The FAA has published a reminder to all pilots to lift their heads from the electronics when circumstances demand. The agency issued an advisory circular on Friday laying out all the regs that mention see and avoid as fundamental to the pilot’s role in preventing midair collisions. “The most advanced piece of flight equipment in any aircraft is the human eye, and since the number one cause of midair collisions is the failure to adhere to the see-and-avoid concept, efficient use of visual techniques and knowledge of the eye’s limitations will help pilots avoid collisions,” the AC says.
The AC comes after a number of high-profile midairs all over the U.S. in recent years in VFR, but the publication uses Alaska air tour accidents as examples. The AC contains a comprehensive list of regulations, studies and supporting information to buttress the see-and-avoid fundamental. “When weather conditions permit, pilots operating IFR or VFR are required to observe and maneuver to avoid other aircraft (refer to § 91.113 for right-of-way rules),” the AC notes.
If the photo is of the two Cessna’s colliding at Watsonville, my head still itches when I hear the -152 pilot calling base. He had an unobstructed view of the final approach corridor, and he must have heard the -340 pilot’s last call before he started his base turn. The -152 pilot even acknowledged that he was being overtaken, and initiated a go around. There’s not much more one can say but someone momentarily lost situational awareness in a busy traffic pattern.
David, an airplane three miles away low against a terrain background is pretty darn hard to see. I don’t recall if the 340 radio calls mentioned what type of aircraft….”white Cessna” or “N numbers” on final three miles out could be a 152 or a Citation, tad different approach speeds. Just sayin’.
I don’t believe the -340 was three miles when the -152 pilot turned base, but just the fact that the -340 pilot reported final within that distance would have prompted most pilots on downwind to yield final to the faster aircraft. I know I would have.
Aviate, Navigate, and (THEN) Communicate. It should not be assumed that the 152 saw the 340 with a mountainous backdrop while he was doing 180 knots. Furthermore, the 340 pressed on full steam unable to see the 152. Had the 152 been a cub without a radio (as is legal), the results would have likely been the same. I think that at the very least we need to dust off Ye Ole FAR to settle EXACTLY what the “traffic pattern” legally is; because the guy in the 152 CLEARLY though he had the right of way. If you take the radio communication completely out of the picture, and assume that the 340 3 miles out might not be seen by a student pilot shifting his scan back and forth from the end of the runway to far off in the distance? I dunno. I’m on the side of the 152 pilot. Utmost respect and condolences to all families.
The 340 was far out hauling ass. I could understand why the Cessna didn’t see him. Also the 340 could have heard that the Cessna was turning final and aborted his landing if he didn’t see him. I think this was an accident caused by get there itis.
Yes, we need to keep our heads out the window as a general rule, but “see and avoid” has kind of been proven to be rather ineffective. This is especially the case when you have situations such as a low-wing above a high-wing, or an aircraft below you that disappears into the ground clutter. And forget about “see and avoid” during hazy days. I think the most effective method would be augmented reality glasses. This would help you find the area of sky where other traffic is located while actually looking out the window to visually locate the traffic.
You’re right, but it’s much easier to blame the pilot.
Were you around after the Controller Strike? There were so many close calls, the back of FAA Forms 7233-1 contained a Last Will and Testament.
Gary:
Augmented Reality (AR) is based on the false premise that accurate data are available to the AR feed. Absent sophisticated sensors in the aircraft airspace below radar does not provide data coverage of a large population of flying obstacles like birds, NORDO aircraft (crewed and otherwise, with electrical systems and otherwise) or static obstacles that penetrate the airspace which are not yet included in the geo-spatial data sets the feed AR.
Keep your head on a swivel and eyes outside. The midair or CFIT you avoid might be your own. 👀
Are you arguing that ALL aircraft should now be required to have installed and operate ADSB to facilitate the use of “augmented reality” glasses? You might as well ban dark colored or camouflaged paint schemes. Lets just keep our heads up and eyes outside!
That’s not at all what I wrote…
I saw how ADSB is not the be all to end all Saturday. The Ipad said traffic was 500ft below me, I kept looking and finally saw him at my altitude.
“The most advanced piece of flight equipment in any aircraft is the human eye, and since the number one cause of midair collisions is the failure to adhere to the see-and-avoid concept, efficient use of visual techniques and knowledge of the eye’s limitations will help pilots avoid collisions,” the AC says. I completely agree.
Humans are great at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory …
ADS-B or something like it is 30 years too late. We have had GPS for maybe that long. It’s possibilities were ignored for many years.
And now how is it normally implemented? Keep the pilots eyes inside the cockpit to watch a display instead of outside the cockpit, where they belong. Audio warnings should be part of every ADS-B installation with advise on where possible intersections are, and suggestions on actions to avoid a collision.
