Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Accidents and Close Calls
Reload this Page >

Midair Collision Near Waddesdon

Accidents and Close Calls Discussion on accidents, close calls, and other unplanned aviation events, so we can learn from them, and be better pilots ourselves.

Midair Collision Near Waddesdon

Old 21st Nov 2017, 07:57
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: london
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wycombe area Air Traffic

Originally Posted by Talkdownman View Post
Thirded. The Daily Telegraph also needs reminding that this collision occurred 13 miles outside Wycombe ATC's area of jurisdiction, and that it has no relevance whatsoever. My wife is a DT subscriber. Given half the chance I would cancel it and reduce our expensive trashy recycling.
>>>

Sorry for any misunderstanding of my post which was NOT intended to be a criticism of any ATC authority but referring to air traffic control among pilots and their aircraft. It was the first time I had flown anywhere near that airfield and the impression gained from the mass of jumbled aircraft flying in all or any direction was reminiscent of a mass bees around a honey pot . I may just have picked a bad day but nevertheless made a mental note to keep well clear of flying in that area in the future. Things may be different and greatly improved today but that was my experience years ago. My apologies for upsetting those concerned.
pasir is offline  
Old 21st Nov 2017, 10:26
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hotel this week, hotel next week, home whenever...
Posts: 1,492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It must be said that the gap in the LARS coverage in the south Midlands seems to get ever larger.
Oxford Radar 127.750 provide a more than efficient LARS service - perhaps too efficient at times. That doesn't change the fact that it is uncontrolled airspace and you don't have to talk to anybody if you don't want to.
Duchess_Driver is offline  
Old 21st Nov 2017, 15:26
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: South of England
Posts: 1,164
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
pasir

Understood that you did not mean to imply criticism of any ATC unit, but it's rather confusing when you then refer to "air traffic control among pilots and their aircraft"!

As for the mass of jumbled aircraft flying in ... any direction = class G with a few other people doing what you were doing! Why is that a bad day?

2 s
2 sheds is online now  
Old 21st Nov 2017, 18:33
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by rsuggitt View Post
IIRC, both Farnborough North LARS and London Information were unavailable on the day concerned (the Farnborough North LARS still is unavailable as of today).
This statement is incorrect. Both agencies were available at the time of this accident.

As mentioned the NOTAM'd closure of Farnborough North was after 17.00 and the London Info closures are after midnight.
Jimmy5616 is offline  
Old 21st Nov 2017, 21:02
  #65 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,061
Received 52 Likes on 25 Posts
Originally Posted by Duchess_Driver View Post
Oxford Radar 127.750 provide a more than efficient LARS service - perhaps too efficient at times. That doesn't change the fact that it is uncontrolled airspace and you don't have to talk to anybody if you don't want to.
Yes, I've used Oxford before. However official responsibility for LARS for that area is covered by Brize and the gap lies further east
ShyTorque is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2017, 14:37
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Herts
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jimmy5616 View Post
This statement is incorrect. Both agencies were available at the time of this accident.

As mentioned the NOTAM'd closure of Farnborough North was after 17.00 and the London Info closures are after midnight.
I accept the correction ! Though I will say that I think that the NOTAM was worded in a misleading way (for simple folk like me, anyway).
rsuggitt is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2017, 16:05
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by rsuggitt View Post
I will say that I think that the NOTAM was worded in a misleading way (for simple folk like me, anyway).
I would agree with that. Especially in the context that a pre flight list of NOTAMS affecting even a short route runs to many pages.
Jimmy5616 is offline  
Old 25th Nov 2017, 12:28
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Berkshire, UK
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
the USAF have the answer to collision avoidance.

Fighter pilots told 'keep windscreens clean' to avoid crashes - BBC News

Sorted!

Rans6.......................
rans6andrew is offline  
Old 25th Nov 2017, 23:35
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Yes.
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Any cropdusting pilot worth his salt even decades ago, could have told them that.

A dirty bug spattered windscreen, especially flying into the direction of the sun can be a ticket to eternity in that business.
Dan_Brown is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2017, 15:40
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I am a little surprised to see Accidents and Close calls situated in the Non Airline Forums. Does this mean, "airline" personal aren't exposed to, or interested in the results of human faillings? I do wonder.
Dan, this is an anomaly/peculiarity of the GA forum (and an extremely poor one at that). Military accidents are in the military forum, ditto commercial ones, ditto rotorheads. The same format should apply to GA, and some would argue the rationale behind having your accident discussions right in the eyeballs of the relevant flying community (as opposed to a sub-forum) would be even more important in GA.

...and it also serves to confuse as your comment and plenty of other dual threads/posts demonstrate.

Time this anomaly is fixed imo.
The Old Fat One is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2017, 16:53
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: UK
Posts: 7,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Seems some are determined to miss the point: One stop collation at a single point whether running live or moved over after the fact.

The forums you praise are actually the cause of this forum. Reams of information lost through the tyranny of time and the slipping down through the pages so quickly. Final reports get even more lost, more quickly as they only generate shorter threads to get lost in the cracks. 20+ years of archives demonstrate this time and again.

Rob
PPRuNe Towers is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2017, 20:41
  #72 (permalink)  
aox
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by rans6andrew View Post
the USAF have the answer to collision avoidance.

Fighter pilots told 'keep windscreens clean' to avoid crashes - BBC News

Sorted!

Rans6.......................
Years ago the USAF devoted significant effort to telling us they might not be looking where they were going

The F-111 was badly fenestrated.

Hence the Heyford radio area.
aox is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2017, 09:08
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
crowded skies? try flying on a GOOD day for gliding...

Invited to visit ATC at Upper Heyford, long ago, when Americans were running the place...they kindly demonstrated what their equipment could transmit.
It depended on the settings....they could actually see EVERY CAR AND TRUCK on the M40! And certainly any aircraft above 50 feet, whatever.

But the day that they dreaded was good gliding weather when gliding competitions were taking place. Talk about crowded skies? twenty or thirty returns in one thermal?

Power pilots, stay home, or practice your night flying!
mary meagher is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2017, 22:54
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Seems some are determined to miss the point:
Tad unconstructive no? I used to authorise aviators for a living...hence my knowledge of all things flight safety is (or perhaps was) of some merit???

I well understand the merits of having a specialised "accidents" sub forum. And indeed the demerits of such. I also understand the merits of having an organised, clear and structured forum, where everybody knows where everything is and everything goes.

Plenty of posts I have seen would suggest, you are not quite there yet.

But hey, it's your train set...do what you want, you will anyway.
The Old Fat One is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.