It’s understandable that we have a hard time convincing those who sit on the ground and write regulations about the benefits of offsetting, but what amazes me is the incredible lack of imagination in so many of my colleagues who fly the line and daily watch a succession of aircraft (with a closing speed of near 1000 kts) fly directly - and I mean directly over or under their aircraft. And still the majority of them resist offsetting and don’t use it even when it’s allowed.
It's been said before on this thread, but I'll say it again - if offsetting was made SOP – or even better, made mandatory – in all but terminal areas, or at the very least, whenever outside radar coverage, 154 people would still be alive today.
I'm told that journalists read these threads. If that's the case, maybe one of you could dredge up some 'shock! Horror!' headlines over this point - that today's supposedly modern air traffic system forbids pilots from using this simple ‘last ditch’ procedure that would undoubtedly save lives should all other safety procedures fail - as they did in this case, and have done in the past.
*****
Here to Help, how in the world could an aircraft that it .2 of a mile off track on an airway be infringing military airspace? Even if he was 2 miles off track, he’d still be well within the confines of a standard enroute airway. (No one is asking for offsets within terminal areas.)