Looking outside

[Piper.Classique]

As too close for comfort seems to have vanished up it's own backside, I will re-ignite here :}

Consider for example the type and frequensy of scan you use, are you focussing on the GPS? or anything else in or out of the cockpit, ideally, your head should never stop moving.

Agreed 100% I would add that you will also need to manouvre the aircraft to clear blind spots. For example dipping the right wing to see under the left wing before a left turn (high wing a/c)
I am in the happy position of having a rear view mirror on the strut, intended to use in watching the glider when I am towing, but pretty useful in general lookout.
Specially as practically everyone flys faster than me :)

Saints preserve us from those :mad: who rely on the radio to do their lookout for them :(

[xraf]

:mad::mad: hell!! That was quick! My poor old hands cant stand that much typing again today! What happened and why please mods? I thought the advice side of things was developing nicely.

[eharding]

Suspect that the original poster Roger10-4 deleted his opening post and took the thread with it. If you didn't see it, then it didn't exist. Rather ironic really.

[Rod1]

I had just typed my “rant” and could not post it as the thread had gone!:rolleyes:

I agree 100% with good lookout, but disagree with;

“Saints preserve us from those who rely on the radio to do their lookout for them ”

If you can get a RIS then it is a huge boost, particularly in poor VMC and it is your only protection in IMC. Getting a RIS when flying into the sun on a typical British summers evening with lots of haze is a really good idea, but you do not have to stop looking out as well.

I know of at least one 172 driver who has an anti collision device and has virtually stopped looking out as he relies on it. When I pointed out that about 80% of the traffic in my local area would not show up on his magic box, he flew into a rage about how everything should have mode s or be grounded, just to make his life easier, lookout was much too hard! It is a strange old world.:(

I get the general impression that people have criticized see and avoid to such an extent that some of the newer pilots are not trying quite as hard, which means it does not work quite as well, which gains more criticism…

Rod1

[Piper.Classique]

If you can get a RIS then it is a huge boost, particularly in poor VMC and it is your only protection in IMC.

We were talking VMC here....IMC is a different story. I don't object to anyone turning on the radio, I just think it is only an aid, and not always that useful. Anyway, as I don't have a transponder I don't ask for radar service, it only increases the controller's workload for a dubious benefit to me and others.

[PPRuNe Towers]

In fairness to BRL I have to confirm it was Roger10-4 who deleted his first post and thus the thread went down the gurgler.

It's a difficult position for all our mods - we have to give you all the ability to change your mind and delete or edit what you've written. We wouldn't have it any other way. I wouldn't normally comment but when a safety issue apparently gets shot down it's only fair to let you know.

Perhaps the moment has passed but you do have this thread and our thanks to Piper.Classique for reviving the issue.

Rob

[Rod1]

I guessed it was Roger10-4, thanks for confirming. I think he did not get the response he was expecting…:}

No criticism of BRL was intended.:ok:

Rod

[Mad Girl]

Rod1I agree 100% with good lookout, but disagree with;

“Saints preserve us from those who rely on the radio to do their lookout for them ”

If you can get a RIS then it is a huge boost, particularly in poor VMC and it is your only protection in IMC. Getting a RIS when flying into the sun on a typical British summers evening with lots of haze is a really good idea, but you do not have to stop looking out as well.

And you've got the situation of a newly qualified, low hours pilot who asks for a RIS.

NOT so as to avoid lookout, but to provide another pair of eyes which may spot someone you've missed 'cos your workload is high and you're inexperienced.... :sad:

[soay]

We're all taught about the limitations of the mark one eyeball, so there's no point in pretending it's foolproof. I've often been informed of traffic while flying, and not been able to see it, even though I knew where to look. However, if I hear "final" when I'm about to be in the same place, I'll know to slow up my approach. That's why I think we'd all be safer if we used radios in the circuit, even where it's legal not to. The cost of a handheld is small beer compared with running an aircraft, and could be a lifesaver.

[Rod1]

“The cost of a handheld is small beer compared with running an aircraft, and could be a lifesaver.”

Yes, it is the replacement of the engine and the modified ignition system to make it usable which costs. I spent well over 100 hours and not insignificant amounts of money trying to suppress the ignition on my Nipper to allow the hand held to work. I could get the radio working perfectly, but at the expense if a misfire, or the engine working but the ignition drowning out the radio completely. Do not assume it is as simple as just putting a hand held in the aircraft…

Rod1

[Mad Girl]

Reminds me Mad Girl of one of my first solo Nav flights, started with good vis but third leg was down the coast and the cloud was rolling in off the sea. I was under the cloud in VMC but the vis ahead was awful, I could see the ground for miles but nothing much directly ahead. I won't ever forget how focused I became when I heard the words 'Unknown traffic at your level on reciprocal heading' :eek: As it was we passed each other with plenty of room to spare but I get a service now whenever I can. Funny to think I knew they were there but they most likely didn't have a clue about the student heading straight for them as they were not talking to anybody.

I had a RIS all the way around my QXC route.

Was informed of a helicoptor operating in the area which shot passed me FROM BEHIND and only a hundred foot below and to my side. Would have scared the c:mad:p out of me if I hadn't known he was there, and I was stressed enough!!.

Have also been told of converging traffic well before I could see it. Because I'd been told about them I was looking harder and when I could see them.... I just moved out of their way.

They "obviously" hadn't been on the same service, or even listening in, and STILL didn't see me when i waggled my wings at them :sad:.

[soay]

the replacement of the engine and the modified ignition system to make it usable which costs. I spent well over 100 hours and not insignificant amounts of money trying to suppress the ignition on my Nipper to allow the hand held to work.
I can't argue with that, but it's unlikely to have been the case with the C152 which started this discussion. More likely is that its radio was broken and they couldn't be bothered to fix it. Shouldn't have stopped the pilot from using a hand held, though.

[eharding]

The original thread appears to have been resurrected for reference:

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=327849

[Rod1]

“More likely is that its radio was broken”

In my local area there are at least 8 frequencies it would be reasonable to be using. As the strip is unlicensed we use safety com and do our best to look out. Recently, this was not successful and two people died.:(

Rod1

[effortless]

'Scuse me if I am mistaken but wasn't the overtaking aircraft higher than the original poster? Had the higher aircraft clipped the lower one, which one, assuming survival, would get the kicking from the CAA? Were they in the circuit? In my book anyone descending from behind is the one most at fault. Or has airlaw changed in the last thirty years? Of course I may have misread all your posts.

[Rod1]

As the lower aircraft was at 2000ft I do not see how they could have been in the circuit?

Rod1

[BRL]

What happened and why please mods?

I have no idea what happened, I was at work today when it was deleted/brought back/locked etc... :)

[effortless]

As the lower aircraft was at 2000ft I do not see how they could have been in the circuit?


Sorry, long final then. The question still arises. Who has more responsibility? The bloke looking forward and descending or the bloke straight and level? How anyone can descend without having a look first I don't know.

[SNS3Guppy]

Some years ago I was exiting a large complex fire in California (USA), in a C-130. I was following established routing in and out of the fire area, and had just confirmed my transponder code with ATC. I spotted a Brasillia approaching from the right and above, and he passed close, quickly disappearing into the smoke below us and to our left. He was close enough I could clearly tell the captain was wearing Rayban Outdoorsman II sunglasses.

The Brasillia, flying for a regional airline, was talking to the same controller we were. He was operating under IFR, we were operating under VFR, albeit in low visibility conditions. The encounter took place inside a Temporary Flight Restriction, for which we were an assigned party.

No matter what the circumstances, IFR or VFR, everone is always responsible for seeing and avoiding. There is never any substitute. You can enhance your ability to look by using TCAS, TPAS, ATC, etc, but there is never a substitute for constant vigilliance outside the cockpit. Had I not seen the Brasillia and taken evasive action, there's little doubt that we would have collided. We didn't miss by much, as it was. You don't need to look away for long to miss the whole encounter; even at the low altitude speeds at which we crossed paths, the encounter came and went very quickly. It's really something you don't want to miss.

The same applies, even more, in the traffic pattern or near an airport, navaid, or airway. That's where airplanes gather. The airport in particular will find most pilots and instructors alike looking at the runway, focusing their attention, and perhaps not being as vigiliant as they should be. Don't let that person be you. Eyes up.

The question still arises. Who has more responsibility? The bloke looking forward and descending or the bloke straight and level? How anyone can descend without having a look first I don't know.


Who has more responsibility? Everyone.

Look for traffic like your life depends upon it. Because it does.

Descents and climbs should be punctuated with clearing turns to ensure there's no traffic one is overtaking, or which is overtaking one from beneath or above. In level flight one should make frequently clearing checks around the aircraft to view blind spots. Same for turns. Know who's out there, and don't let the radio spot traffic for you. It can certainly help, but nothing replaces what you can see.

[DeeCee]

I wonder what you all might make of the following? I was joining downwind LH from about 20 degrees off, shortly before the downwind position - this was a high wing and I had a good view of movements coming off the active runway, or so I thought. I had seen an aircraft lift off and had maybe fixated on it a little too much. Right as I went to transmit 'downwind' I saw a dark coloured classic aircraft passing close behind me. It had lifted off and turned left early so that it passed exactly through the downwind point at circuit height. Don't you think that is a potentially dangerous thing to do at an airfield? The one place that you are sure to find another aircraft is at the downwind point. I am told that the view from this type is quite poor and I am not certain that he saw me. If he did see me, then he was very reckless in judging the distance to pass behind.

