Almost Bought the Farm Today!

It was a beautiful day for flying in Southern California today. Visibility was 50 miles, negligible wind, some high Cirrus clouds, moderate temps. For those familiar with SOCal flying I will describe the route that nearly ended tragically for me.

I planned a flight from Agua Dulce (L70) to Fullerton (KFUL) (distance 46nm and 18 mins) in my RV6A to pick up my daughter for a weekend visit and some flying. Between those two airports there is a mountain range, Burbank Class C airspace, and the outer rings of the LAX Class B airspace and a couple of airports with Class D airspace. I studied the LAX TAC chart and plotted a route that would keep me north of the Burbank Class B airspace which would take me to El Monte airport (KEMT). After passing KEMT with the top of the Class D at 2600 I could turn direct to KFUL and descend under the floor of the Class B airspace which is 4000 ft along that route. I had my chart on my lap and was watching my G496 as a crosscheck for airspace boundaries. For the flight up to KEMT I was monitoring SoCal approach but not talking to them. When I passed KEMT I descended to 3500 on a heading of about 155 and after listening to FUL ATIS switched to FUL tower. I was about 8 miles out.

Suddenly I caught movement out of the corner of my eye on my right. A Citation jet passed over my plane so close that I heard a loud 'whoosh', the sound of the disturbed air followed by the whine of the two jet engines. I had no time to take evasive action, it was over in a second or two. It did not appear the crew of the Citation jet saw me as they were in a steep climb and took no obvious evasive action. Holy smokes! I estimated the vertical separation at 100 feet. My first thought was it would have been over so fast I would not have felt a thing. I looked over my left shoulder to see the jet climbing like **** NE bound. My next thought was how did that just happen? Was I inside Class B airspace? Where did that jet come from? I checked my position. I was exactly where I intended to be below the 4000 foot floor of one of the LAX Class B outer rings. My altitude was 3400 not 3500. I had strayed from my intended altitude of 3500 by 100 feet and that may have saved my life!

If there had been a midair the NTSB would say that I had failed to see and avoid other traffic as required under VFR flight. I have been going over this NMAC now for eight hours wondering what I did wrong and/or what I could have done differently to prevent such a close encounter.

Before I go into that part, I contacted SoCal TRACON to find out where that jet came from and to report the NMAC. The controller I talked to gathered the details of where, when, heading, altitude, speed, etc and said he would review the radar tapes and get back to me. Within an hour I got a call back and he confirmed that the radar tapes showed a vertical separation of 100' and less then 2/10 mile horiz separation. I did a little math and determined the 2/10 mile horiz separation was about 2 to 3 seconds. The Citation jet had just departed from EMT on Rwy 19 on an instrument departure. I have been to KEMT many times and never saw a jet there and did not know the Rwy was long enough for jets. After flying Rwy Hdg to 1500 feet the jet turned NE bound and that is where our flight paths crossed at about 90 degree intercept. The jet was flying the IFR departure as instructed.

What went wrong? What could I have done differently?

1. As I passed over KEMT though above their airspace I could have monitored EMT tower. My plane has two radios. I might have heard the takeoff clearance for the jet and perhaps the direction of flight.
2. I could have monitored the SoCal Approach frequency for that area and I might have caught the radio traffic between the jet and SoCal App. I was monitoring SoCal App earlier in the flight while near Burbank airport but discontinued as I descended and approached my destination.
3. I could have requested flight following from SoCal for my entire flight though I know from past expereince that at that altitude in that area below the Class B they often cancel flight following due to poor radar coverage and/or workload. The SoCal TRACON controller who investigated the NMAC indicated radar coverage was poor in that area that low.
4. I could have done a better job of scanning for traffic. I was not looking inside the cockpit prior to the NMAC and given this jet's climbing flight profile I may not have seen him climbing toward me from below. I have taught classes on scanning, I know the limitations of the eye, I strive to maintain eyes outside but today I failed to detect a imminent collision threat in time.
5. I could invest in a traffic collision avoidance system to assist in identifying other traffic threats. I have tried the XAON portable system and was not that impressed but it is better than nothing. I checked into Garmin's active traffic system for general aviation aircraft in the past. For about 9-10,000$ you can purchase one of these systems. Now that there is ADS-B traffic available with the proper equipment I will check into buying that system.

