Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

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

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
erj-145mech said:
What I do with the Admirals staff is so far over your insignificant head, that it dwarfs what ever you think you do into oblivion.
Oh, I get it now, your screen name comes from inSIGnificant!
Click to expand...

What you do under the Admiral's desk is nothing to be proud of.



In Hoc.
 
Scrapdog said:
Because he was responding to a GA pilot flying in the middle of his fight when the GA pilot knew perfectly well it was a hot MOA.

It's not rocket science, if there are 4 or 8 high speed military jets maneuvering in relation to each other, they're not looking for a 250 knot GA airplane. Don't go in there, for safety's sake alone, much less poor judgement.
Click to expand...

Let me condense your two paragraphs into three letters.

"Ego"
 
By the way, for the record; I want our fighter pilots to be aggressive, that's their job. Carry on, and be safe.
 
Well, I'm going weigh in again, despite the beatings I took on the last thread that discussed this issue. I think everyone agrees flying through an active MOA is a bad idea. If you have the foresight to call the controlling agency and can deconflict prior to entry, then good. If you can't, don't go in. As for the actions of the Viper pilot - that seems to be in dispute. What should not be disputed is that whatever he did, he could've done it better. I think the main thing to remember, in spite of all the chest thumping and E-peen stroking going on here by the pointy nose guys, is that MIL pilots are PROFESSIONALS. The GA pilots are not. The expectations for us are, and should be, higher.
 
Agressive?

cjdriver said:
My point was that a 180 degree turn towards the ga and the resultant RA demonstrates an aggressive and impulsive move on the part of the 16.
Click to expand...
I don't think you have a clue as to what an aggressive move is in an F-16. Aggressive to you might be a mild reposition to an F-16. An "aggressive" 180 turn is done every time a viper does an overhead patter to land. SOP.
 
ExAF said:
I don't think you have a clue as to what an aggressive move is in an F-16. Aggressive to you might be a mild reposition to an F-16. An "aggressive" 180 turn is done every time a viper does an overhead patter to land. SOP.
Click to expand...

for you.... not aggressive...

to a civ pilot..... yes... and that is what this is about....
 
cjdriver said:
It would have to be within a few hundred feet to generate an RA, and the pilot is heard reporting the 16 came within a couple hundred feet. That would be credible, coming from someone who flies a jet aircraft and is dependent on their ability to judge distances the way we do everyday, would it not?
Click to expand...

TCAS II does not measure distance, it measures rates and anticipates the potential for a future collision using transponder returns. Also, considering the way an F-16 maneuvers even non-aggressively and at the rate of speed they're going, the TCAS could easily give a TA or RA and the F-16 would already be gone.

That being said, an F-16 maneuvering in a much less-than-aggressive manner (as evidenced by the turn-on seen in the radar video) than it normally operates is still far more aggressive than the average civilian will ever maneuver am aircraft. If you want to see how tight a block 50 F-16 can turn, I'll strap you to the pylon of the A-10 while I'm BFM'ing him and you can see for yourself.

So its very possible that the TCAS would have been set off without the F-16 getting within 500', simply by maneuvering around the civilian traffic in a manner consistent with non-aggressive fighter-type maneuvering.

I'm not taking sides in this case, but to hit some of the talking points people have been making:
- Civilians are looking at a military fighter maneuvering in relation to them, and don't understand how military dudes operate their jets and what, to them, is considered 'close' or 'aggressive'
- Military dudes are looking at the civilians and wondering what the big deal is - but to them, getting a TCAS RA is a huge deal, whether or not we think we are not maneuvering aggressively on them
- Judging distances is VERY subjective. In the A-10, as well as in fighters, we do something called MIL sizing. Without getting deep into what a milliradian is, and how to break it down, basically, its taking something you know the wingspan of or fuselage length of and then comparing its apparent size to something you have to target with (HUD symbology, gunsight, etc.) to come up with a very close approximation of range. Once you do this a few thousand times, your eyeballs get used to judging distances - and this is something most civilians do not do on a regular basis. Once again, most civilians don't have another aircraft coming within 1,000' of them unless they're parked at the FBO (with the occasional IFR/VFR passing within 500'). So once again, what is close for a civilian (think of the runway illusions with short but wide runways or vice versa - same principle and your eyeballs are deceiving you) is WAY far away for a tactical jet.
- what a public relations person from the base says and what the extent of the discipline is, especially in a case like this, is far and away from what most civilians think of when they reference Hollywood-versions of the 'stereotypical military-style butt-chewing'.

Now, for a personal opinion - the comm jamm on the freq after the civilian spoke up (and continued to share his war-and-peace diatribe on the radio) and which was added to by the other guy after the first one spoke up is totally bogus. Make the call, ask for a phone number, and then shut up and fly the airplane if you are scared of being hit by another aircraft.
 
The term joint use tends to escape some people.

When you start flying civilian again or in the future you'll understand how serious an RA is. Maybe if the DHL flight and the russian airliner had there wouldn't be bodies all over eastern europe.

I do bet though after the press coverage this got the military pilot is at a radio listening post somewhere close to the north pole.
 
TCASII operates on both distance and closure rates. The 16 had to be within a few hundred feet to set off an RA. Anytime someone points a weapon at me, I consider that aggressive, not so much the maneuver. Having said that, if I'm in an active MOA, it would not be unexpected to have a weapon pointed at me. If I had an RA screaming for a 3000fpm climb, I would absolutely react as trained and follow the RA if I couldn't gain a visual immediately. I've only had one RA, and it required only a few hundred fpm climb. A 3000fpm RA would indicate a significant closure rate and impending collision.
 
cjdriver said:
Having said that, if I'm in an active MOA, it would not be unexpected to have a weapon pointed at me. If I had an RA screaming for a 3000fpm climb, I would absolutely react as trained and follow the RA if I couldn't gain a visual immediately. I've only had one RA, and it required only a few hundred fpm climb. A 3000fpm RA would indicate a significant closure rate and impending collision.
Click to expand...

Other unknowns: did the civvy pilot overreact? I understand being a bit flustered, but perhaps he had other options available. For example, did he ever have the F-16 in sight? If so, was lateral maneuvering then an option, instead of continuing the climb into the Class A?

Once again, none of us was there, so much of this topic is pure speculation hindered by preconceived perceptions.
 
Rez O. Lewshun said:
for you.... not aggressive...

to a civ pilot..... yes... and that is what this is about....
Click to expand...


And a competent civilian pilot should understand that while operating in an active MOA, there might be a little "aggressive" maneuvering going on...but again, you would need a certain level of competence.

Diesel...

I doubt he got much more than a sit down. You need to learn how the military works.
 
Diesel said:
The term joint use tends to escape some people.

When you start flying civilian again or in the future you'll understand how serious an RA is. Maybe if the DHL flight and the russian airliner had there wouldn't be bodies all over eastern europe.

I do bet though after the press coverage this got the military pilot is at a radio listening post somewhere close to the north pole.
Click to expand...


Many military pilots fly civilian to and know well what an RA is. . .and that pilot is flying a viper in a MOA somewhere. . .you're an idiot
 
Rez O. Lewshun said:
for you.... not aggressive...

to a civ pilot..... yes... and that is what this is about....
Click to expand...


actually its about a civilian in a MILITARY operating area. . . .


NOT a military dude in a CIVILIAN operating area. . .If he had made that manuever in class B airspace, you might have a point. .
 
I do bet though after the press coverage this got the military pilot is at a radio listening post somewhere close to the north pole

There are several casinos down here that would love to see you come through the front door. Methinks you've watched one or two movies too many.
 
AIR2MUD said:
Other unknowns: did the civvy pilot overreact? I understand being a bit flustered, but perhaps he had other options available. For example, did he ever have the F-16 in sight? If so, was lateral maneuvering then an option, instead of continuing the climb into the Class A?
Click to expand...

