Light aircraft lands on top of another in TX

[Xtndr50boom]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/7406041.stm

Apparently the pilot was sick the day they taught "don't land on another aircraft" in flight training

 

[DixieTexian]

Looks like two aiplanes making babies.

 

[D_Rob]

Low wing landing on a high wing.

 

[Gatordev]

Apparently the pilot was sick the day they taught "don't land on another aircraft" in flight training

I'm sure your post was somewhat in jest, but it's easy to do. Two weeks ago I was flying into PIE for the overhead and a CG C-130 had turned under me for his approach. I was "cleared for the visual" so I started descending to the break altitude. I lost the Herc when he turned under me, but had gone through a cloud earlier, so I thought he was out of the way since I was "cleared for the visual." Finally, about the time I was starting to (very tentatively) descend, Tower jumped on me for descending and the NACWS started yelling at me. That was also about the time he started coming out from the nose of my plane as I descended.

I don't think we would have touched paint because of our relative speeds, but it had the potential to be a worse situation if tower and the NACWS wasn't there and it had been two slower moving aircraft.

 

[Xtndr50boom]

I'm sure your post was somewhat in jest

It was

 

[BACONATOR]

I'm sure your post was somewhat in jest, but it's easy to do. Two weeks ago I was flying into PIE for the overhead and a CG C-130 had turned under me for his approach. I was "cleared for the visual" so I started descending to the break altitude. I lost the Herc when he turned under me, but had gone through a cloud earlier, so I thought he was out of the way since I was "cleared for the visual." Finally, about the time I was starting to (very tentatively) descend, Tower jumped on me for descending and the NACWS started yelling at me. That was also about the time he started coming out from the nose of my plane as I descended.

I don't think we would have touched paint because of our relative speeds, but it had the potential to be a worse situation if tower and the NACWS wasn't there and it had been two slower moving aircraft.

I love how the NACWS in its current incarnation in the turboweenie is only useful for telling you that you already fvcked up by getting too close to someone. It doesn't tell you where they are and doesn't warn you with much of a buffer. It basically says "Hey! You're about to say 'hoy shit!' in a few seconds".

 

[Gatordev]

I love how the NACWS in its current incarnation in the turboweenie is only useful for telling you that you already fvcked up by getting too close to someone. It doesn't tell you where they are and doesn't warn you with much of a buffer. It basically says "Hey! You're about to say 'hoy shit!' in a few seconds".

I think I've probably said this before, but... The NACWS gets a bad rap. It could certainly be more useful and as far as I understand, has been at the top of the OAG list every year to get the software upgrade, but it's not "cost-effective." That said, I've had it help countless times. A lot of the times I already know, roughly, where to look based off listening to the radios (like my missing C130), and it gives you that "no, really, you should be looking" message.

The biggest problem I've had with it is cutting through a departure area or when entering a spin. No one is doing anything "wrong," but you don't know where to look or how legit the hit is, especially when the "other guy" forgot to turn on the mode C. I remember as a student, it was nice to be able to hit the PROX button right before doing the spin and seeing all the other radiating targets.

 

[BACONATOR]

I remember as a student, it was nice to be able to hit the PROX button right before doing the spin and seeing all the other radiating targets.

This was what I was getting out. Without knowing WHERE to look, all it does is tell you that you fvcked up. It doesn't HELP at all (unless of course the traffic is/was on the radios like you said). The random hits (most dangerous) are the least effective.

 

[TopShot]

Here is the same kind of thing almost happening on a slightly larger scale.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=440_1179192181

 

[Gatordev]

This was what I was getting out. Without knowing WHERE to look, all it does is tell you that you fvcked up. It doesn't HELP at all (unless of course the traffic is/was on the radios like you said). The random hits (most dangerous) are the least effective.

Yeah, didn't mean to sound like I was disagreeing. Like I said, it has been deemed as cost-ineffective to update it. I have no evidence to back this up, but I really wonder if it has something to do w/ the way T-34 ops are conducted where CNATRA is located and the different way things are done at Whiting. I have never flown at Corpus, but it's my understanding that traffic separation is much more organized in the Corpus training area and it's therefore deemed not as necessary there. Meanwhile, the Whiting guys are playing battle of Britain over Summerdale. Both methods work (and overall, I enjoy the freedom that Whiting ops allow), but having the PROX function would make things even safer. Again, just me musing out loud.

 

[Xtndr50boom]

Here is the same kind of thing almost happening on a slightly larger scale.

Routine go-around -- runway not clear. That cameraman/narrator needs some perspective. Perhaps a trip to SFO and hanging out in between the 28s would show how "dangerous" that video really wasn't.