I almost died today and it made a big impression on me. It was pure luck that I survived. I posted this overly long thread to share that story to illustrate how fast things can go wrong. We all know that the age-old "see and avoid" has some limitations particularly in busy airspace and under certain atmospheric conditions.

I have been flying in the SoCal area for over 20 years and I have always felt the greatest risk on every flight is NOT an engine failure, fire, instrument or equipment failure. It is a MID-AIR collision. There are an awful lot of aircraft of all types, many airports, complicated airspace, student pilots, foreign pilots, overloaded pilots etc.

I will be investing in a traffic collision system ASAP and cost is not a factor any longer.

If you have any comments (good or bad) or suggestions I welcome them.

Thanks for sharing your experience, Doug. I'm glad you are still alive to share it with us. I nearly had a mid-air with a Learjet several years ago while in the pattern at Pryor Field (KDCU). The Lear was descending to land at Huntsville and IMO should have been at or above 2000 MSL (Class C) but he was clearly lower. An instructor was with me, and it scared him, too. But I don't think my near miss was as close as yours.
Glad you can tell us about it.

LL #3 is big, I think. No reason not to atleast request Flight Following. Obviously, don't bet your life on FF, but use it if you can. I had a Lancair almost hit me while I was on a Radar Trail ILS into KLUF. He entered our SATR without establishing 2 way comm with approach. We passed co alt w/in 50 feet of each other. So it irritates me when people don't talk to approach.

sorry to hear

Sorry to hear about your near mid air. Flying in LA has its drawbacks. I have been flying in the LA basin for 20 years and have been close to others, but never as close as you. When I fly with my kids, I only fly a G1000 with TIS. It is amazing how much traffic is out there that can't be seen. I find that looking for traffic below the horizon over LA is nearly impossible. I also only fly the established recommended VFR routes. This way others know where I am expected to be even if I do not see them. Also, I always use flight following. If they dump me at least I tried. Your story made me aware that IFR traffic is not looking out the windows, and I need to watch the KEMT area due to poor radar coverage. After reading this, I will be more careful near departure ends of runways. Thanks for posting; I learned something today. And glad you are still with us.

By the way, what do you think is going to happen when Long Beach gets it's class C? Scary to think.

Wow! Thanks for sharing that! Mid-air/catastrophic structural and fire are the leading things that make my skin crawl.

I agree with your assessment. #4 sticks out for me because with our canopies, I guess I hoped we would see threats like this sooner. I need to do a better job scanning for traffic.

As stated, SoCal is really really congested.

If it's any consolation for you, many of us have been there as well. Even here in the wide open Midwest, I've had two close calls in 20 years of flying. I can relate to how shook up you feel. Sometimes, there isn't anything you can do about it. I think some of the latest traffic avoidance hardware is a good investment.

TIS and other tools

Thanks for sharing the story. Flying over or near any airport, you are at risk of a faster airplane climbing into your belly - there is no way you will "see and avoid". Just hope to be seen, or if your traffic alerting system is working, take evasive action.

I try to use whatever is available - TIS or Zaon - and while useful, they often scare the cr*p out of me when I see how much traffic is out there that I can't get a visual on.

Perhaps with LED technology there will be new ways we can make our aircraft more visible.

That can be an intense area

I flew the space from Orange County/John Wayne to El Monte twice a day for 15 years commuting for work in our Piper Archer II as well as a common over flight route returning from the north. Citation Jets did use El Monte on extremely rare occasions and it was a big deal each time it happened. It may come as no surprise that I disagree with all of the "prevent the possibility of a mid air collision in this area at all cost" talk. Loss of freedom and opportunity is not something I am willing to sacrifice for the illusion of safety. When a class C area for Long Beach was proposed 10 or 15 years ago I wrote a comment defining my daily commute and the strategies and tactics used to deal with the airspace. I don't know how the process went but the Long Beach Class C didn't happen. Many changes have occurred in the LA basin airspace in the past 30 years and every one has reduced the ability to use that airspace by the average private pilot. Your flight plan seems reasonable to me. In that area the the low level traffic below the approaches into LAX is dominated by El Monte traffic, traffic on V186 and traffic following the 210, 60 and 605 freeways. The frequency to monitor is the El Monte Tower and the traffic hot spots are over the freeways and over the Rose Hills cemetery on the hill at the intersection of the 605 and 60 freeway. I often gave El Monte a call to let them know I was passing over their class D airspace and/or monitor that frequency until reaching Rose Hills. Then I would call SOCAL Approach and in preparation for entering the SNA Class C airspace. Prior to the Cerritos disaster and the resulting complete reclassification of all airspace and the institution of BFRs I would monitor Fullerton and call Orange County Tower outside the SNA Airport Traffic Area and my contacts with Coast Approach were strictly for IFR operations. Someone once said something like "when you give up freedom for safety you end up with neither" and I agree with that thinking. Now with shrinking numbers of pilots we need more restrictions? There is a message there someplace about generations and frame of mind. There is a simple way to deal with an alternate risk of transportation and that is to drive to Fullerton.

