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

A near miss...

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
near miss.

no. I'm sorry for the uncalled for comment. I guess on a more productive note from what I've noticed...

Loss of separation & FSDO actions...

Rule 1: the controller is fellow FAA, don't go after him no matter what. It's serious business when an atc'er gets a black mark.(like it isn't for a pilot?)

Rule 2: Airline vs. 135 ... go after the 135, he doesn't have the union behind him, an easy way to place fault and close the issue.

Rule 3: The controller is in paperwork avoidance mode. (i.e. bury the incident).

I guess it's a lesson for dilligence in VFR conditions. In your own best interest, fsdo's are to be avoided.
 
Badger,

You're pretty knowledgeable on loss of separation and FSDO actions. How many times in your 2700 hours have you caused a loss of separation? I'm guessing by your comments to English that you've done it more than once.
 
He may sound like it, but his comments aren't accurate. The FAA doesn't refrain from taking action against controllers, but in this case it appears that the controller did nothing that would warrant any action taken.

The other aircraft was VFR. The poster was on a visual approach. See and avoid is THE rule weather IFR or VFR. In this case, it's clearly the law.

No paint was traded. THAT is a near miss (it ceases to be a miss when fabric or metal gets traded).

The poster asks a legitimate question; what happens when one lodges a NMAC report. No need to jump all over him about that.

In this case, an investigation involving the other pilot, the poster, and the controller would be warranted, and action would be taken depending on the outcome of what was learned, and the attitudes of each party involved. Always remember, "attitude of compliance." It's very possible to be the reporting party and still come out on the short end, all based on attitude.

Most of the time what pilots classify as a near miss really isn't. Personally, its not a near miss until you can identify the type of sunglasses the other pilot is wearing. It ceases to be a miss if you come away from the meeting wearing his sunglasses, and he's got your eyes...
 

Latest resources

Back
Top