Whats a "deal"?

[68ft can of beer]

If 2 VFR aircraft, a jetranger and a 152 are within say 2 miles of each other, with perhaps 500ft vertical seperation. Is this a deal?

They crossed paths without collision. but it was within 30 seconds, made me shudder. I think the heli pilot got a nice view of the 152 heading onto him!

Saw this from my backyard in Australia last weekend.

[Jerricho]

The term "deal" is a very American one referring to a situation where a controller doesn't have the required separation (all sorts of other names: sep-loss, airprox, airmiss, incident, nasty, "Oh f**k"). Normally it would be with reference to aircraft in controlled airspace.

For the event you saw involving VFR aircraft, they may or may not have been in controlled airspace and may or may not have been receiving a ATC service. The premise of VFR flying is what is known as "see and be seen", hence the term "Visual Flight Rules" with weather requirements to ensure the flight stays as such.

VFR flights normally fly an altitude that is relevant to their direction of flight (here in Canada, a westbound flight flies at an even altitude + 500 feet eg 6500 feet, east bound is odd + 500 feet). Outside of controlled airspace, it seems like a good idea, doesn't it.

If the aircraft you saw were outside of controlled airspace, realistically if they saw each other and didn't trade paint, it was fine ;).

Just as a matter of interest, where did you see this. May give a better idea as to what was going on. If it was inside controlled airspace, it's a different ball game (and even then treated differently in different classifications)

[Point Seven]

Jerricho my old china. Things are getting bad when folks like you and me are on here pontificating on the fineties of reduced separation in the vicinity of an aerodrome.

I'm back online now and ready to roll.

P7:cool:

[Jerricho]

Ahhh P7 me old, nice to see you mate.

Now tell me, when was the last time you worked VFR traffic ;)

[av8boy]

It’s nice to see Jerricho in his element, isn't it? Well-said, buddy! :ok:

The FAA’s 7210.56C defines both “Operational Error” and “Operational Deviation” (see below). In my experience, when I hear somebody use the informal term “deal,” I assume there has been an Operational Error. I don’t recall hearing it applied to Operational Deviations.

a. Operational Error: An occurrence attributable to an element of the air traffic system in which:
(1) Less than the applicable separation minima results between two or more aircraft, or between an aircraft and terrain or obstacles (e.g., operations below minimum vectoring altitude (MVA); equipment / personnel on runways), as required by FAA Order 7110.65 or other national directive; or
(2) An aircraft lands or departs on a runway closed to aircraft operations after receiving air traffic authorization.
(3) An aircraft lands or departs on a runway closed to aircraft operations, at an uncontrolled airport and it was determined that a NOTAM regarding the runway closure was not issued to the pilot as required.
b. Operational Deviation: An occurrence attributable to an element of the air traffic system in which applicable separation minima as referenced in paragraph 5-1-1a, Operational Error was maintained, but:
(1) Less than the applicable separation minima existed between an aircraft and adjacent airspace without prior approval; or
(2) An aircraft penetrated airspace that was delegated to another position of operation or another facility without prior coordination and approval; or
(3) An aircraft penetrated airspace that was delegated to another position of operation or another facility at an altitude or route contrary to the altitude or route requested and approved in direct coordination or as specified in a letter of agreement (LOA), pre-coordination, or internal procedure; or
(4) An aircraft is either positioned and/or routed contrary to that which was coordinated individually or; as specified in a LOA/directive between positions of operation in either the same or a different facility; or
(5) An aircraft, vehicle, equipment, or personnel encroached upon a landing area that was delegated to another position of operation without prior coordination and approval.


Dave

[niknak]

If they are VFR and can both see each other, what is the "deal"?

No problem as far as I can see.

[Point Seven]

Jerricho

We don't get much VFR traffic down in the office. Great chocolate biccies though.

Have to bow to your superior knowledge here.

P7:confused:

[Jerricho]

Good to see you still know your place, biach!

;)

[catocontrol]

VFR traffic should not be seperated from each other. Traffic info should be sufficient.

Many controllers seperate VFR from IFR in Airspace class D! This is not required!

[Jerricho]

It's not required, however sometimes a gentle prod in the right direction makes life easier for all involved ;)