Bob Axsom

what doesn't kill us will make us stronger. i am sure your experience will help you and others change there ways on this subject.

i have been flying behind the small zaon for years now and am satisfied it helps identify traffic and also helps the passengers become expert traffic spotters.

your angels were on call that day. you must be doing something good in life.

thanks for your input, now what can we do about those pesky B1 RDS out there?

After a NMAC (with a slow moving Cessna) in our busy DFW area, I bought a Garmin 330 and added TIS to the 696, one of the best upgrades I ever did.

I am now installing ADS-B as it became officially active this month in this area. These are not a cure-all, but they are pretty darn good at giving you traffic warnings that are coming your way!

While flying flight following or IFR control is always pointing traffic out to me. The question I have would be directed more to control then yourself. Since you had a transponder on board why did control issue a clearance for this jet when you were in the vicinity? You should not shoulder all the blame here, that jet, in VFR conditions should also be looking out the window. Someone should have a talk with that pilot. In that jet there were likely two pilots on board to share the load. See and avoid is how we are supposed to operate but it is pretty hard to catch something coming up below. Before getting my IFR ticket I flew around in total ignorance of the IFR system. I just flew around the rings, close, or under/over zones thinking that would keep me safe. What I did not know was how far out instrument approaches went. While an airport might have a 5 mile control zone a gps approach could extend 15 miles out. Now when I am flying I pay particular attention to those extended lines from airports.
I think that your point #1 is important and it is something that I have grown complacent about, and that is monitoring local airports on the second com. Why not if you have the equipment? Thank you for the good post

I'm with Bob. I hear a lot of emotion in the story and many of the responses. Here's the rational view; you probably drove by at least one drunk, one druggie, and one functional idiot in the opposing traffic stream on the way to the airport....all inside 10 feet. Why does a collision risk at 100 feet bother you?

Yes, use the tools. Doing so is very rational. As for the emotional side, when the risk/reward equation doesn't work for you it is time to quit flying. The collision risk will never be zero no matter what you do.

Thanks for the report and I'm so glad you are OK. Your candid report may spur some on to invest in a traffic collision avoidance system and ultimately save another person's life as well. I hope this thread, or another, facilitates a full blown discussion of modern systems and features.

visual

Tom Martin said:

...Someone should have a talk with that pilot. In it there were likely two pilots on board that airplane. ...

Click to expand...

Actually, for all we know ATC did point out the VFR traffic, and the guys had Doug visually.

rv8ch said:

Actually, for all we know ATC did point out the VFR traffic, and the guys had Doug visually.

Click to expand...

Yep,
Quit beating up on yourself. You did nothing wrong. NMAC is just that.
No collision, no one is dead.
If he was IFR and radar contact it was ATC that screwed up.

The jet also has an obligation to see and avoid.

Being a jet doesn't confer superior privileges in the air.

Now as Dan alludes above be careful driving home as that is more likely where you will "buy the farm".

I go with the second radio option, which I found to be very beneficial. Also used the XAON, which is much better than nothing.

Nothing wrong

I agree you did nothing wrong, but I understand that's not the answer you're looking for - dead is dead, right or wrong.

It's hard if not impossible to see other targets climbing up from below you. I've not ever used any type of traffic avoidance system, but I wonder (and this is a question to the forum) under those conditions and rates of closure how much warning you would have had, and whether any avoidance maneuvers you might have made at the last micro second would have made things worse - I don't know.

Flight following is one of your best options - I always use it. Having said that, I once, while under flight following, had a DC-3 climb up and beneath me right to left so close that I could see the passengers.

Glad all was well in the end.

