Mid-Air Collision Near Ottawa

[corethatthermal]

By the time YTZ Tower cuts you loose, you are typically closer than that

This is where 2 radios and an audio panel/ switch comes in! Listen to one, broadcast and listen on another!

[Donald]

With the speed at which avionics and the regs are evolving, how long until TCAS is mandated for all aircraft?

[Schooner69A]

In this day and age, flying around without the ability to communicate is like self abuse in a house of ill repute...

[DanWEC]

You can add me to the list of people who have almost scraped metal in midair around Carp. The Practice area encompasses airspace above and around YRP, and has an MF clearly marked on the VTA and VNC, and which most everyone who flys out of YRP would hopefully know about unless they're a special kind of stupid.
I was flying maybe 5-10 miles away from YRP at a few thousand feet with a student, when suddenly some toolbox in the Grob went overtop of me by about 50 feet on climbout from YRP, well into the practice area airspace, with zero calls. Didn't see us because of their nose high attitude. I made a bunch of rants on all 3 frequencies and no response whatsoever. Just flying around dumb and blind.

[goingnowherefast]

Not picking on anybody in particular, but people have to remember radios serve two functions. They can be listened to as well. I've lost count the number of times I've heard somebody make a beautiful radio call, then completely ignore somebody else trying to respond to them.

[linecrew]

All this talk about radio calls....

Radios don’t prevent collisions, your fucking eyeballs prevent collisions; so use them.

Radios will give you a better situational awareness to augment the use of just your eyeballs. Why not make things safer?

[B208]

All this talk about radio calls....

Radios don’t prevent collisions, your fucking eyeballs prevent collisions; so use them.

If only you knew how many planes you’ve got really close to and never even saw.

Son, if someone needs a radio call to prompt them to start looking for traffic, they are a bad pilot.

I don’t know if I’ve ever come close to hitting someone that I never saw,( I did @#$! up horribly once during fighting wing and got a real close view of lead going by me opposite direction), but if I have, the radio would not have made any real difference.

[B208]

All this talk about radio calls....

Radios don’t prevent collisions, your fucking eyeballs prevent collisions; so use them.

Radios will give you a better situational awareness to augment the use of just your eyeballs. Why not make things safer?

You have hit the nail on the head, radios augment SA. Unfortunately, people seem to have come to rely on radios for collision avoidance at the cost of maintaining a good look out.

The collision which is the subject of this thread was not caused by poor radio work. It was caused by poor look out.

[jakeandelwood]

And then there is those lean of peak idiots that spend the majority of there flight staring at their fancy multi bar graph engine analyzers trying to squeeze one less gallon per hour from their engine while they maybe should be taking a glance outside for traffic once and a while.

[Schooner69A]

I had a discussion some time ago with a FKIA who wouldn't admit that a radio was a great augmentation to the Mark 1 eyeball.

[goingnowherefast]

All this talk about radio calls....

Radios don’t prevent collisions, your fucking eyeballs prevent collisions; so use them.

If only you knew how many planes you’ve got really close to and never even saw.

Son, if someone needs a radio call to prompt them to start looking for traffic, they are a bad pilot.

I don’t know if I’ve ever come close to hitting someone that I never saw,( I did @#$! up horribly once during fighting wing and got a real close view of lead going by me opposite direction), but if I have, the radio would not have made any real difference.

Radios tell you where to concentrate your traffic scan. If I know there's traffic approaching from the right, I'm going to focus my scan on the right.

When Center says "traffic, 10 o'clock, 8 miles, 1000' below", do you focus on the left? Or do you completely ignore the information and continue scanning everywhere with equal attention?

[photofly]

Radios tell you where to concentrate your traffic scan. If I know there's traffic approaching from the right, I'm going to focus my scan on the right.

Well I'm going to focus my scan to the left. I already know about the guy on the right.

When Center says "traffic, 10 o'clock, 8 miles, 1000' below", do you focus on the left? Or do you completely ignore the information and continue scanning everywhere with equal attention?

I will continue scanning everywhere with equal attention. This guy is still a tiny speck 8 miles away and in any event a thousand feet below. Remember it's not the one you know about that's going to get you.

