Originally Posted by
172_driver
Isn't that a bit like speeding through an intersection without looking - there is only a probability I will hit someone?
When there is a fly-over, one can do so.....
Originally Posted by
172_driver
Sure, if you're using the data plots after it happened, you can construct something which doesn't involve two aircraft at same point in space. Or am I not following you?
Let me try again ;-)
There are 2 (tilted and bent) planes, one for the Bombers, one for the fighters in which the aircraft fly. For the area these aircrafts use, there is no overlap/crossing of the planes, so no (potential) conflict for the aircraft. The fighters are in the "upper" plane, the bombers in the lower one. At least, when you assume 2 display lines, which is now assumed, after the audio emerged.
Originally Posted by
172_driver
Now it so happened that probability positioned two aircraft at same spot in space, at the same time, and that probability could've been reduced to almost zero by better coordination of lateral and vertical profiles to be flown. Yes, the direct cause so happened to be the P63 (or the B17, but arguably the P63 was late) was at the wrong spot at the wrong time, but there was a good chance of that happening with the way it was set up.
With one display line, there would be a problem, though with separate display lines for bombers and fighters, there is separation in space and time.
Of course, when it turns out with further investigations, the mechanism of 1000ft and 500ft display lines are invented on the spot and only used by part of the display aircraft, tja, things will change......