Tom

Sorry to hear the event was such a fright, but if you were reporting mode C altitude ATC probably called it and the outbound IFR flight had you in sight. They were climbing fast and knew they would clear your altitude in no time. If they had TACAS, the system I am familiar with would have commanded keep climbing.

It happens everyday across our country, more than once, sometimes a little too close, but it happens. There is no IFR-VFR traffic separation outside positive control airspace.

The riskiest time for IFR flight is in VFR conditions, especially in Southern California. And that means it is doubly risky for VFR flight in airspace transitioned by high speed IFR flights. You really have to pay attention outside the airplane whether in the jet or the RV.

We have a Zaon in our 10, probably not knowing how to use it or it's not installed in the best location ( on glare sheild). I find that when it shows a target we can rarely see it. If we see the target it useally is on the opposite side of the aircraft. Is it us or is this the norm? My buddy thinks it shows a target when we are in the vacinity of windmills?
Ron

Ron, check the manual for the Zaon... There may be a switch that swaps the left-right axis. That would at least explain why things are popping up on the wrong side. I have flown behind two Zaon units (in others' aircraft) and they've been right on the money every time they give a traffic alert. I noticed that both owners turn off the audible alarm when entering a busy area though... It just beeps continuously if you don't.

Walt said:

After a NMAC (with a slow moving Cessna) in our busy DFW area, I bought a Garmin 330 and added TIS to the 696, one of the best upgrades I ever did.

I am now installing ADS-B as it became officially active this month in this area. These are not a cure-all, but they are pretty darn good at giving you traffic warnings that are coming your way!

Click to expand...

I'm so glad my MicroAir transponder failed before I ever took my first flight, and Walt suggested the Dynon/Trig Mode S transponder. Without it, I wouldn't have TIS and now would never want to fly in the busy DFW area without it. I already have the cash set aside to buy the Dynon ADS-B unit the second it becomes available.

The Citation you encountered certainly had TCAS and they probably "saw" you in some fashion....either visually or on TCAS. The problem is, a midair with any other airplane that was equipped with lesser or no collision avoidance system would/could have been just as deadly. It's those lesser equipped airplanes that I want to avoid here in the busy DFW area.

N395V said:

Yep,
Quit beating up on yourself. You did nothing wrong. NMAC is just that.
No collision, no one is dead.
If he was IFR and radar contact it was ATC that screwed up.

The jet also has an obligation to see and avoid.

Being a jet doesn't confer superior privileges in the air.

Now as Dan alludes above be careful driving home as that is more likely where you will "buy the farm".

Click to expand...

we are only responsible for traffic advisories (on a workload basis) and safety alerts (compulsory) outside of Class C and B. there is no ATC requirement to separate aircraft from mode-c targets (for all we know, the original poster was below radar anyway). now, that said, we generally DO separate you, but be aware that there is no requirement to do so.

another factor worth discussing here is the pilot was probably just checking on with approach, and the tower might not have a radar display. so who would issue the traffic?

considering all of this, it would be my guess that the citation had you in sight the whole time.

what could the OP have done differently? given the situation, i'd say he was doing much MORE than the average pilot. there are always ways to improve safety, but at some point there is a diminishing return. i think ADS-B proliferation will solve a lot of these issues. hopefully the FAA doesn't screw it up

See and Avoid

I'm not happy with the statement: "my guess that the citation had you in sight the whole time".

If I'm climbing out in my high performance RV and I see a slow moving Cessna ahead on a near-collision course, I think it's quite irresponsible of me to continue my course so as to barely miss the Cessna. How do I know he's not going to change course ever so slightly and Bang! we're both dead.

I know the mantra is "See and Avoid", and I suppose avoiding by 100 feet is still avoinding. But to me it seems like it ought to include include the guideline "See and Safely Avoid". Avoiding by a only 100 feet does not seem very safe.

Citation

Cessna numbers for Citation Mustang, standard day, sea level, 3310' to clear a 35' obstacle at gross weight. El Monte has 3995' runway. I have seen the older Citations use a 3200' runway on a regular basis.

Near misses are an unfortunate part of flying, especially in areas such as LA. I have not had much sucess with the traffic avoidance systems, limited range and lots of false signals. At least some of the false signals were apparently caused-at low altitude on final-by truck transponders.

Whew, that was close! I have ADS-B wx and traffic on the list. For now I almost always get FF.