[goingnowherefast]

If you don't look for the conflicting airplane, how do you visually avoid it? "Yep, he's right over there, just about to smack into my plane, but I'm looking the other way..."

[CpnCrunch]

The problem is that looking for traffic takes discipline and effort. Looking out the windscreen isn't good enough. You have to move your head forward and look to the left and right, and to be sure of detecting traffic you need to do that at least once every 10 seconds. I admit I don't generally do that unless I'm in congested airspace.

A few days ago I had a traffic alert from FSS. She was telling both me and the other aircraft that we were both at 12 oclock 3 miles, 12 oclock 2 miles, 12 oclock 1 mile. By 3 miles we couldn't see each other and we maintained 500 feet vertical separation. It was only after the 1 mile callout that I see the other aircraft coming from my 2 oclock position 500 feet above. This isn't the first time this has happened...FSS is very unreliable about position reports, and I really need to learn not to entirely trust them. (Wind wasn't a factor...our tracks were about 30 degrees offset from each other).

[jakeandelwood]

Use something prominent on the chart to base your position report off, not "I'm over the big oak tree heading between Fred's farm and the old coal mill"

[photofly]

If you don't look for the conflicting airplane, how do you visually avoid it? "Yep, he's right over there, just about to smack into my plane, but I'm looking the other way..."

Nobody has a midair with traffic that's pointed out to them "8 miles 10 o'clock, 1000 below." Not unless your aircraft is 8 miles long and a thousand feet tall. For now, I don't really give a toss if I see that traffic or not, and I'm not going to waste a second looking for it at the expense of looking for someone much closer not pointed out to me who is an immediate risk.

Midair collisions occur during manoeuvreing flight, often high-wing to low-wing, or otherwise in a blind spot. Keep lifting those wings, lean forward and look around the A pillars, look up, look down. And look properly before you turn.

[rookiepilot]

A classic not too long ago:

"XXX traffic 12 o'clock, 5 miles, 3000', climbing"

Me: "Looking for traffic" (I'm at 5500 or something)

"XXX, Maintain current heading, descend 3000 now"

Me: "Uhhhhhh...."

(This was an anomaly from the norm, BTW-----)

[A346Dude]

All I know is it can be very hard to spot traffic, even when it's relatively close, you know exactly where it is, and it is repeatedly pointed out to you by ATC. That's why I don't think a good lookout is enough to spot traffic (early enough to avoid it) in every conceivable configuration 100% of the time.

So I'll use every tool I can; I'll make good position reports and listen to others' reports, and I'll pick up flight following when available. I'll spend most of my energy looking for the potentially conflicting traffic that I know is out there, not for the unknown aircraft that may or may not exist. An aircraft that is 1,000 ft below me now, might be at my altitude when we meet in 4 miles.

[Heliian]

I don't understand the hate for radios from some people, if you're that bothered then shut it off and go home. If you're not going to bother to pay attention to traffic information, you are the problem.

And guess what radio haters, we still make calls in the middle of nowhere, especially when there might be a chance of a survey plane or other helicopter in the area, even if we know that the nearest aircraft SHOULD be a good 25 miles away. Overkill? yes. having an increased situational awareness is worth it.

[B208]

I don't understand the hate for radios from some people, if you're that bothered then shut it off and go home. If you're not going to bother to pay attention to traffic information, you are the problem.

And guess what radio haters, we still make calls in the middle of nowhere, especially when there might be a chance of a survey plane or other helicopter in the area, even if we know that the nearest aircraft SHOULD be a good 25 miles away. Overkill? yes. having an increased situational awareness is worth it.

Herein lay the problem. Everyone assumes that just because you don’t have absolute faith in your radios for collision avoidance you are a radio hater. I don’t hate radios, I don’t feel one way other the other about them.
The whole radio discussion got started because someone speculated that improper radio work caused this collision. They are wrong. Improper look out caused this collision. Somebody let their discipline in the maintaining a look out slip and now somebody is dead. The ultimate lesson is look out the window or you will wind up dead. All the verbal diarrhea in the world won’t save your ass if don’t put your eyeballs in the right place.