VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

  #151  
Old 08-16-2012, 08:53 AM
rwhittier rwhittier is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 256
Default Don't bet your life on it...

The closest I came to a midair was in a class delta under a controllers (un)watchful eye. If you read the accident reports a surprisingly high percentage of midairs occur in class delta airspace (you would think its zero). And if you read the regs (here in the US anyways) controllers provide sequencing to runways not seperation services. Have a midair in a class delta and the accident report will most likely read the cause as the "pilots failure to see and avoid". Keep your eyes open and try to have a visualization where that plane should be. If you can't see it, ask the controller. That very likely saved my life as the plane that should have been lined up on the parallel runway was lined up for mine and literally just below me.

You should have heard the controllers voice as it raised a couple of notches...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
The controllers will keep me safe, right?
__________________
Roger Whittier
RV7A Quick Build, Tip Up
N1MY Reserved - Canopy finished - Wings mated, Engine hung, electrical 95%
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 08-16-2012, 09:29 AM
pvalovich pvalovich is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
Posts: 432
Default We Can Work It Out........

Inyokern - uncontrolled, 3 intersecting runways - Friday around noon. I called 10 miles to the east; a Piper called taking 33 with a left turnout to the west; Skywest EMB 120 called taking 20 (downwind takeoff - those guys will takeoff and land downwind in a hurricane to save time and gas); a glider called inbound from the west.

I called intentions to enter the overhead for 33 instead of left downwind to avoid crossing the Skywest on 20 centerline - and the glider to the west of 33.

Piper called left turnout; Skywest called airborne; glider said he'd be overhead at 5K; I called 3 mile initial, broke and landed; glider then landed on 02. We used 3 different runways in less than 5 minutes.

If you communicate properly and cooperate, have proper SA, and be willing to immediately resort to Plan B if you don't have SA, you can work it out. Admittedly, different approach required if students / visitors in the pattern - but hey, this is Inyokern - and you really have to want to go to IYK to go to IYK.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 08-16-2012, 10:49 AM
Echo Tango Echo Tango is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SFO Approach
Posts: 204
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rwhittier View Post
The closest I came to a midair was in a class delta under a controllers (un)watchful eye. If you read the accident reports a surprisingly high percentage of midairs occur in class delta airspace (you would think its zero). And if you read the regs (here in the US anyways) controllers provide sequencing to runways not seperation services. Have a midair in a class delta and the accident report will most likely read the cause as the "pilots failure to see and avoid". Keep your eyes open and try to have a visualization where that plane should be. If you can't see it, ask the controller. That very likely saved my life as the plane that should have been lined up on the parallel runway was lined up for mine and literally just below me.

You should have heard the controllers voice as it raised a couple of notches...
we are only required to issue traffic to vfr aircraft not receiving radar services in the delta. and then provide the sequence to the runway. beyond that, you're on your own.

to aircraft receiving radar service we are required to separate you visually (IFR or VFR) or by means of vertical/longitudinal from other aircraft receiving radar services.

what this boils down to is you don't know who is or who isn't receiving radar services at the field and depending on the type of airspace surrounding the delta, the separation may be next to nil (primaries can't touch). so in a roundabout way you are correct. see and avoid is a very good practice.

we have a VERY busy stand-alone delta in our airspace and it's like the wild west compared to our delta (primary airport with radar sequencing of arrivals).
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 08-16-2012, 12:01 PM
az_gila's Avatar
az_gila az_gila is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 57AZ - NW Tucson area
Posts: 10,011
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by pvalovich View Post
.....- but hey, this is Inyokern - and you really have to want to go to IYK to go to IYK.
...or that's how far you get when you start off in the southern Mojave desert and don't get enough thermals to get up the Owens Valley.

You land there even if you don't want to...
__________________
Gil Alexander
EAA Technical Counselor, Airframe Mechanic
Half completed RV-10 QB purchased
RV-6A N61GX - finally flying
Grumman Tiger N12GA - flying
La Cholla Airpark (57AZ) Tucson AZ
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 08-16-2012, 12:12 PM
Echo Tango Echo Tango is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SFO Approach
Posts: 204
Default

this has probably already been brought up, but doesn't the aircraft that is "lower" automatically have the right-of-way while landing at an uncontrolled field? sounds like an overhead automatically makes you number last every time

disclaimer: i havent flown in about 6 years so be gentle
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 08-16-2012, 01:17 PM
AZtailwind's Avatar
AZtailwind AZtailwind is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Flagstaff, AZ
Posts: 447
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Echo Tango View Post
sounds like an overhead automatically makes you number last every time

disclaimer: I haven't flown in about 6 years so be gentle
The "initial to an overhead break" is also a strait in approach executed at pattern altitude. So it's not altitude that makes it the least in priority. The guy that makes the 45 entry to the downwind has priority since he is using the "standard recommended approach".
Didn't hurt a bit, did it....
__________________

Brad Ransom
http://www.westcoastravens.com
RV-6A 180HP-acquired
RV-4 180HP-acquired
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 08-16-2012, 01:37 PM
ccsmith51's Avatar
ccsmith51 ccsmith51 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZtailwind View Post
The "initial to an overhead break" is also a strait in approach executed at pattern altitude.
Maybe not. Note item g. below from page PCG O-3 of the 2012 AIM:

OVERHEAD MANEUVER− A series of predeterminedmaneuvers prescribed for aircraft (often in formation) for entry into the visual flight rules (VFR) traffic pattern and to proceed to a landing. An overhead maneuver is not an instrument flight rules (IFR) approach procedure. An aircraft executing an
overhead maneuver is considered VFR and the IFR flight plan is cancelled when the aircraft reaches the ?initial point? on the initial approach portion of the maneuver. The pattern usually specifies the following:
a. The radio contact required of the pilot.
b. The speed to be maintained.
c. An initial approach 3 to 5 miles in length.
d. An elliptical pattern consisting of two 180
degree turns.
e. A break point at which the first 180 degree turn
is started.
f. The direction of turns.
g. Altitude (at least 500 feet above the conventional
pattern).
h. A ?Roll-out? on final approach not less than 1/4
mile from the landing threshold and not less than 300
feet above the ground.
__________________
Chris Smith
Maule M5-180C (Sold)
RV-6 O-360 CS (Sold)
RV-4 O-360 FP (Sold)
Full-time in the other type of RV....
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 08-16-2012, 01:48 PM
RV8R999 RV8R999 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: na
Posts: 1,457
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZtailwind View Post
The "initial to an overhead break" is also a strait in approach executed at pattern altitude. So it's not altitude that makes it the least in priority. The guy that makes the 45 entry to the downwind has priority since he is using the "standard recommended approach".
Didn't hurt a bit, did it....
How do you figure?

In a left hand traffic pattern the plane at the initial has the right of way over the plane at the 45 since the overhead aircraft is to the other planes right - see part 91.113 Right Of Way.

In a right hand pattern it would be opposite.

There is no degree of standard in any of the approach methods and none are regulatory - yet right of way rules are. Period.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 08-16-2012, 03:06 PM
az_gila's Avatar
az_gila az_gila is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 57AZ - NW Tucson area
Posts: 10,011
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by RV8R999 View Post
How do you figure?

In a left hand traffic pattern the plane at the initial has the right of way over the plane at the 45 since the overhead aircraft is to the other planes right - see part 91.113 Right Of Way.

In a right hand pattern it would be opposite.

There is no degree of standard in any of the approach methods and none are regulatory - yet right of way rules are. Period.
There is a degree of standard based on the "overhead pattern developed for an operational need" bit of the AIM.

At Tucson (TUS) I've been requested to do a downwind departure at under 700 ft AGL while F-16s were doing a overhead break above me.

I presume these altitudes were written into the "operational need" document that everyone seems to ignore in this discussion...
__________________
Gil Alexander
EAA Technical Counselor, Airframe Mechanic
Half completed RV-10 QB purchased
RV-6A N61GX - finally flying
Grumman Tiger N12GA - flying
La Cholla Airpark (57AZ) Tucson AZ
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 08-16-2012, 03:58 PM
RV8R999 RV8R999 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: na
Posts: 1,457
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by az_gila View Post

I presume these altitudes were written into the "operational need" document that everyone seems to ignore in this discussion...
Because this discussion isn't relevant. There isn't a regulation requiring an airport to list the overhead as an approved approach to an uncontrolled airport. This point is not arguable. The word standard can be used in many contexts. Procedurely the overhead is as standardized as any other listed in the AIM. From an operational context each airport is going to be different in which approach is most common and therefore deemed standard. In either case the PIC gets to determine the operational need and doesn't need anyone else's blessing to do so provided no regulations are violated.

The main discussion has always been about how to handle those pilots who do not understand the procedure and to ensure when the overhead is executed it is done safely and with consideration to others.

Because I also fly helicopters (funny DanH!)... Here is a picture:


Last edited by RV8R999 : 08-16-2012 at 05:19 PM. Reason: Pictures are easier...
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:43 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.