Originally Posted by
pudoc
Interesting to see not many people blaming the approach controller. How you can plonk an aircraft right below another and ask them to maintain visual separation, whilst at a similar speed and track...legal or not. I know that’s the done thing in the US but there’s a lack of airmanship shown by the controller. Awful vectoring too.
Not a great deal of airmanship shown by either of the flight crews either.
from the AIM
A pilot sees the other aircraft involved and upon instructions from the controller provides separation by maneuvering the aircraft to avoid it. When pilots accept responsibility to maintain visual separation, they must maintain constant visual surveillance and not pass the other aircraft until it is no longer a factor.
When the CX accepted the visual he was instructed to maintain visual separation but not pass the aircraft. Many airports have very closely spaced runways and the aircraft can fly almost in formation. For awhile they were trying to establish PRM approaches for such airports with a “zone of no transgression” and a monitor approach controller. It’s all in an effort to increase arrival rates.