Controller & WN Pilots suspended.....

[waveflyer]

Is it really?
Or are the scared of their own shadows pilots taking over?

Guess you guys think the tipping your wings to HNL and a low pass is unsafe too-

Sorry but on the last flight- that B24 story is nothing but great- and to suspend pilots for getting too close to another plane at the request of the controller just doesn't sound that scary either...

Like the previous poster said- how close do we get in SFO, SNA, LAX when landing 24L and R-

They clearly had the other plane in sight and adhered to the controllers instructions- we don't know exactly how close they got- so what's the problem?

 

[jetracer5]

Only been flying for the airlines for 6 years but everyday I feel the FAA and the government suck away a little bit of fun everyday..... In 2004 my neighbor who I have known all my life tried his hardest to get me approved to ride the jumpseat on his retirement flight.......nothing.....nobody would approve it.

 

[ultrarunner]

from what I read they were closer than 1000'. the article said the SWA was initially at 12,000 and the SR22 at 11,000 and the SWA descended to get a better look-it didn't say how close they got.

Ahh, ok, well that's way uncool to do that. As a previous post said, the AF guys would have had a blast doing that intercept. Why not give 'em a call, esp with no contact for over an hour? I didn't think ATC waited that long nowadays.

 

[Dan Roman]

The Feds don't seem to get all bent out of shape when we cozy up to each other on closely spaced simultaneous visuals such as 28L&R at SFO?

I think the diference is that on the PRM approach both crews have been trained to do it and both crews did it with advanced planning, The 737 crew in this case had no idea what he was cozing up to and what the reaction of the private pilot would be by the surprise.

 

[Dan Roman]

...and the SWA Captain may very well fly one of those fighters, hence his apparent comfort level with a little bit 'o wingwork.

I think you are being facetious, but if you are not.......anyone who thinks because he flew formation in the military thinks that it would make it OK to do the same with an airliner full of passengers has a serious lack of judgement.

 

[IBNAV8R]

"However, the airplanes apparently got too close to each other in violation of FAA minimums for separation of aircraft."

Probably not the most prudent move but, what, exactly, are the required "minimums" for visual separation?

 

[regionalcap]

Is it really?
Or are the scared of their own shadows pilots taking over?

Guess you guys think the tipping your wings to HNL and a low pass is unsafe too-

Sorry but on the last flight- that B24 story is nothing but great- and to suspend pilots for getting too close to another plane at the request of the controller just doesn't sound that scary either...

Like the previous poster said- how close do we get in SFO, SNA, LAX when landing 24L and R-

They clearly had the other plane in sight and adhered to the controllers instructions- we don't know exactly how close they got- so what's the problem?

Flying an approach into SFO etc. you have both flights aware of each other and talking to the controller. Here you only have one airplane aware of the close flying....big difference. You have no idea of the reaction of the cirrus aircraft when he sees a 737 getting close. You have a responsibility to get the passengers safely to their destination. Leave the rest to the military.

 

[N1atEcon]

Ditto to the above post. Shouldn't have done it!

 

[scoreboardII]

Really? Think about that next time someone starts asking for help on guard "I must get pax to destination, ignore guard call."

I guess this places you in the same group that would have "gone around because it's safer" with the sleeping controller incident.

 

[waveflyer]

There seems to always be two groups anytime flyers end up in the media: those who hang them (really, trying in vain to prove their own superiority) and those that give them the benefit of the doubt and have their back.

I'll have their back until the investigation is closed.

And for those who want to launch fighters for this- how much money are you willing to waste to do what?--- protect st. Pete from a cirrus two miles up??

Don't call yourself a fiscal conservative if you think that's a good idea- maybe launch a CAP c210 eventually... Or have a police chopper already up check him out if he gets lower near civilization... But fighters?? C'mon-