2 -v- 1 (close call with a Viper)

[Kuma]

disagreement

This is where we disagree. I don't think that it was a "ridiculously bad decision" on the part of the fighter pilot. Any maneuver that the fighter pilot might consider safe and well controlled would blow the logic circuit of the TCAS which is designed to help you deconflict from other civil traffic.

So my point, is that closing to a 1000 feet is a yawn (and ridiculously long range) for a fighter pilot but is considered a "ridiculously bad decision" by the civil pilot reacting to the TCAS.

If you fly trough an active MOA, do not be surprised and do not overreact. Your TCAS is out of its element.

 

[Deuce130]

This is where we disagree. I don't think that it was a "ridiculously bad decision" on the part of the fighter pilot. Any maneuver that the fighter pilot might consider safe and well controlled would blow the logic circuit of the TCAS which is designed to help you deconflict from other civil traffic.

So my point, is that closing to a 1000 feet is a yawn (and ridiculously long range) for a fighter pilot but is considered a "ridiculously bad decision" by the civil pilot reacting to the TCAS.

If you fly trough an active MOA, do not be surprised and do not overreact. Your TCAS is out of its element.

Being punched in the face by your sister is a yawn, being punched by Mike Tyson would hurt. Also depends on who's getting hit. I don't think a single person here disagrees that entering a MOA is a bad idea. I also am surprised by the number of people who don't think intentionally closing on a civilian aircraft is a bad idea. Serious lack of judgement, especially when it was unnecessary. Military pilots are supposed to be professionals, GA enthusiasts and private pilots are not. We have a higher standard to uphold and giving in to frustration, anger, or irritation while in command of one of America's airplanes is inexcusable, regardless of the reason.

 

[SIG600]

Military sacrifices have nothing to do with Lt Numbnuts Viper Driver intercepting not one but two civillian aircraft legally flying in public airspace. The fact still remains that the only unsafe flight operation was conducted by the military pilot on that day, in that area.

There it is... that's the argument here, and the issue of aviators more seasoned and experienced than you. Hell, my helmet bag has more experience.

 

[Bjammin]

Military pilots are supposed to be professionals, GA enthusiasts and private pilots are not. We have a higher standard to uphold and giving in to frustration, anger, or irritation while in command of one of America's airplanes is inexcusable, regardless of the reason.

I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Being in command of ANY airplane requires professionalism and responsibility, much more so then controlling any other type of vehicle.

I agree that if the F-16 pilot intentionally got inside of 500ft of the civilian aircraft then he was being reckless and way out of line.

However, it is the responsibility of ANY PIC to insure the safety of his aircraft and have situational awareness of his surroundings. I would argue that by flying into an active MOA without notifying the controlling agency you have compromised both of those.

To expect the military aircraft in the MOA to have situational awareness of you and rely on them to keep all involved safe is unrealisitic.

Please, let us know where, what altitude, and what time you will be going through the MOA and we will TRY to change OUR plans and keep all safe. Deal?

 

[Deuce130]

I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Being in command of ANY airplane requires professionalism and responsibility, much more so then controlling any other type of vehicle.

I agree that if the F-16 pilot intentionally got inside of 500ft of the civilian aircraft then he was being reckless and way out of line.

However, it is the responsibility of ANY PIC to insure the safety of his aircraft and have situational awareness of his surroundings. I would argue that by flying into an active MOA without notifying the controlling agency you have compromised both of those.

To expect the military aircraft in the MOA to have situational awareness of you and rely on them to keep all involved safe is unrealisitic.

Please, let us know where, what altitude, and what time you will be going through the MOA and we will TRY to change OUR plans and keep all safe. Deal?

Sorry, BJAMMIN, but I think you're wrong. I agree with most of what you've said so far, especially your points concerging notifitying controlling agencies, but you and everyone else who flies for Uncle Sam gets paid for just that - to be a professional aviator. You ARE held to a higher standard than Joe Schmoe flying around with more money than sense. To hold a lawyer with a PPL to the same standard as an F16 pilot diminishes the F16 pilot, and everyone else with military wings.

 

[Bjammin]

To hold a lawyer with a PPL to the same standard as an F16 pilot diminishes the F16 pilot, and everyone else with military wings.

An idiot that violates restricted airspace or transits through an approach path of a major airport can cause as much damage and death as an F-16 pilot with an AIM-9.

Yes, there are different levels of professional aviatiors, but you have to have a certain level of responsibility to be a PIC. That level MUST include the need to be inheirently safe and have respect of our surroundings.

I have known many civilian aviators with only a PPL that have more aviation professionalism then some of my military peers.

This is somewhat of a silly argument. Does a 747 pilot have more responsibilty then a P-3 commander? Does a T-37 instructor have to be more professional then a Citation owner? We all, as pilots, have the same responsibility, the safe operation of the aircraft we sign for. That's a BIG deal.

 

[SIG600]

You guys are both right, but I think you're both wrong as well. Proffessionalism is a frame of mind, not a function of hours. Everyone behind the controls of any aircraft has to understand that, or they are doomed to failure.

Having said that however... by in large the non-flying public (and I'm sure to a large extent aviators themselves) expect more from military aviators BECAUSE of our training, and the proffesionalism and skill it requires to operate the stuff we get to fly. I'm not talking stick and rudder skills either... any monkey can "fly" an F-18.

 

[Deuce130]

Does a T-37 instructor have to be more professional then a Citation owner? quote]

Without a doubt. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[Bjammin]

I think the crux of the discussion is this: Joe pilot in any aircraft needs to realize that he has great responsibilities.

Does farmer Joe flying a C-150 over his farm land in Nowhere Nebraska have the same responsibilities as Joe captain flying a 777 into LAX? No, but that does not absolve him from his duty to operate his craft safely, and that includes being aware of the airspace and aircraft around him.

Some in my flying communities, both airline and military, want to abolish VFR flying all together. I'm very much against that, but VFR pilots must underatand and respect the airspace around them and act in a cautious AND professional manner in order to keep the great freedom of flight awarded them.