No. Lateral maneuvers are not an option. TCAS RA's only give vertical escape maneuvers. It seems that many MIL (not all) don't understand TCAS and how it works... A 3000fpm climb is very aggressive for a CIV aircraft of that type...

Once again, none of us was there, so much of this topic is pure speculation hindered by preconceived perceptions.
Click to expand...

That is the whole point... the CIV pilot didn't know, so he had to follow the RA... pretty concerning stuff for a CIV guy, with a low energy aircraft and no ejection seat...

We also know that the MIL pilot was reprimanded.... at a minimum he made the DoD look bad...
 
AIR2MUD said:
Other unknowns: did the civvy pilot overreact? I understand being a bit flustered, but perhaps he had other options available. For example, did he ever have the F-16 in sight? If so, was lateral maneuvering then an option, instead of continuing the climb into the Class A?
Click to expand...

No. Lateral maneuvers are not an option. TCAS RA's only give vertical escape maneuvers. It seems that many MIL (not all) don't understand TCAS and how it works... A 3000fpm climb is very aggressive for a CIV aircraft of that type...

Once again, none of us was there, so much of this topic is pure speculation hindered by preconceived perceptions.
Click to expand...

That is the whole point... the CIV pilot didn't know, so he had to follow the RA... pretty concerning stuff for a CIV guy, with a low energy aircraft and no ejection seat...

We also know that the MIL pilot was reprimanded.... at a minimum he made the DoD look bad...

Having a trained killer aggressively chasing TWO CIV aircraft that pose no national security threat with a warplane is not good....
 
Diesel said:
I do bet though after the press coverage this got the military pilot is at a radio listening post somewhere close to the north pole.
Click to expand...


I think the squadron commander found the pilot in the squadron bar, "Hey lieutenant, we told public affairs that you got reprimanded for that PA mess the other day, so, umm, you're reprimanded. And next time you do that you should turn off your mode 3 like I do. Here, have another beer. Remember, tell anybody that asks that you've been reprimanded."

OK, probably not. Diesel is probably closer to right, but it's what I think should have happened.
 
Hmmm a highly competitive buisness where every pilot is trying to outshine the other pilot. Board time comes up and everyone has a perfect record except one guy. He may not be at a radio listening post but I bet his career is severely side tracked.

Same as a civilian crew who does something stupid and has to go before the CP. In the end they know your name and thats never a good thing.
 
Yup your right nowhere did I say they would get fired but the CP would still know their names and that is never a good thing.

A good career is for the CP to say "who's retiring?"
 
No matter how you spin this event it was caused by two VFR aircraft flying through an active MOA! There is nothing irresponsible, dangerous or even illegal in what the F-16 pilot did. If you think so, then sorry, cry to AOPA about it since they seem to care!

You have no idea what it takes to be a military pilot or how we interact with one another in a work environment. It is not anywhere near what you're implying...which is quite frankly a totally false assessment. Messing around with some stupid yahoos going through the airspace during a fight is so low on the priority list it doesn't even register. Safety of flight and insuring deconfliction from said yahoos would be #1...followed by actually performing the training we need to execute the mission's we're assigned, either at home or overseas. Otherwise we'd just be burning holes in the sky and a lot of JP-8 for no reason!

Here's some more clarifying information if you haven't seen it: http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1097-full.html#197689

Build a bridge and get over it already...
 
Last edited:
How about we'll agree to stay out of your military areas if you agree to stay out of all our civilian and commerical areas?
It works on so many levels.
 
Daytonaflyer said:
How about we'll agree to stay out of your military areas if you agree to stay out of all our civilian and commerical areas?
It works on so many levels.
Click to expand...

Maybe the military should shut down all the MOA's and turn them into restricted areas?

Or how about we learn how to get along with each other and respect the intent of a certain type of airspace?

Its unfortunate that the pure civilians on here cannot see the dangers posed by entering an active MOA just because "I CAN". Those dangers are for everyone involved.

Having seen both sides of the argument and having seen what can go on inside a MOA, I choose to stay out.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom