F16 vs Cessna 150 collision

DavidWhite said:
There are two kinds of pilots - those who have been buzzing along, scanning for traffic, all of the sudden to have a windshield full of someone elses airplane, and those who will.

**** happens. Unfortunately sometimes with tragic results.
Click to expand...

And plenty of those have, but never knew, because they weren't looking out the window. Too busy reading the paper on autopilot or playing angry birds on their iPad.
 
jesse said:
And plenty of those have, but never knew, because they weren't looking out the window. Too busy reading the paper on autopilot or playing angry birds on their iPad.
Click to expand...

Or just looking in the wrong direction.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Even if the Cessna had ADS-B IN (Stratus for example), he would not necessarily have seen the Viper without ADS-B Out and I doubt many 150s have that.
Click to expand...

And, IMO, that is because the FAA has a policy of withholding safety related information. RADAR data should be openly broadcast via ADS-R, not kept in abeyance for the 'bona fide' ADS-B Out airplanes.

IF the 150 had a portable ADS-B In capability, and ADS-B traffic "FIS-B" were openly broadcast, would the outcome have been different?
 
okav8r said:
And, IMO, that is because the FAA has a policy of withholding safety related information. RADAR data should be openly broadcast via ADS-R, not kept in abeyance for the 'bona fide' ADS-B Out airplanes.



IF the 150 had a portable ADS-B In capability, and ADS-B traffic "FIS-B" were openly broadcast, would the outcome have been different?
Click to expand...

No disagreement here.
 
DaveA said:
Press conference: Dennis Diaz NTSB investigator is emphatic that they are lead in this investigation. Victims were supposedly in N3601V, a 150M based at KMKS, and the son, aged 30, was flying, father, 68, was passenger (his body was recovered- still looking for 30 y/o pilot). Most of the 150 is suspected to be in the Cooper River.

Both had operating transponders according to Diaz, and he says that they have high quality data from radar. He says they will examine types of transponders/radar/type data/operational aspects in the investigation.

Witness says he saw the jet dump fuel or tanks- now everyone is asking hazmat/fuel/environmental questions, and the EPA is on site.

He states the F16 continued on for a few miles after impact before it went down.
Click to expand...

Thanks for a post with some relevant data.
Kathryn's Report web site has collected more data and photos for those still interested in the particulars of this accident:

http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2015/07/cessna-150-and-f-16c-fighting-falcon.html
 
jesse said:
Well, for one, it'd be pretty simple for them to fly above the ultralights. And also be pretty simple for us to drop every single one of them. Be a fun job in an A10...of course we'd be stuck with the J35.
Click to expand...

Speaking of them, coming across the upper chesapeake bay last summer east to west at two thousand, I looked below, over the water , to see two A10s from martin state very low, maybe five hundred feet, in formation. They saw me? Who knows!
 
From the link above: "According to National Transportation Safety Board Air Safety Investigator Dennis Diaz, both aircraft had active radar. The F-16 had not encountered engine problems prior to the accident as had been speculation after the collision."

Well equipped C150.
 
timwinters said:
I don't know squat about military aircraft but I too find it surprising that a 150 can knock one out of the sky...and apparently rip an engine out of it (assume an engine was ripped out of it since an engine was laying against a travel trailer with no other debris around).
Click to expand...

All depends on how the military plane hits the other one. Many times it's no more than a bump and a dent and still destroying the civilian plane. I think most in airs happen so quickly that fault is hard pin down . I think most military pilots are very good at what they do , well educated, and certainly don't want to have a mid air.
 
docmirror said:
From the link above: "According to National Transportation Safety Board Air Safety Investigator Dennis Diaz, both aircraft had active radar. The F-16 had not encountered engine problems prior to the accident as had been speculation after the collision."

Well equipped C150.
Click to expand...

Humor results when a reporter attempts to rephrase what was actually said, which another article reports as being:

"Both aircraft had operable transponders that basically report back to the radar site the aircraft's location and altitude," Diaz said. "I know the data's there, and we're going to be reviewing it."

Also:

The collision happened between 2,000 and 3,000 feet altitude, Col. Stephen Jost, the commander of the 20th Fighter Wing at Shaw, said at a news conference Tuesday.

 
Wow.... the sister of the pilot of the 150 said that a few days earlier her other brother and his wife was murdered by a grandson..
 
Zeldman said:
Wow.... the sister of the pilot of the 150 said that a few days earlier her other brother and his wife was murdered by a grandson..
Click to expand...

Yeah, I just read that...sad...

MONCKS CORNER, S.C. — A collision between a small plane and an F-16 fighter jet that killed a father and son was the second fatal tragedy to strike their family in just four days, a relative told The Associated Press.

Authorities found the body of 68-year-old Michael Johnson, the passenger, in the Cooper River in a rural, sparsely populated area in South Carolina, Berkeley County Coroner Bill Salisbury said. They are still searching the same area for the body of his son, 30-year-old Joseph Johnson, who was piloting the Cessna 150 when it was torn apart by its crash with the jet Tuesday.

On Saturday, Jim Johnson and his wife, Beverly — Michael Johnson's brother and sister-in-law — were found dead at their home in Missouri, said Connie Stallworth, the men's sister. The couple's 16-year-old grandson has been charged with second-degree murder in their slayings, police said.

"It's unbelievable. There just aren't words to express it. I'm dumbfounded that it happened twice in a few days," Stallworth said.
Click to expand...
 
creweite said:
One thing we can NOT be sure about, it was not the 150 that ran into the Viper. And to me that indicates that there is no way to know if the Viper pilot did not have a good visual scan going, essential when in airspace with other slower traffic.
Click to expand...

FTFY.

Where you in the cockpit? How much time do you have in a fighter to know what the scan pattern should be? What was the Cessna doing at the time?
 
EdFred said:
What is the difference if they are on instruments when flying at terrain +10k vs flying at terrain +500?

I also agree on the in designated areas. Like R-areas.
Click to expand...

If they are flying low level at those speeds, they are not on instruments (*unless doing TFR ops, which is not the standard) - they are navigating primarily visually with instrument backups. They are also running a radar, flying formation, making required radio calls, assessing jet status, doing fuel checks and clearing for traffic. All at 9 miles a minute - it's not an exact science and certainly isn't easy.


EdFred said:
I think that can be or possibly is careless and reckless.

§91.117 Aircraft speed.

(a) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, no person may operate an aircraft below 10,000 feet MSL at an indicated airspeed of more than 250 knots (288 m.p.h.).


There's our rules, and the higher class citizen rules it seems.
Click to expand...

All those speeds are of course authorized, in fact MANDATED by regulation. It is unsafe for us to operate at such slow speeds - particularly at heavy weight because the aircraft is not maneuverable enough to dodge birds, traffic, towers, etc. It is also required for training because you can't ingress enemy territory at 250kias and expect not to get your ass shot off; train like you fight - another reason we fly fast.

It's not "higher class citizen" - it's just doing the job. The job outlined, regulated and mandated by regulation. It is most definitely not careless or reckless. The fact that you'd insinuate either of those things is rather sad and disappointing.
 
EvilEagle said:
If they are flying low level at those speeds, they are not on instruments (*unless doing TFR ops, which is not the standard) - they are navigating primarily visually with instrument backups. They are also running a radar, flying formation, making required radio calls, assessing jet status, doing fuel checks and clearing for traffic. All at 9 miles a minute - it's not an exact science and certainly isn't easy.




All those speeds are of course authorized, in fact MANDATED by regulation. It is unsafe for us to operate at such slow speeds - particularly at heavy weight because the aircraft is not maneuverable enough to dodge birds, traffic, towers, etc. It is also required for training because you can't ingress enemy territory at 250kias and expect not to get your ass shot off; train like you fight - another reason we fly fast.

It's not "higher class citizen" - it's just doing the job. The job outlined, regulated and mandated by regulation. It is most definitely not careless or reckless. The fact that you'd insinuate either of those things is rather sad and disappointing.
Click to expand...
And yet if I did it, it would be careless and reckless, simply because I'm a civilian. There's a definite schism.
 
EdFred said:
And yet if I did it, it would be careless and reckless, simply because I'm a civilian. There's a definite schism.
Click to expand...
ya but, you're not worthy to go that fast....:rofl:


I'll just throw this out there....if a jet can't safely mix with traffic, maybe they should operate differently to be safe with that traffic....or stay home in the MOA. :nono:
 
Last edited:
EdFred said:
And yet if I did it, it would be careless and reckless, simply because I'm a civilian. There's a definite schism.
Click to expand...

Well, not really. As I understand it, if you had the equipment for that speed, and asked, it's up to the ATC guy/gal on the scope.

I understand that the AF jets have safety reasons for the speed in some regimes, but I'm also betting they can safely operate below the speed limit if they want. May not be comfy at 240kts, but I'm sure the plane will do that speed if they were told to.
 
EdFred said:
And yet if I did it, it would be careless and reckless, simply because I'm a civilian. There's a definite schism.
Click to expand...

Does your flight manual for your aircraft require a higher speed? If so, then you're not being reckless or careless.

As far as flying low and fast, I don't know of too many civilian aircraft that have an operational necessity to be there. I would think it would be obvious that the only reason why the FAA grants the DOD waivers for that, is that's it necessary for training.
 
Velocity173 said:
Does your flight manual for your aircraft require a higher speed? If so, then you're not being reckless or careless.

As far as flying low and fast, I don't know of too many civilian aircraft that have an operational necessity to be there. I would think it would be obvious that the only reason why the FAA grants the DOD waivers for that, is that's it necessary for training.
Click to expand...

But there should be places for that - like MoA's. There's a reason NASCAR races aren't held in school zones or residential areas.
 
EvilEagle said:
FTFY.

Where you in the cockpit? How much time do you have in a fighter to know what the scan pattern should be? What was the Cessna doing at the time?
Click to expand...
Erm. We know for a fact that the F-16 slammed into the C150. What are you smoking?
 
BillTIZ said:
GA can fly out to the ADIZ, but if you expect to come back I hope you filed your plan with ADIZ penetration location and time and expect to clear customs inbound. Oh don't forget your eApis filing too.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure you're wrong here buddy. Unless you land in a foreign country you don't need eAPIS and you don't need to clear customs. Overflights of foreign countries (esp. Canada) are fairly common even on domestic routes, and they don't require eAPIS or customs.

See, e.g., http://www.aopa.org/Flight-Planning/Canada "If you overfly Canada without landing, eAPIS is not required."

If you were right domestic flights from the contiguous states to Hawaii or Alaska would require clearing customs. I think not.
 
Anyone else notice that all three people involved in the collision were named Johnson (father, son and the Viper pilot)?

Lot of bizarre coincidences in this one.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Anyone else notice that all three people involved in the collision were named Johnson (father, son and the Viper pilot)?

Lot of bizarre coincidences in this one.
Click to expand...

Kinda like the unfortunate FBI agents in Die Hard.
 
Lotta hostility in here. As a complete aside to the ongoing fight about special use airspace, civilian vs military traffic, etc, the news did report that the F-16 was in the process of executing an instrument approach. Not that all the other bickering is meaningless, but perhaps not applicable in this instance? :dunno:

As for airspeed, aside from the MTR discussion, in a Viper on an instrument approach, I am not below 250 until I'm putting the gear down. It can fly below that airspeed in clean configuration, but it is really uncomfortable and just wallows around. Max endurance is somewhat lower than that, as well as engine out glide, but that would normally involve being up a higher altitude, not getting bumped around on an approach or having to dodge things like birds that can snuff out your only engine. Unlike a lot of other aircraft, there is no flap switch in the F-16, just the gear handle that also schedules flaps, approach/landing FLCS gains, etc, so you can't just drop a notch of flaps while holding the gear and comfortably slow down very much. It is not an airplane I, or anyone else I know, like to fly slow.......like everyone in aviation, no wise pilot wants to put him/herself in a corner without a backup plan, and flying a Viper slow and low is about the best way to have no options. Also, just like a slow moving Cessna, the F-16 is a pretty small airplane to pick up visually, especially given its faster airspeed. If I had to venture a guess, I'd say both pilots in question probably would have had a tough time seeing one another......especially after you factor in the generally poor visibility this time of year in that part of the country. We all talk a pretty big game about visual lookout and the like, but it is often difficult, regardless of what you are flying. Just some food for thought, without knowing the true circumstances that were present in this scenario.
 
Last edited:
Hostility? pfft

Must be Chair Force. Oops, I meant Air Farce.

Lemme know when you really want hostile.
Semper FI :cheerswine:
 
35 AoA said:
Lotta hostility in here. As a complete aside to the ongoing fight about special use airspace, civilian vs military traffic, etc, the news did report that the F-16 was in the process of executing an instrument approach. Not that all the other bickering is meaningless, but perhaps not applicable in this instance? :dunno:

As for airspeed, aside from the MTR discussion, in a Viper on an instrument approach, I am not below 250 until I'm putting the gear down. It can fly below that airspeed in clean configuration, but it is really uncomfortable and just wallows around. Max endurance is somewhat lower than that, as well as engine out glide, but that would normally involve being up a higher altitude, not getting bumped around on an approach or having to dodge things like birds that can snuff out your only engine. Unlike a lot of other aircraft, there is no flap switch in the F-16, just the gear handle that also schedules flaps, approach/landing FLCS gains, etc, so you can't just drop a notch of flaps while holding the gear and comfortably slow down very much. It is not an airplane I, or anyone else I know, like to fly slow.......like everyone in aviation, no wise pilot wants to put him/herself in a corner without a backup plan, and flying a Viper slow and low is about the best way to have no options. Also, just like a slow moving Cessna, the F-16 is a pretty small airplane to pick up visually, especially given its faster airspeed. If I had to venture a guess, I'd say both pilots in question probably would have had a tough time seeing one another......especially after you factor in the generally poor visibility this time of year in that part of the country. We all talk a pretty big game about visual lookout and the like, but it is often difficult, regardless of what you are flying. Just some food for thought, without knowing the true circumstances that were present in this scenario.
Click to expand...
First, thanks for the perspective. Second, I agree that see and avoid is a total nonstarter in these types of situations. In fact, see and avoid is a pretty bad solution in most cases. But we still have far too many mid-airs -- and this is not limited to military/civilian. With all the technology at our disposal in 2015, mid-airs should be a thing of the past.
 
docmirror said:
Well, not really. As I understand it, if you had the equipment for that speed, and asked, it's up to the ATC guy/gal on the scope.

I understand that the AF jets have safety reasons for the speed in some regimes, but I'm also betting they can safely operate below the speed limit if they want. May not be comfy at 240kts, but I'm sure the plane will do that speed if they were told to.
Click to expand...

Actually don't even have to tell ATC. If the airplane can't fly that slow, it can't fly that slow. They can't force you to slow down to a speed that puts you in the stick shaker or forces you to limit yourself to 10-15 degrees of bank.
 
Gucci Pilot said:
Actually don't even have to tell ATC. If the airplane can't fly that slow, it can't fly that slow. They can't force you to slow down to a speed that puts you in the stick shaker or forces you to limit yourself to 10-15 degrees of bank.
Click to expand...

Sensible. they prolly know by the equipment type squawk anyway.
 
EdFred said:
And yet if I did it, it would be careless and reckless, simply because I'm a civilian. There's a definite schism.
Click to expand...

Yup there's a definite "schism" because he works for "us" and you don't.

My point is if you want to criticize him or the hierarchy under which he is governed then pick up a mirror.
 
35 AoA said:
...in a Viper on an instrument approach, I am not below 250 until I'm putting the gear down.
Click to expand...
Are we going to have to start calling you 25 AoA? :rofl:

Nauga,
from the top of the doghouse
 
There is a Instrument MTR that runs S-->N just east of MKS over the Cooper, then turns NW over the Lake. Also...someone spectulated as to whether or not the Cessna was talking to ATC or had their transponder on...it really wouldn't matter. The radar on the Falcon would have picked up the Cessna as a target whether ATC was involved or not.
 
There's no reason for any hostility on a board like this...not even the passive-aggressive snarkiness. Pilots should be able to comment back and forth without the incivility one sees from the imbeciles on political forums.
 
docmirror said:
Well, not really. As I understand it, if you had the equipment for that speed, and asked, it's up to the ATC guy/gal on the scope.

I understand that the AF jets have safety reasons for the speed in some regimes, but I'm also betting they can safely operate below the speed limit if they want. May not be comfy at 240kts, but I'm sure the plane will do that speed if they were told to.
Click to expand...

As stated earlier, if I'm at 240knts, I'm in the traffic pattern and flaps/slats are coming out.

The only time I'm below 10K is climbing out or coming back for landing, or in an MTR / MOA
 
nauga said:
Are we going to have to start calling you 25 AoA? :rofl:

Nauga,
from the top of the doghouse
Click to expand...

haha touche. Not to mention that General Dynamics put everything in their cockpit on the opposite side that MacAir did. Flew my first flight in a Hornet in like 30+ days a few weeks ago. Felt like someone had driven the seat to about 50 degrees forward of upright, went to grab the stick over on the right console (nothing there, idiot), and proceeded to almost taxi off the pavement when I kept forgetting to hold the NWS button for hi gain (viper doesn't have hi gain so its hands off taxi)......I'm surprised I even remembered to start the left motor :) Then, after trying to arm the seat with my left hand to no avail, at the hold short my left hand was in complete confusion......."yes, there is something over here that I should be concerned with right now, but I can't remember what"........
 
Last edited:
SbestCFII said:
There's no reason for any hostility on a board like this...not even the passive-aggressive snarkiness. Pilots should be able to comment back and forth without the incivility one sees from the imbeciles on political forums.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It brings it out in me when people make statements they pose as facts when they don't really know that it's a fact. For instance:

SbestCFII said:
to whether or not the Cessna was talking to ATC or had their transponder on...it really wouldn't matter. The radar on the Falcon would have picked up the Cessna as a target whether ATC was involved or not.
Click to expand...

It could have picked it up, but it's not a guarantee. You don't know that, if the Cessna was going slow enough it wouldn't be on the radar. What if his radar was locked onto other potential traffic at the time? Not going to see it then. What if his radar wasn't working that great or at all? Unfortunately we rarely fly jets in training that have all systems working like they are supposed to. (too expensive for the taxpayer)

Guys on this and other boards are quick to say "well, the 16 had a radar so it's his fault" Most people saying that have no idea the capabilities and limitations of fighter radar, none of them were in the cockpit at the time so they have no idea if the radar picked him up or not.
 
35 AoA said:
haha touche. Not to mention that General Dynamics put everything in their cockpit on the opposite side that MacAir did. Flew my first flight in a Hornet in like 30+ days a few weeks ago. Felt like someone had driven the seat to about 50 degrees forward of upright, went to grab the stick over on the right console (nothing there, idiot), and proceeded to almost taxi off the pavement when I kept forgetting to hold the NWS button for hi gain (viper doesn't have hi gain so its hands off taxi)......I'm surprised I even remembered to start the left motor :) Then, after trying to arm the seat with my left hand to no avail, at the hold short my left hand was in complete confusion......."yes, there is something over here that I should be concerned with right now, but I can't remember what"........
Click to expand...

Are you in an Aggressor squadron?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top