wing went up.

I continued the turn into a full 180 for spacing and saw them level and look my way and continue inbound.

Have had other passes departing and arriving places. But the afternoon with the Gobosh was by far the closest. Any closer it would have been a yank and bank and pray you didn't hear a crunch. If he hadn't have seen me, the angle was great enough it still would have been. Only because both of us saw each other simultaneously could it be handled with dual steep turns.
 
Had a similar experience today.

I was shooting a VOR approach on RWY32 at SBY. A Cessna comes in wanting the same approach so the tower vectors him outbound past me. We watch him go by and think nothing of it.

An arrival comes in on 14 so he tells us to circle (we are about 6 miles out at this point) until he clears us inbound. Finally, after the jet lands, he clears me in #1 to land, inbound for the VOR approach.

So I start flying down after intercepting the inbound course, I'm about halfway to my MDA, and we are wondering where the heck that Cessna went. The tower never released him but we couldn't find him anymore.

Sure enough, he ends up about 100 feet above and the too the right of me, and overtaking me. The tower had not cleared him inbound and he was high and off the VOR approach he supposedly had requested (which comes in at an angle, he was lined up straight in).

I ended up doing another 360 to give spacing and then resumed the approach but it's dudes like that that make airport ops more dangerous then they need to be. Do what the freaking tower tells you to. And if you aren't sure you are doing it right, ask.
 
Last edited:
Bonchie said:
It wasn't the Piper's fault.
Click to expand...

True.

But with the traffic coming from above and behind, the Cessna had almost zero chance of seeing the Piper.

Since he was overtaking from above, the Piper had at least some chance of seeing the Cessna ahead of him.

Not blaming the Piper pilot - picking out that Cessna could have been very difficult as well.
 
FastEddieB said:
True.

But with the traffic coming from above and behind, the Cessna had almost zero chance of seeing the Piper.

Since he was overtaking from above, the Piper had at least some chance of seeing the Cessna ahead of him.

Not blaming the Piper pilot - picking out that Cessna could have been very difficult as well.
Click to expand...

Yeah, who knows what the paint color was. It could of been an off white that was hard to see. And the Piper was no doubt going much faster, making it even harder to distinguish the slower plane below him. If the Piper was flying an approach his eyes may of been inside at the critical moment adjusting something. It's easy for us to judge behind our keyboards.
 
Last edited:
It disturbs me how often I get traffic advisories when on FF and never see the traffic even knowing exactly where to look...

Or when I'm in the pattern how long it can take to spot someone again even knowing exactly where to look.

The sky is really big and airplanes are really small, I think that explains both why it's so darn hard to see them and why we usually don't run into each other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top