is your head in the cockpit

Everskyward said:
Curious how people who claim they were "almost run down" by others playing with their electronic devices know that that was the reason. There were pilots who flew patterns the wrong way, etc., long before there were ipads and glass cockpits in small airplanes.
Click to expand...

There are these very old fashioned things that people use to determine such things. They are rarely used these days, unfortunately, but they still exist despite the modern trend to eradicate them from the Earth. They're called conversations. It's where two or more people gather together and use their vocal chords to grunt and make the air vibrate in a way that the others' ears can sense and comprehend. It's one of the oldest ways that information is conveyed from human to human. ;)
 
Lachlan said:
There are these very old fashioned things that people use to determine such things. They are rarely used these days, unfortunately, but they still exist despite the modern trend to eradicate them from the Earth. They're called conversations. It's where two or more people gather together and use their vocal chords to grunt and make the air vibrate in a way that the others' ears can sense and comprehend. It's one of the oldest ways that information is conveyed from human to human. ;)
Click to expand...
That's how you know what someone in another airplane was doing when they almost hit you? Interesting...
 
Lachlan said:
There are these very old fashioned things that people use to determine such things. They are rarely used these days, unfortunately, but they still exist despite the modern trend to eradicate them from the Earth. They're called conversations. It's where two or more people gather together and use their vocal chords to grunt and make the air vibrate in a way that the others' ears can sense and comprehend. It's one of the oldest ways that information is conveyed from human to human. ;)
Click to expand...

So the other pilot specifically told you that he was fiddling with his gizmos and not paying attention to flying the plane? I have a hard time believing that, but OK.
 
Lively thread. So far everyone is right, well just about everyone. :cool:
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
So the other pilot specifically told you that he was fiddling with his gizmos and not paying attention to flying the plane? I have a hard time believing that, but OK.
Click to expand...
Especially since it was a different poster who responded than the one who originally claimed they were almost run down by a student fooling with gizmos...
 
Everskyward said:
Especially since it was a different poster who responded than the one who originally claimed they were almost run down by a student fooling with gizmos...
Click to expand...

Like I said, lively, keep it going! :D
 
Yeah we need more for sure or just bring them back from the old site.
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
So the other pilot specifically told you that he was fiddling with his gizmos and not paying attention to flying the plane? I have a hard time believing that, but OK.
Click to expand...

Back up a bit and read the thread. I never said that it happened to me or anyone I know or don't know. I *DID* respond to the question of how someone would know if the reason someone was almost erased from the Earth was due to another pilot knobdicking (my favorite new word) in the pattern. I simply stated that it could indeed be ascertained by a low-tech conveyance of information through the spoken word. Believe it.
 
Yeah, still don't get how you (or anyone) would know if someone caused an unsafe event due to messing with their tech toys. If they really were fiddling around with stuff, I doubt they are going to say that over the radio.
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
Yeah, still don't get how you (or anyone) would know if someone caused an unsafe event due to messing with their tech toys. If they really were fiddling around with stuff, I doubt they are going to say that over the radio.
Click to expand...

Here's a not-so-hard-to-imagine scenario: there is a close call in the pattern. The tower calls the offending aircraft and attempts to get said aircraft safely out of the pattern to re-enter correctly. A meek voice responds, "Uh, sorry, sir, I was trying to put my next waypoint into the GPS. I only looked down for a second." And there you have it. Or the tower tells that pilot to call the tower after he safely lands, and the other pilot (the one with poo on his shorts) calls the tower, also, and the tower tells Mr. Poopypants that the student pilot was knobdicking around and nearly killed him in the pattern because of gizmos. There again, you have it. It could have been discovered a number of ways. Why is that so hard to believe? Oh, I know- it's because there's no direct internet link to the proof, right? Har, har. ;)
 
Everskyward said:
Curious how people who claim they were "almost run down" by others playing with their electronic devices know that that was the reason. There were pilots who flew patterns the wrong way, etc., long before there were ipads and glass cockpits in small airplanes.
Click to expand...

I talked to the student who did this after we landed. He admitted that his head was inside. I was an instructor at the time.

It's difficult to prove that someone was texting when they rear-ended you, but the cops have access to a technology now that can find out if they were. I hope they use it. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...yzer-now-meet-the-roadside-police-textalyzer/

A quote from that article:

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, each day in the US nine people die and more than 1,153 are injured because of distracted driving accidents. That's roughly 20 percent of mishaps caused by distracted driving.
 
Dan Thomas said:
I talked to the student who did this after we landed. He admitted that his head was inside. I was an instructor at the time.
Click to expand...
Cool. But that's only one incident. I still think pilots in "the good old days" screwed up as much as pilots with their new technology do now. I was able to do many stupid things without the benefit of electronics.

Dan Thomas said:
It's difficult to prove that someone was texting when they rear-ended you, but the cops have access to a technology now that can find out if they were. I hope they use it. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...yzer-now-meet-the-roadside-police-textalyzer/

A quote from that article:

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, each day in the US nine people die and more than 1,153 are injured because of distracted driving accidents. That's roughly 20 percent of mishaps caused by distracted driving.
Click to expand...
I have no doubt that the technology exists. I can see getting a violation if you send a text, but you can receive a text without knowing it.
 
I just keep an eye out for you NORDO freaks and respect the right to NORDOFF anytime.

Would I do it in class G out in the boonies from a ghost strip? Hell yeah.

Would I do it where there are a lot of airplanes coming and going constantly? Hell no.
 
My worst near midair collision, with a jet airliner, happened years ago, when I was flying VFR radar advisories. I was terminated by ATC, and given another frequency to try. As I was fumbling with the radio to get the new freq in, I noticed out of the top of my peripheral vision a light. It was the landing lights (on during the day) of a 737 barreling right at me! :eek:
(Excellent practice, BTW, to leave those lights on during approach.)
I pushed the nose down instinctively, and we missed each other by around 100 feet vertical and 0 lateral. Despite the years that have gone by, that picture of our closest approach (I don't think they ever saw me since there was no discernible evasive action on their part) is still very fresh in my mind.
I had no gizmos beyond radios and a simple Loran C, with no moving map or anything fancy.
So I agree that you don't need fancy e-stuff to get your eyes inside the cockpit.
 
Everskyward said:
Cool. But that's only one incident.
Click to expand...

Do be so dismissive. Wave it away after challenging him on it? You and others doubted how he could possibly know that someone knobdicking in the pattern nearly caused an accident. He responds with proof and you say, "But that's only one incident." You're cool. We only need one incident to kill any of us. One. Now be a gracious adult and admit you were wrong to doubt that poor guy. And do have a good day.
 
RotorDude said:
I pushed the nose down instinctively, and we missed each other by around 100 feet vertical and 0 lateral
Click to expand...

You were 100 feet below a 737 without getting rolled? What were you flying, a C130??
 
deonb said:
You were 100 feet below a 737 without getting rolled? What were you flying, a C130??
Click to expand...

If you mean wake vortices, I felt nothing at all, which makes sense to me, since I was close enough to be between them. Bear in mind they start from the 737's wingtips (113' span according to Google) and spread outward a bit.
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
Yeah, still don't get how you (or anyone) would know if someone caused an unsafe event due to messing with their tech toys. If they really were fiddling around with stuff, I doubt they are going to say that over the radio.
Click to expand...
I've heard it over CTAF.

"Sorry. Programming the GPS." In a busy pattern? Yikes.

I don't know what happened, but I assume it was a close call. I was still miles out on the 45 and was not involved. I suppose it could have been enabling a missed approach.
 
When I had the Maule it was equipped with a number of gizmos. One of them was the JPI engine analyzer which was down in the lower left side of the panel above my knee. A fabulous instrument with just two little buttons and about one billion sub-menu functions accessed by various combinations of pressing or holding one or both buttons. So yes, I can personally attest to having my head buried deep in the cockpit knobdicking on numerous occasions wondering WTF is it doing that?
 
I have spent more time looking at a paper map than I probably should have and have consequently come close to other airplanes.
 
Lachlan said:
Back up a bit and read the thread. I never said that it happened to me or anyone I know or don't know. I *DID* respond to the question of how someone would know if the reason someone was almost erased from the Earth was due to another pilot knobdicking (my favorite new word) in the pattern. I simply stated that it could indeed be ascertained by a low-tech conveyance of information through the spoken word. Believe it.
Click to expand...


Permission to use your word sir?
 
Timbeck2 said:
Permission to use your word sir?
Click to expand...

Knobdicking belongs to Hotprops, and comes right out of the first post in the thread! I just took it and ran with it. I work in a very large and very advanced medical lab. My coworkers are all using it as of today. It really accurately describes instrument and analyzer calibrations and QC and troubleshooting. It's hilarious!
 
Everskyward said:
I have no doubt that the technology exists. I can see getting a violation if you send a text, but you can receive a text without knowing it.
Click to expand...

Receiving a text isn't illegal while driving as long as you leave the phone alone. The textalyzer would be smart enough to figure that out. A smartphone, after all, has accelerometers in it that can figure out if it's being held or not, and knows when something has stopped or swerved suddenly, and when it happened. These things are way more capable than most of us realize, and they're capable of ratting us out.
 
Dan Thomas said:
Receiving a text isn't illegal while driving as long as you leave the phone alone. The textalyzer would be smart enough to figure that out. A smartphone, after all, has accelerometers in it that can figure out if it's being held or not, and knows when something has stopped or swerved suddenly, and when it happened. These things are way more capable than most of us realize, and they're capable of ratting us out.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if they could prove that the device was being held. Motion can be caused by many different things. I think even the orientation of the device as it sits in the car could cause false assumptions.

But I don't think they should necessarily crack down on texting or tech in particular. Just as in flying, distracted driving was occurring way before cell phones. Eating or drinking without spilling on yourself can be a distraction. So can looking at a paper map. I can remember people complaining about women applying make-up (although I never saw that occur). Other people in the car can also be distractions, especially children who are not old enough to know that the driver needs to be paying attention to the road and not to them.
 
to add,, the closest i came to a midair was too close for comfort. about 15 years ago i dropped a friend of at hfd to pick up his bonanza. we both took off to return to hto 50 + miles south late afternoon 4 miles in haze 2800 ft vfr {2 mistakes right there, altitude and not filing} . at the time i had the latest greatest 2nd gen tcas or tcad cant remember {25k of junk} in my t210 . friend behind me was one of those guys who just had to pass you and land first. my tcas kept resolving him at same altitude 1 mile 6 o'clock, and i would add just a little more mp to make his day! just approaching the LI sound with the sun about to set in the wnw it lit up a crome spinner coming right at me .push yoke down sand and all sorts of stuff flying around the cockpit we just missed .lucky we were both talking {bonanzaboy and I} as we switched to hto unicom as soon as we could after offing hfd . i told him to get low quick and he did and never saw the traffic. that pos tcas was programed to resolve the nearest target even though it was behind you .by the time it resolved the other aircraft i had already seen its spinner! i quickly bought new scrip polarized sunglasses and rosen visors. and yes i will soon start a new thread about polarized sunglasses and gizmos :eek: fly suave you all !
 
Missed an oncoming plane by maybe 50' 4 miles out coming into uncontrolled airport. I saw him and swerved btw to the left was the only way to swerve as he was to my right a bit. If I had turned right, I would have turned right into him. I was looking intently all the time and I have 20/16 eyesight. They were climbing and coming from below. Planes below you get lost in the clutter. Also there were mountains in the background so even a higher plane would be not be against the sky. That one was close. Would have taken 4 of us. Whew!

BTW, the oncoming plane had a student and an instructor as did my plane (I was the student). All of the instructors were using the same corridor as approach and departure because it was over the least populated area. After this close call, they stopped doing that.

They instead went to random approach corridors (an argument for not having a single pattern altitude, but a "range" ).
 
Last edited:
I was passed on my left by a faster, climbing twin, only about 40 feet away, over lake washington.
I dont think he saw me, he didnt look at me, but I was looking at him!
I could have picked him out of a line up,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top