So much for theory. Big Sky - Isn’t.

[walrus]

Today I crossed tracks exactly with another aircraft, exact enough for visual and ADSB confirmation . There was a 3000 ft altitude difference. So what? you say. Absent ADSB I would not even have known to look up and see the other aircraft. If I had been on climb and the other guy on descent, well…….

 

 

‘’The ADSB technology disproves, in my opinion, the big sky theory. Near misses are a lot more common than we think.We just don’t notice them most of the time.

 

 

[APenNameAndThatA]

I’ve been within 30 m of another aircraft… twice

[turboplanner]

Don't get nervous, 3000 feet s not a near miss; Big Sky is the clue, you can't treat your track as a road and just look straight ahead. You need to be looking in three dimensions all the time.  Even in places like western NSW it's not unusual to look out and see another aircraft on a reasonably similar track to yours but a bit higher or lower. You just adjust your altitude. Near Hits are the worry; when you see a tail fin go from left to right of your windscreen and you can see the rivets.

[mkennard]

Katoomba is where I always seem to get closest to other aircraft. One time my ADSB picked up an aircraft, even Sydney Centre called out the other aircraft who did not change his path or speed at all. I did both.

 

Another time a RPT was inbound to Dubbo and it gave me plenty of time to plan and prepare. The radio was my only other means for lookout. Having aircraft appear on my EFB adds to the prep. I still see planes outside the window but more often I see them on my EFB.

[skippydiesel]

Given that we (human) have relativly poor eyesight, compared with so many other animals (particularly birds) its truly astonishing that we are able to see another aircraft away from the circuit/training area.

 

I have always flown with a transponder, so although not a frequent occurrence, I have benefited from quit a few  "alerts" , from ATC, regarding conflicting/close aircraft. Only once has ATC contacted me personally, the others were directed to the pilot of the other aircraft, received by me litening in on area frequency.

[facthunter]

There's a recommended technique for making your eye search of part of the sky more effective. You  should find info on it in any human factors book. People still pull out onto the runway as another is landing.

 The BIG sky concept is significantly cancelled out by more accurate tracking (GPS) and height keeping. You HAVE to stick to assigned heights  to close tolerances so that can provide very positive separation IF the assigned height has been properly done. Ie no one else has been assigned the same height in that  vicinity or it's got a lot of traffic like on final. Nev

[Kenlsa]

I was once flying to another airfield exactly on the gps line, just below 3500 ft that was the upper limit of military air space. I didn’t have  clearance above this step.

 

A Piper Archer was descending thru controlled air space directly in front of me on the reciprocal gps track. I saw him for about 5 seconds and I climbed. I guess he was dropping to the next Lower level step behind me.

 

 I guess see and avoid worked, BUT, while assigned altitude works, climbing and descending has its issues.

 

My co pilot (many thousands of hours, including military) reminded me to stay to the right of the Gps track to minimise the problem of another aircraft flying the reciprocal track. 
Head in the cockpit, slavishly following the magenta line can lead to tears.

Ken

[walrus]

“wandering all over the sky” is safer than following a GPS course between published waypoints.

[Bruce Tuncks]

I once worked out that if 50 planes were flying at random over australia's wheat lands, there would be a mid-air once in 20,000 years on average.

The workings included that the pilots were not looking out at all and there were no concentrating factors, like GPS tracks and airspace boundaries.

Has there ever been a midair in Australia in the absence of concentrating factors ?

[onetrack]

The overwhelmingly major percentage of mid-air crashes are all within a relatively short distance from airfields, as aircraft converge to, or diverge from, that all-important feature they must all use.

[Bruce Tuncks]

Yes onetrack, and I agree about the magenta line being a concentrating factor. That is good advice to stay away from it. With gliders, you also have thermals and clouds.

This is why you have to wear a parachute for competitions , and they do get used from time to time. A Libelle once lost a wing outer ( halfway along the aileron! ) and the wreckage landed on a Narromine street. The unhurt pilot didn't even fly the task before landing.

Harry Schneider kept that wing for the next 20 years in the hope of using  it in a repair job.

 

[facthunter]

You'll get a pretty hard smack most of the time with a mid air so a chute MAY be no use whatever.. In controlled airspace it should be only as a result of the system failing but I've had  plenty of close calls in lighties and I  expect I'm no different from others but may seen more because I put a lot of effort into it because the "big sky" is a concept that gives a false sense of security as far as I'm concerned..Nev

[Thruster88]

7 hours ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

I once worked out that if 50 planes were flying at random over australia's wheat lands, there would be a mid-air once in 20,000 years on average.

The workings included that the pilots were not looking out at all and there were no concentrating factors, like GPS tracks and airspace boundaries.

Has there ever been a midair in Australia in the absence of concentrating factors ?

These two big yellow Airtractors that were not connected or concentrated in any way collided out in the GAFA.

They could just as easily been two recreational aircraft. 

 https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2008/aair/ao-2008-014/

 

[Old Koreelah]

On 11/07/2021 at 1:45 AM, walrus said:

Today I crossed tracks exactly with another aircraft, exact enough for visual and ADSB confirmation . There was a 3000 ft altitude difference…

Like this one I photographed over Darwin years ago:

[kgwilson]

Covid must have scared everyone away today. I went for a fly after lunch & heard absolutely nothing on CTAF or on Coffs Tower & only a couple of calls on area for an hour. Or maybe everyone was just sneaking around hoping they wouldn't get hit.

