avoidance rule

[Tomanek, Wojtek]

Georgie
 
I would have to disagree with this proposal, if you angle two flight lines
from each other they will have a cross point which may endanger the planes
during every other turnaround maneuver.  At least when you fly parallel, the
possibility or midair is a lot smaller and there is a higher chance that
either one or two pilots will notice the other plane in the vicinity and can
keep a safe distance.  I am sure you have seen two planes going into a stall
turn at the same time, with the leading one always waiting for the other one
to initiate the turn first.  The problem with the parallel flights is that
only one pilot can fly at 175 m, the other one is forced to fly closer or
further out and risk downgrades but that is a different issue.  Still it is
a safer option.
 
WKT
 
-----Original Message-----
From: george kennie [mailto:geobet at gis.net]
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 9:13 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: avoidance rule
 
I kinda like Frank Grannelli's idea regarding separation which could even be
expanded upon by canting both flight lines 30 degrees from runway-parallel
with the right station canted right(away from left station) and left station
canted left.Landings and take-offs would still be aligned with the runway
but the rest of the flight aligned with the flight-line markers marked on
the ground. After all, how many mid-landing colisions have you
observed.Probably would eliminate 99% of all mid-airs and could easily be
accomodated at places like Muncie and probably quite a few others.Might
encourage a few of the more timid among us, who might be reluctant to to put
their investment at risk, to put their bird in the air. 
Georgie 
Bill Glaze wrote: 
Lance: 
Yes, it is highly useful, in my opinion.  I've found myself flying formation
aerobatics several times in IMAC, and was able to call a break.  Judges
later said they were relieved that a break was called.  Did it avert a
midair?  Really can't say, but it made me feel a whole lot more relieved,
and I could concentrate a lot better. 
As far as midair avoidance, it's hard to say the avoidance rule did/didn't
work if a midair didn't happen; kind of like trying to say how much crime
was prevented by a certain law/procedure. 
Flying pattern, I sure would like to see it. 
Bill Glaze 
BTW: I've never seen the rule abused; maybe it has been, but I've never
heard it spoken of. 
s.vannostrand at kodak.com wrote: 
  
I'm not disagreeing, Croz, but here is my observation from limited
experience.  I've seen several midairs at contests, unfortunately.  Each
time was such a shock that no one saw it coming.  In only one case (at the
now infamous Temple 2001 where 7 planes were lost in one contest) were the
planes even flying in the same direction.  But even here, neither pilot saw
the other until it was too late.  Others of us did, but there wasn't much we
could do in the split second  before. 
    I'm curious to know is this is really beneficial in IMAC 
--Lance
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20030131/b82f801b/attachment.html