This is closer:

 

[BACONATOR]

Yeah, didn't mean to sound like I was disagreeing. Like I said, it has been deemed as cost-ineffective to update it. I have no evidence to back this up, but I really wonder if it has something to do w/ the way T-34 ops are conducted where CNATRA is located and the different way things are done at Whiting. I have never flown at Corpus, but it's my understanding that traffic separation is much more organized in the Corpus training area and it's therefore deemed not as necessary there. Meanwhile, the Whiting guys are playing battle of Britain over Summerdale. Both methods work (and overall, I enjoy the freedom that Whiting ops allow), but having the PROX function would make things even safer. Again, just me musing out loud.

While I've never flown in Whiting (for the record, I've heard it's TERRIBLE especially with split field ops/WAY more planes there etc), I can tell you that ATC (being students here as well) sometimes just plain SUCK. I've gotten countless relatively small errors (turn RIGHT to a heading 20 degrees off my left when they DID NOT intend for me to do a 360, fvcking up clearances, clearing me for something, then yelling at me because they "didn't clear me" for that), but I've also had, once or twice, SERIOUS errors on their part. On an RI hop one day, I was putting the bag on after the gear came up and saw a C-12 flying off our nose. He was JUST cleared to turn left on climbout from the right (parallel) runway. IP maneuvered to avoid the collision and informed tower that they cleared a freaking plane in front of us.

Whiting may suck, but Corpus isn't exactly "safe" to the point where we don't need a useful NACWS. But again...this is just my silly ENS opinion and the guys with the birds and stars on their collars are the ones that make things happen...

 

[Single Seat]

Exact same thing happened a few years ago in Florida. Cherokee landed on top of a C-152. Everyone walked away.

 

[Gatordev]

While I've never flown in Whiting (for the record, I've heard it's TERRIBLE especially with split field ops/WAY more planes there etc), I can tell you that ATC (being students here as well) sometimes just plain SUCK. I've gotten countless relatively small errors (turn RIGHT to a heading 20 degrees off my left when they DID NOT intend for me to do a 360, fvcking up clearances, clearing me for something, then yelling at me because they "didn't clear me" for that), but I've also had, once or twice, SERIOUS errors on their part. On an RI hop one day, I was putting the bag on after the gear came up and saw a C-12 flying off our nose. He was JUST cleared to turn left on climbout from the right (parallel) runway. IP maneuvered to avoid the collision and informed tower that they cleared a freaking plane in front of us.

What you describe sounds like Navy ATC trainee SOP. Same stuff happens at Whiting. Often times IPs sort out the traffic quicker than the controllers. I don't think Whiting is terrible as far as ops go, but often times the controlling is less than desirable w/ a full recovery in effect.

When I was referring to ATC earlier, I meant in your working areas. Again, it's just what I've heard, but you guys get sectors which you own. I have done Las Cruces which I was told was pretty much the same idea, sans ATC. Whiting isn't as sterile an environment as Corpus (as has been described to me) in the working areas. FOR THE RECORD, I'm NOT saying you guys don't need NACWS, I just have a feeling it's perceived to not be as necessary there buy certain bean-counters there.

Whiting may suck, but Corpus isn't exactly "safe" to the point where we don't need a useful NACWS. But again...this is just my silly ENS opinion and the guys with the birds and stars on their collars are the ones that make things happen...

Again, I don't think Whiting "sucks." I like the way we do business most of the time. I also don't think one is "worse" than the other, just different. W/ the Weiner lasting another 7 years, it just seems to make sense to add a relatively small addition to the plane, especially w/ the increased mishaps this FY, fleet-wide.

BS, just giving perspective/elaborating, not disagreeing w/ what you're saying, on the whole.

 

[SDNalgene]

I can tell you that ATC (being students here as well) sometimes just plain SUCK.

Yeah, true, but I am willing to bet we make it fairly hard on them too. I am sure all your turns on a no gyro GCA are standard rate and half standard rate on final, right...? Like you said, they are students too so cut them some slack. There is almost always someone more experienced there to fix the mess, be it the IP or a more senior controller. They have to learn too.

An IP made a great point (shocking, I know) during a PAR one time. This girl kept saying "left of course, come left heading 119". Obviously, coming left isn't going to fix "left of course" and there were FCLPs on the left runway so I asked if I should just come right and fix it myself. He said no and moreover, if you fix it for the junior controller then they don't know they are screwing up and they don't learn. Also, if we had fixed it then the experienced controller who took over and vectored me back never would have known she screwed the pooch and might have signed off on her quals without further training. Not exactly the situation you would want if you were actually shooting the approach to mins in IMC.

Overall, I think ATC does a pretty good job, at least in south Texas given what they have to work with. I remember a TW-4 safety stand down where the ATC director started putting up slides of all the working areas, then of all the approaches, then of all the transitions, then of the holding patterns, etc. Each slide was pretty simple and easy to understand. Then he put up one that had all of it on one slide. It is a very complicated picture they are dealing with, so I respect the complexity they are dealing with and accept that they are gonna make some mistakes occasionally. Of course they haven't recently tried to kill me so I might just be naive.