Originally Posted by
Sidestick_n_Rudder
Should the Mods also delete the quoted FAA and ICAO regulations as "non-kosher"?
The problem with the weasel words in the ICAO docs is that they are intended to allow a pilot to not follow an RA if it would be more dangerous to do so than to risk a collision, example: getting a "climb" RA that is beyond the performance of the aircraft. But some pilots, like F16 above, think it means they can basically do what they want. If they think they have full SA then they can do a non RA manoeuvre instead. That is not the case though, if it is a genuine RA and it's not going to put you into the ground or cause you to stall, then FOLLOW IT! More importantly, if you, for whatever reason, won't, or can't follow it, then do NOTHING, don't do a non TCAS manoeuvre in an attempt to avoid the target aircraft.
If there are so few aircraft in the area that you think you can positively identify the intruder aircraft then you won't come to any harm by following the RA. If there are enough aircraft around that you can't positively identify the intruder aircraft then you must follow the RA. In both cases, just follow the RA.