[kgwilson]

3 hours ago, Thruster88 said:

These two big yellow Airtractors that were not connected or concentrated in any way collided out in the GAFA.

They could just as easily been two recreational aircraft. 

 https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2008/aair/ao-2008-014/

 

One had just departed an airstrip 4.5km away to spray a crop,  and the other from 13km away to do the same & should have been higher than 200 feet. At that height it is hard to see anything as there is so much else flashing around you. Minimum height is 500 feet for recreational so unless this is in the circuit it is unlikely it would be 2 recreational aircraft.

[F10]

I think radio calls are really important. Going into Tyabb on Monday (I avoid weekends...too busy by half!) about two weeks ago, listening to radio calls as I flew in for an overhead join, helped a lot with building up a mental picture of traffic. I joined mid downwind, number two to a yellow Gazelle, who I was able to spot because of his radio calls. I don’t have a transponder unfortunately, have just installed a GPS Garmin 495, and I don’t have an i pad, I prefer my paper map with tracks and distance markers drawn in, my A5 clipboard with my log card clipped on it....old school habits I’m afraid. I like to think my eyes are mostly outside.

Edited July 13, 2021 by F10

[Garfly]

I'd have said that all paper navigating calls for more eyes-down than an EFB does.

Ditto ADSB traffic alerts. New school attitude, I'm afraid.

 

[Roundsounds]

On 13/07/2021 at 11:25 PM, Garfly said:

I'd have said that all paper navigating calls for more eyes-down than an EFB does.

Ditto ADSB traffic alerts. New school attitude, I'm afraid.

 

“Paper Navigation” requires very little head down if it’s done properly. All navigation is primarily performed using DR, charts and nav aids simply support DR. 

[Garfly]

Fair enough, and I'd agree that new tech has taken a lot of the sport out of air-navigation (along with a fair bit of anxiety). And I'd be the last one to tell others how to do it. My only point is that (all else being equal) done properly, EFB nav requires even less eyes down, not more as the common straw-man argument insists.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 14, 2021 by Garfly

[MattP]

I tend to use both. The ADSB display is good for showing the general direction of traffic, helping you look in the right place and giving an idea of what they’re doing.

 

It also shows direction and you can work out climbing / descending, great if they’re in a spot your scan wouldn’t normally pick up, or just for directing focus.

 

 

[Kenlsa]

Switch on the GPS so the pilot can input the plan into the auto pilot to get to the destination.  All the while informing the passenger how great it is to be a LSA pilot.

 

V’s

 

Planing the trip on the kitchen table, marking the map and filling out the flight plan sheet. Then actually flying the plane and navigating as you go, all the while talking your way thru the steps as you keep a good lookout; impressing your passenger with your skills.

 

I know what system I prefer.

 

Ken

[poteroo]

Have had a few adjacents when way out in the sticks. Many years ago, (pre-GPS), I was Marble Bar to Broome direct at 7500 and heard a C310 coming opposite direction at 8500 make a call at the standard waypoint near Wallal, (?).  Thinking that neither of us could be so accurate on visual + ADF tracking as to be within cooee, looked up to see said 310 and our C182 cross precisely under/over. Big surprise!   Little wonder then, that when I learned how to use them new-fangled GPS things - I learned to track off to one side of the direct waypoint to waypoint track, having watched US pilots do the same with offsetting the VOR radials. In fact, I'm more likely to find a close visual feature and use that as my wpt instead of the designated wpt.  I also like to be about 150 ft below the correct hemispherical altitude for my track as it's much easier to spot traffic against blue sky than when level. Just turbulence yer honour!

 

In many years of flying, my closest encounters have always been in controlled airspace. Class D is particularly higher risk due not just to any old students flying there, but due to many international students with unusual English diction & pronunciation. Student judgement of base to final turns with parallel runways was always a time of high concentration for me when instructing there. Out in the training areas it's everyone-for-themselves and only luck that more don't meet up!  I've had 2 particularly close shaves with opposite direction and crossing traffic in Class C - (Military released to civil). One wasn't even given as traffic - yet there he was, directly under us, and probably under 500 agl if truth be known!  

[skippydiesel]

Quit a few years back now - Coming back from a day trip out west, I was on the home leg, Katoomba/The Oaks. I usually come in at about 7000ft over YKAT and do a long descent into YOAS. Had been hearing a lot of chatter between an RAAF flight (female PIC) X2 and Sydney Control - the gist of the conversation was that Sydney was lucky they were  giving their general location & operating at low level (no actual altitude). Moments later as I passed over Warragamba Dam, two Hercules, in formation, flew under me, from north to south, - I was probably at 5500 ft at the time - they seemed awful close . Shook me up a bit.

Edited July 15, 2021 by skippydiesel

[facthunter]

The situation is far  from satisfactory but however you do it the right amount of planning has to be done beforehand and you may even have to plan a diversion in flight. Positive vertical separation is pretty sure and has been widely used. That relies on altimetry generally. If you have planned or  been assigned a level there is a tolerence on that +/_ 200 feet. Parallel tracks and  don't climb or descend on frequently  used tracks into and out of airports if possible. Give accurate proximity calls  when in the vicinity of airports. Always know what direction you are from that place and respond if asked. IF you get it wrong it's worse than not replying as people are looking for you in the WRONG place. Nev