Yesterday was a banner day to illustrate See and Be Seen…and it’s limitations. In the first instance I was approaching an airport from the east to land on 36, while another aircraft of same speed was approaching the same distance on final to the south, and did not have ADSB-Out. We were both talking to FSS, and I just couldn’t find them…so I deliberately turned left to make darn sure there would be no conflict and called #2. I didn’t see them until they crossed the threshold. The second event, heading home in a friend’s Comanche, we were on a long path to straight in downwind left, they were in a 172, again with no ADSB-Out, and about 4 miles ahead of us. Two of us, talking to them for location and using our best eyeball skills, couldn’t find them until they turned base – we had of course slowed down a bunch to make darn sure we wouldn’t over-run them, particularly because everyone has a different definition of the size of a circuit and how to describe where you are.
The reinforced lesson: assuming someone can/will see you to provide collision avoidance is very very very foolish. Do what you need to do to make very absolutely sure there’s no way you can hit them. Turning base when there’s an aircraft on long final that you can’t see…sorry, doesn’t matter who’s ‘right’, that’s just asking for disaster.
The even bigger illustration is when you don’t even know about other traffic nearby.
The number of times ADS-B or ATC has indicated traffic to me that I never saw despite my best efforts is far greater than the number of times I have seen traffic that was not on ADS-B or ATC radar (which isn’t zero, but it amounts to maybe one a year).
The real takeaway is really “don’t get complacent about scanning for traffic” and ” use all means of detection available”.
I never flew a plane with those gadgets. (TCAS/ADS-B) Usually, I just established contact with approach or center for traffic advisories, and if other aircraft were in conflict, they’d let me know.
The second closest I have come to a likely fatal mid air was a fast retractable doing a long straight in to an uncontrolled airport with several airplanes in the pattern, broadcasting on the old frequency (changed 3 year’s previously 🙄).
I was a new private pilot on base leg looking at the runway to gauge my turn to final when I got a flash in my peripheral vision almost immediately followed by the site of the airplane passing directly in front of me maybe 100 feet away.
The majority of mid airs happen around uncontrolled airports. Operating safely around these airports is not rocket science if the AIM and any local published procedures are followed. This is one area where GA has to do better.
“The majority of mid airs happen around uncontrolled airports.”
Is that actually the case, though? I don’t know.
Within five miles of airports and day VFR
Unless the plane is on fire, barreling into an uncontrolled field on a high-speed straight-in is careless & reckless, period. IMHO it should be cause for a violation even when there’s no collision, or evasive action taken, or even when there doesn’t happen to be other traffic in the pattern.
Still saying ADSB was a waste of time and money. They should have waited until there was a $500 solution that actually worked. Now we are stuck with this kluge. We are all thousands poorer, AND it seems midair’s are actually going up (?).
I don’t see that midairs are increasing. Anyone else?
Actually, humans are poor performers at see-and-avoid tasks. I can’t tell you how many times ATC has called out traffic – traffic at your 10 o’clock, traffic at your 11 o’clock, traffic at your 12 o’clock, traffic at your 1 o’clock, traffic no longer a factor – and I’ve never seen it. Back when we were first looking at “sense and avoid” now “detect and avoid” for unmanned systems, the official position was just make the machine do it as well as a human. I was like, ok, that’s easy because humans really suck at it. Then they realized what they were saying, and numbers like 1×10^(-6) (1 in a million) or even better were being thrown around, which is much better performance than a human. I’m not saying give up on “see and avoid”, especially in uncontrolled congested areas, but the tools they are saying pilots eyes are glued to are giving better information generally IMHO. What’s probably missing is some sort of aural or visual alert like TCAS to help the pilot understand there is a situation evolving so they don’t have their heads buried all the time. I avoided being drilled by an Airbus descending into me (C172) from behind not because pilots saw me but because their TCAS went off. I heard it going off when they called ATC and shortly later saw them flying right by off my right wing.
If the businesses want to make their market projections, the performance better increase a lot more than the traffic does.
I’m no genius, but my intuition tells me that increasing traffic by a factor of ten will increase the collisions by much more than a factor of ten.
Just Say’n.
(Let’s see if somebody whips up a good Fermi on that one.)
You can add hear and avoid. Particularly in patterns at busy, uncontrolled fields, if there were a passel of planes and no pattern calls, I’d chime up on the CTAF and advise pilots to keep up the chatter, folks. During a trip to Lincoln, CA for pattern work, I watched in horror as one plane departed runway 33 on initial climb, while another plane was on short final for runway 15. With as much calm demeanor as I could muster, I radioed “Both aircraft at Lincoln, turn right immediately!” two times before each plane banked to starboard. That was a close one.