I would also add #6: Keep ALL LIGHTS on all the time. Bulbs are replaceable.

85 hours of almost continuous use and mine are still working fine.

Near Misses are spooky - no doubt about it! I've had two that I vividly remember in my flying career, and truthfully, none of the electronic systems (or flight following) would have helped in either case. Now that I am regularly flying a 330-equipped airplane (Tsam) with traffic, I find that I tend to miss it when I get in one of the other airplanes - but I also find that with high density traffic, I am not sure that it isn't more of a distraction than an aid (at times). When I am concentrating on one spot where I think I should see traffic (according to the screen), I am NOT scanning elsewhere.

Flight following is great - except where the radar coverage is poor, or ATC is very busy - in which case, you can't depend on it to keep you safe - or depend on even getting a squawk.

Bottom line is that in the end, we need to see and avoid (if not in IMC), and use everything else as a tool - not a crutch.

Is a NASA report warranted here?

I do not have much experience in the LA basin, but if possible, I always fly high. I do not use VFR corridors. There was a mid-air in one at Denver a few years ago.

Fly high

Repeat...fly high.

Traffic

My neighbor is an air traffic controller at the LA Tracon. Prior to working there, he worked at Phoenix Approach. He was also building a 7 when we became neighbors. We often talked about equipment and panels, etc..... He said no matter what he was putting in some nature of traffic awareness system.

His comments were so true. He said, "if you could see the screen on a Saturday or Sunday, you'd never push your plane out of the hangar, at least not without Traffic."

Based on this, I put in a Garmin 330S for traffic display on the 430. It has saved me on two occasions and alerted me to many other potential issues. In both cases of closeness the traffic alerted to planes I didn't see. Traffic awareness also gives you the "big picture," when operating in a busy airspace system.

In the event described, I'm surprised the CJ allowed things to get so close. These aircraft usually have some nature of TCAS. Further, I"m sure they were on an IFR flight plan which should have alerted them to traffic.

Who knows for sure but I'm glad everyone is safe.

FYI, on the new 7 I'm building, it will have both TIS and ADSB traffic.

Just remember

Just remember that jets and turbo props take off VFR many times from an airport just like that and pick up their IFR clearance after airborne. Climbing between 2000 and 3000 FPM in many cases, 3500 ft is the altitude they may be changing frequencies to pick up that clearance. Turning on course and busy with other cockpit duties, they may have never seen you. Even with their traffic avoidance screaming at them, one has to look at the traffic screen, see the conflict, then look outside to try and get a visual. I had a similar experience last week in Maryland, but not near as close. It happened to be an RV 4 that I had watched taking off 10 minutes before we boarded our plane. Several miles from the airport, having a great time. We banked hard to avoid the area he was in, not knowing what direction he was going to terminate his turn. He did nothing wrong and neither dd I. TCAS was sceaming, but I already had a visual. Easy to see how your situation happened. Glad it all turned out well.

Think about how close the plane on short final practicing cross-wind landings gets with you at the hold-short, which is far more disadvantageous since you cant move out of the way. It's all about comfort zone, a good scan, trusting your intuition (why did you look up when you did?), and being able to maneuver that airplane.

An MIT prof conducted an airspace simulation exercise plugging in various parameters to determine which resulted in the most likely for midair. Turns out the FAA cruising rules for VFR and IFR was the worst case scenario as the traffic is concentrated and not taking advantage of the vastness of the airspace. The best case, meaning least likely, was randomness allowing pilots to fly at random altitudes independent of direction. When VFR I fly the required altitude plus a random fudge factor. Instead of 4500,5500, or 6500 I'll fly 4591, 5415, 6587. Not nearly as likely somebody else is going to be cruising at a crazy number like any of those.

100 feet of separation is 99.99999999 ft more than you needed!

GPS

RV8R999 said:

Think about how close the plane on short final practicing cross-wind landings gets with you at the hold-short, which is far more disadvantageous since you cant move out of the way. It's all about comfort zone, a good scan, trusting your intuition (why did you look up when you did?), and being able to maneuver that airplane.

An MIT prof conducted an airspace simulation exercise plugging in various parameters to determine which resulted in the most likely for midair. Turns out the FAA cruising rules for VFR and IFR was the worst case scenario as the traffic is concentrated and not taking advantage of the vastness of the airspace. The best case, meaning least likely, was randomness allowing pilots to fly at random altitudes independent of direction. When VFR I fly the required altitude plus a random fudge factor. Instead of 4500,5500, or 6500 I'll fly 4591, 5415, 6587. Not nearly as likely somebody else is going to be cruising at a crazy number like any of those.

100 feet of separation is 99.99999999 ft more than you needed!

Click to expand...

THe other issue may be plugging in VOR locations into your GPS while flying VFR. With GPS vs older VOR accuracy everyone is flying almost exactly down the corridors.

I have starting to use adjacent airports as GPS way points instead of VORs, OK for higher cruising altitudes out West....

az_gila said:

THe other issue may be plugging in VOR locations into your GPS while flying VFR. With GPS vs older VOR accuracy everyone is flying almost exactly down the corridors.

I have starting to use adjacent airports as GPS way points instead of VORs, OK for higher cruising altitudes out West....

Click to expand...

Very true. Also, many GPS systems have offset capability.

I will be so glad when ADSB coverage is available here in Arkansas. I had a near miss right here in a rural area airport with a FedEx corporate jet landing as I was departing the pattern. I took off on 18 and made a right turn out right into the path of the jet on left base for 36. I was so close I could see the co-pilots face. I was using the preferred runway but the corporate jets and our regional air service planes land from whatever direction their coming from to save fuel regardless of the wind unless it is howling. I never heard any radio transmission from the jet.

rv9aviator said:

I will be so glad when ADSB coverage is available here in Arkansas.

Click to expand...

Don't count on it being available at pattern altitude.

I bought a Zaon PCAS after a similar incident with an RV-9A during Phase I. Even though we're drilling into scanning for traffic, I don't think many people realize just how difficult it is to spot traffic on a consistent basis. Yeah, there's a lot of false pings with a Zaon and it's not mean to replace a scan; it's just another item for the toolbox, like flight following.

I think there's probably not that much more you could've done and I totally understand what you're going through; I think ALL THE TIME about that traffic I never saw.

Doug Weiler, the head of the Twin Cities RV Builders Group had a similar situation not long ago and I've taken his advice, too, head on a swivel, use the tools, landing lights, and fly at weird altitudes near this kind of airspace.

That probably wouldn't have helped you here but about all, I think, you can do is everything you can do to make the odds work in your favor, and work as best you can to be comfortable with the fact that's all you can really do.

Ron Lee said:

Don't count on it being available at pattern altitude.

Click to expand...

at many airports you get ADSB on the ground, when the system is fully functional most will.

I fly corporate and most of them Citations. I would think that particular airplane had a working TCAS. If your transponder was shown on the Citation's TCAS they would not have come that close. You said ATC had the tapes so it proves your transponder was working. I'm wondering if the Citation's TCAS was inoperative or an old one with a 6nm ring. I used to fly a model which had this setup. By the time the traffic would pop up on the screen it became more of an evasive maneuver.
Seeing and avoiding is great to practice but it only gives you a small area to spot other planes.
I have become a chicken when it comes to traffic. I used to spot for fishing boats with 30 other aircraft. Our company bought BFGoodrich TAS which was a big expense and it had a 6nm ring. The planes were slower and it worked perfect. My wife and I both insisted on active traffic for my RV10. I bought the GTS800. It has a 12nm ring. It took a while to save up for the 8,700 price tag and luckily received a 1000 rebate at the time. It has been very worth it for piece of mind and it will always work better than TIS or ADS-b. It only takes one airplane and what is it worth? The GTS800 works as the (in) portion of the next gen and GTS330 (es) works as the out. So you cover the ADS-b requirement with the GTS800 with an (es) transponder.

ADS-B - Yes.

Doug, glad that you could report about this to us.
I had a surprise near miss with another Cessna once about that close.

I put in NavWorx ADS-B system a couple of year ago and am so happy with it.
I can see targets (on the screen) well before I can pick them up visually and make plans to not meet up with them. Also when the targets are close enough for visual I can quickly find them, because I know where they are.

You have to keep your eyes out the window because some planes will not show up (no transponder or forgot to turn them on).

If you already have an EFIS in your plane adding this product will be less the $3000. Well worth the piece of mind that I got.

Kent

I agree --- ADS-B

Wasn't going to mention a manufacturer, but since the post prior to me did, I really really like the NavWorx ADS-B. As Paul mentioned earlier, I feel naked if I'm in a friend's plane without it.

A nice sized black box with a red outline pops up on the EFIS screen (NAV mode--bottom screen for me) if traffic is with 2NM of you (if he's a conflict or not). That is in addition to the regular traffic displayed.

I think an ADS-B unit (no matter who makes it) should be part of one's panel purchase to aid (in a big way) in the discussions we have had in this thread.

Dave

I can?t imagine anyone here not having had at least one good scare with some kind of near miss. One thing I?m grateful about the first instructor I ever had is him constantly telling me, even yelling at me, that the traffic is out there, quit looking at the instruments.

With our closing speeds, the ?see and avoid? can still only do so much though. Considering the closing time of two RV?s or other fast aircraft coming head on is some 6-7 miles a minute, and consider it?s basically about the size of a small pencil dot at that distance, I think it?s a real challenge.

My biggest scare of a nearly head-on collision was some 23 years ago during my first cross country flight while doing my student training. It didn?t help that while listening to Abilene?s control tower, the controller was saying they were very busy at this time. Not something a student pilot on his first cross country flight wanted to be hearing.

Anyway, while I was flying VFR into Abilene, the control tower says, ?Piper 89er Charlie you have traffic at 12:00.? I reported back that ?89er Charlie was looking.? It didn?t dawn on me at first, but after I made my call, I then realized, geeze, this is head-on. Then my heart really started pounding. I was looking ever so hard trying to find that plane to no avail. Maybe one minute later the control tower comes on again and says, ?Piper 89er Charlie you still have traffic at 12:00!? His voice was a bit raised that time. I was in the middle of my call sign, and I was fixing to tell him ?I?m still looking?, but instead, whoosh, we both see each other at the same time, and both did 45 degree banks fortunately in the opposite direction because we were actually just off to the side of one another, I?m guessing maybe 200-300 feet or so. While in the middle of my call sign, and after making that maneuver, still having the mic keyed after making my call sign, I still managed to say, ?yeah, I have that traffic in sight.?

What had been converging on me so quick was a Mooney with retract (yep, knew that rudder, and got a good look at the underbelly!), and he was climbing out, while I was descending. Some 5 minutes later or so, you ought to have seen my landing!

Most of the 80 hours in my 6 have been pretty much drama free. The Zaon helps, especially now after understanding exactly how to interpret the readings faster and more accurately, and enjoy it being interfaced with the 696, but like others, it seems to have plenty of false readings that can drive you crazy. Every time I come into home airport (F14,) it is always showing this mysterious aircraft that never ever appears, and it is always showing to be real close to me.

Reading with interest

Having flown most of my life and recently getting involved in smaller general aviation aircraft the last two years has proven an eye opener
One problem I have noted is that a lot of folks in my area ( Atlanta ) fly around what they think is just under the TCA.

What a lot of pilots miss is the fact that ATC drops us below the TCA 25 miles from our satellite airport (PDK). There are several problems with this.
We're descending through VFR altitudes and we get a lot on Non transponder targets and thus the TCAS 7 does not give TA's (traffic Advisories) or RA's
We too are left up to our eyes to see and avoid. All we see is a diamond with no altitude separation.

After flying with several follks in their RV's I made a suggestion to them
When under flying a TCA to other airports please get ATC advisories as this mightbe your only salvation.

Many times we are at everyone favorite altitude 3000 feet when flying. VFR A long time ago I when instructing in a practice area would fly at 3200 feet just to avoid the common altitudes. Remember there is no east west altitude restrictions until you get to 3000 AGL and those are crusiing altitudes. So what happens to the rules when you climb up to 6500 feet AGL and decide to do a 3 turn spin and lose 1500 feet. You are going through IFR and VFR altitudes (clearing turns and look and avoid)

Know the arrival and departure corridors at satellite airports, looks at the IFR charts, listen to approach and departure and hear how they clear departing aircraft.
We no longer fly airways with GPS and IRU's the only requirement we have by ATC is to file a fix within 50 miles of our departure point and then the destination airport and that is generally how we're cleared. An example is a common trip for us KPDK GAD KMRY. Peachtree Dekalb to Monterey,Ca. When I was instructing a lot in the 70's and 80's we went airways or VOR to VOR.

Use all the assets you have available it could save your life and mine.

Smilin' Jack