The high probability of errors in the reporting
I may not live long enough to read the official reports on this accident, so I appreciate all of you who have contributed info from news reports, local knowledge, similar incidents, and Wikipedia, despite the high probability of errors in the reporting. I factor that in. As has been pointed out, Wikipedia has the advantage that errors can be easily corrected. That doesn't happen with news reports or PPruNe posts. And an interesting thing, those official reports sometimes seem a bit politically skewed. For example, the hair-raising F-16 vs Cessna 172 N73829 near Tampa that OK465 cited. Read it and see if you agree that the poor Cessna pilot was in any way responsible, or even ATC. And I'm a USAF veteran. Ignoring the high probability of errors, Kathryn's Report has a good article on this incident and mentions that “Both aircraft had operable transponders". Please continue to contribute any info on this accident you find, that's why I read PPRuNe.
Last edited by PrivtPilotRadarTech; 11th Jul 2015 at 08:11.
Reason: The yellow plane is not the C-152.