Looking outside
Thread Starter
Looking outside
As too close for comfort seems to have vanished up it's own backside, I will re-ignite here 
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
who rely on the radio to do their lookout for them 
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.
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
who rely on the radio to do their lookout for them
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Manchester UK
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
A little less conversation,
a little more aviation...
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bracknell, UK
Posts: 696
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had just typed my “rant” and could not post it as the thread had gone!
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
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
Thread Starter
If you can get a RIS then it is a huge boost, particularly in poor VMC and it is your only protection in IMC.
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: UK
Posts: 7,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Down South, preferably inverted
Posts: 235
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rod1
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....
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.
“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.
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....
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“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
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
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Down South, preferably inverted
Posts: 235
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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' 
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.
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.
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
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
.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rod1
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.
A little less conversation,
a little more aviation...
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bracknell, UK
Posts: 696
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The original thread appears to have been resurrected for reference:
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=327849
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=327849
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“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
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
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Under the clag EGKA
Posts: 1,028
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'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.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Under the clag EGKA
Posts: 1,028
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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.
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.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.