[DeeCee]

I also learned to fly at a busy airfield in Essex and it was exactly as you describe. You simply get used to it. I suppose that my point is that the downwind point i.e. level with the upwind end of the runway and at circuit height is not appreciated properly. After all, the circuit calls are for the benefit of those in or near the circuit mainly for avoidance purposes.

[Final 3 Greens]

I wonder what you all might make of the following?

From what you describe, I think that you may have cut it up in the circuit, as you made a non standard join and flew through where this aircraft was aiming for, it definitely being in the circuit, having just taken off.

I would keep a better look out next time.

[DeeCee]

This is the approved join at this airfield. I suggest that you take a piece of paper and a pencil and draw out what happened. You may understand a little better instead of jumping to wrong conclusions. The other aircraft could not have followed the practise at this airfield which is a minimum 500' turnout clear of the field.

[effortless]

Quote:The question still arises. Who has more responsibility? The bloke looking forward and descending or the bloke straight and level? How anyone can descend without having a look first I don't know.

Who has more responsibility? Everyone.


Quite right but I was responding to the kicking the first poster was getting from everyone else. He has less chance of seeing behind him than the other pilot has of seeing in front yet he was the one flamed. A BOI would place the descending driver at fault.

[Final 3 Greens]

This is the approved join at this airfield. I suggest that you take a piece of paper and a pencil and draw out what happened. You may understand a little better instead of jumping to wrong conclusions. The other aircraft could not have followed the practise at this airfield which is a minimum 500' turnout clear of the field.

If you had bothered to explain in a little more detail, your post may have made more sense :ugh:

[Kengineer-130]

Interesting thread..... Seems a lot of problems are our own doing, "pushing in" on circuits etc, classics like VOR station overheads, centre of airways following GPS etc....

One thing that always worries me, is if you suddenly find your windscreen filled with another aircraft, will you both remember the turn right rule, or will self preservation take over and will each of you go for the slightly easier avoidance turn and end up playing airbourne chicken :ugh:...

The only times I have been in REAL fear of a mid-air , well the first one was at Ormond beach in Florida, where after 7pm the airfield becomes uncontrolled so it is down to your discretion which runway to land etc. I had been for a bimble up the coast and back, and joined the circuit in use by THREE :eek: other c-150's practicing thier night landings on runway 35. Joined and did a full stop landing, then went again for a few more circuits..... Well, on climbout of my third circuit, in the gap I had engineered myself after the other 3 a/c ( all in runway 35 circuit and spaced nicely), to my shock I saw a landing light coming straight at me, with the radio bursting into life announcing " Embray riddle xxxx, short finals for runway 17 practice VOR approach" :mad::mad::ugh::*, I had to make a sharp turn to the right, which took me well off the circuit, and the other a/c did not even move, just ploughed straight on and landed on 17 AGAINST the four aircraft n the circuit :ugh::ugh::ugh:..... As a low hours PPL student , that really knocked my confidence in the "see and avoid" principle. ( and yes, all 4 of us training at OBA put a complaint in, don't know if there was ever an outcome)...

Second time was being aerotowed in a glider, about 1000 feet just making our first turn, a warrior flew about 3' above us coming at 90° across our path :ugh:, right through the middle of the ATZ :ugh:, luckily me, my instructor and the tug driver had seen him , and taken avoiding action by decending hard, but it is scary how easily and quickly other A/C pop up without seemingly having a clue where they are, or about others in their vicinity....

In my eyes, the ONLY way to fly safly is to be eyes outside for 95% of the time, all the gps/tcas/ris/ras in the world is no help if some plank has decided to ingnore everything and fly where the hell he likes :suspect:.

[Piper.Classique]

SNS3Guppy said
Who has more responsibility? Everyone.

Look for traffic like your life depends upon it. Because it does.

Descents and climbs should be punctuated with clearing turns to ensure there's no traffic one is overtaking, or which is overtaking one from beneath or above. In level flight one should make frequently clearing checks around the aircraft to view blind spots. Same for turns. Know who's out there, and don't let the radio spot traffic for you. It can certainly help, but nothing replaces what you can see.Couldn't have put it better myself if I'd thought it out with both hands for a fortnight.

Here is a little rhyme to follow

Here lie the bones of Billie Day
Who died defending his right of way
He was right, dead right, as he flew along
But he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong.

heads UP please. It might be me you hit while you are fiddling with your GPS and I still say Saints preserve us from those who expect the radio to tell them about all the other traffic. It won't land the aircraft for you, either. :E

[Lister Noble]

Exactly the same at sea,same nav rules as air for the most part.
Expect the other craft to obey rules of road ,but if he does not then take appropriate avoiding action.
The captains prime concern is to avoid an accident,does not matter who is right or wrong.
Lister:)