[NSRCA-discussion] Collision Avoidance Breaks

[Archie Stafford]

This is not a rule in pattern.  There is virtually no way to be certain of
an oncoming mid-air.  If you are flying your plane then you really aren't
going to be able to see the other plane either.  I've seen some that looked
very close, that probably really weren't and mid-air's that happened when
they didn't look that close.  

In IMAC where they have the rule you can call avoidance, I have twice seen
people call avoidance thinking they are going to have a mid air and actually
turn directly into the path of the other plane.  Had they just stayed on
their line they would've been fine.  I think you are much better off, just
flying and maintaining your line and if a mid air happens, it happens
unfortunately, but the odds of turning away in time to avoid one is
virtually impossible.

Mid-airs will happen as long as there are 2 planes in the air.  Trying avoid
them usually causes more problems than it solves.

Arch

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Bill's Email
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 12:58 PM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Collision Avoidance Breaks

I've looked over the rule book but I cannot find where this topic is 
mentioned.

Is it the case that if a pilot who maneuvers to avoid a collision is 
downgraded for doing so?

We can displace a figure to avoid the sun without penalty but you cannot 
avoid a mid-air without penalty?





_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion