at what altitude did the collision happen?
The track of the Warrior seems to stop around 900'. Post #9.
at what altitude did the collision happen?
….or even been to jack browns/Winterhaven.
Government faa rules do not make things better or safer.
The track of the Warrior seems to stop around 900'. Post #9.
See post 87oof. Minus field elevation of 150, that's a high collision if true. Seaplanes were agreed to be operating below 500AGL if I understand this local operation correctly? It's already egregious they insist on operating directly under a busy land airport traffic pattern because "we were here first", but if they're not even going to exercise a modicum of altitude discipline then I'm not sympathetic to their argument at all. I don't even care much about this regulatory back-n-forth over nordo/adsb potato that has overtaken the thread; they have no leg to stand on if they came in bombing across a class E final/base ground tracks at 750AGL. None.
We have to sidestep or climb for class E traffic patterns all.the.time during the conduct of our low-level MTR training (500agl at 360GKTS at 12 aspect is not a fight anybody is gonna win when we slice through joe Nordo). That's taxpayers getting less value added, but we do it because it's the prudent thing to do. This seaplane operation needs to suck it up and start acting with a better sense of shared responsibility, even if it's money-inconvenient. As I said before, why we can't have nice things.
Seaplanes were agreed to be operating below 500AGL if I understand this local operation correctly?
It's already egregious they insist on operating directly under a busy land airport traffic pattern because "we were here first",...
This seaplane operation needs to suck it up and start acting with a better sense of shared responsibility, even if it's money-inconvenient. As I said before, why we can't have nice things.
lots of publicity
See post #87. It appears that JB's may have changed their altitude protocol recently. Don't know the reason yet.
Actually, it's the other way around. KGIF pre-dates Jack Brown's by about 35 years. The land was donated for the airport in 1925 and it operated as a grass field at first. It got paved runways when it was used by the Army in WWII.
https://www.mywinterhaven.com/airport/about/history-2/
Agreed, and I think there will be lots of publicity and discussion. The home office for the Seaplane Pilots Association is in the FBO building at KGIF. There's no way this crash won't get attention.
In this modern day and age is it so difficult to ask for a flippin radio. Shoot they have been around for 100 years. Why the stubborn defiance. ADSB would be nice also. Whats the reasoning for not having at least a radio? Death wish? It cant be affordability…not in a world where a tank of gas is 8 bucks a gallon. we go through the trouble to install position lights no one sees in the daytime but something as simple as a radio… god forbid we upset the gods of freedom.
How much talk about Jack Browns was there at the meetings about this, https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/remote-tower-project.138820/See post #87. It appears that JB's may have changed their altitude protocol recently. Don't know the reason yet.
Actually, it's the other way around. KGIF pre-dates Jack Brown's by about 35 years. The land was donated for the airport in 1925 and it operated as a grass field at first. It got paved runways when it was used by the Army in WWII.
https://www.mywinterhaven.com/airport/about/history-2/
Agreed, and I think there will be lots of publicity and discussion. The home office for the Seaplane Pilots Association is in the FBO building at KGIF. There's no way this crash won't get attention.
Because radios do not prevent mid-air collisions.
I believe many pilots already have a dangerous blind faith in radios and adsb that results in complacency. Requiring radios will only make that worse IMO. We should all be flying with the assumption that there are NORDO planes out there, because even with a mandate, there will always be NORDO planes out there.
Interestingly enough, we also have a sky writer at KGIF who flies an AgCat. He often gives a puff when turning base or final. Makes him real easy to spot!
There is the solution. Require every plane to have smoke and have it turned on while in the pattern...
It would be safer, so it’s not logical for everyone not to do it, right?There is the solution. Require every plane to have smoke and have it turned on while in the pattern...
Well, yes. There will always be aircraft flying with radio problems. My last flight, for instance, I had headset issues and other planes' transmissions were garbled and the sidetone was badly distorted. Brand new Flightcom ANR. My homemade headsets sound better (albeit no ANR).I respectfully disagree. ..and of course its just my opinion as a fellow pilot.
It would be best if we could fly knowing that there are NO NORDO planes out there. Although yes in the name of safety always assume the worst.
White smoke if you've elected to land, black smoke if you're going to continue circling. Heck, it works for the Vatican....White smoke for singles, yellow for twins, red for turbines?
Well, yes. There will always be aircraft flying with radio problems. My last flight, for instance, I had headset issues and other planes' transmissions were garbled and the sidetone was badly distorted. Brand new Flightcom ANR. My homemade headsets sound better (albeit no ANR).
There will always be aircraft tuned to the wrong frequency. My home airport, one of the busiest uncontrolled airports in the state, is changing its CTAF frequency after ~50 years at 122.8. It's going to be real fun for a while, after that.
There will always be pilots identifying the wrong "white Cessna" instead of the one that's truly their traffic.
There will always be pilot mis-stating their positions. There will always be pilots who flat-out ignore other aircraft's calls. There will always be CFIs who turn off the radios in the pattern because all the calls interfere with their student instruction.
The number of midairs involving the above factors vastly outnumber the ones involving NORDO aircraft. In the thirteen-year period that I posted about, there were just two cases of a midair in the pattern involving a radio-equipped airplane and a NORDO one. There were 46 cases where both planes had radios. Four happened at controlled fields.
I wrote up my analysis for my EAA chapter newsletter this month. Plotted out some data...rather interesting.
View attachment 115954
Only about a third of midairs occur in the traffic pattern. All the others happen away from the airport, where *everybody* is, essentially, NORDO (except for those under ATC control).
NORDO airplanes aren't the problem. They SCARE people, yes. But it's a good thing to be scared, when operating in a busy pattern....
Ron Wanttaja
Certainly. Point me to an official source that provides data for NORDO vs. Non-NORDO. Not aware of one myself.Can you normalize those data for the number of aircraft not equipped with radios versus those so equipped?
How much talk about Jack Browns was there at the meetings about this, https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/remote-tower-project.138820/
You've got a couple of see and avoid incidents with two balloons in there.Certainly. Point me to an official source that provides data for NORDO vs. Non-NORDO. Not aware of one myself.
As of January 1st, there were ~3,800 J-3 Cubs on the active registry. Willing to bet more than one have radios; beyond that, we don't really know.
Here's a summary of the aircraft involved in pattern-related midairs, 2008-2020. I manually typed in the entries in the Plane #2 column. BTW, *still* looking for a way to easily post tables.
View attachment 115959
Some of these are foreign accidents, where the rules might have been different.
CEN09LA555 involved two NORDO airplanes, as are CEN13LA506, GAA15CA157, and ANC10LA094. The latter is two NORDO PA-18s on floats taking off from the same lake. CEN21LA040 may have involved two NORDO J-3s, but there's no mention of equipage or radio calls in the NTSB preliminary.
Almost all of these planes are of the type that should have radios installed. I suspect a couple of the cases with Ag aircraft probably weren't talking. One of those cases involved aircraft flying to nearby airports with no common frequency, another was two Ag airplanes spraying fields near each other.
Ron Wanttaja
Certainly. Point me to an official source that provides data for NORDO vs. Non-NORDO. Not aware of one myself.
As of January 1st, there were ~3,800 J-3 Cubs on the active registry. Willing to bet more than one have radios; beyond that, we don't really know.
Here's a summary of the aircraft involved in pattern-related midairs, 2008-2020. I manually typed in the entries in the Plane #2 column. BTW, *still* looking for a way to easily post tables.
View attachment 115959
Some of these are foreign accidents, where the rules might have been different.
CEN09LA555 involved two NORDO airplanes, as are CEN13LA506, GAA15CA157, and ANC10LA094. The latter is two NORDO PA-18s on floats taking off from the same lake. CEN21LA040 may have involved two NORDO J-3s, but there's no mention of equipage or radio calls in the NTSB preliminary.
Almost all of these planes are of the type that should have radios installed. I suspect a couple of the cases with Ag aircraft probably weren't talking. One of those cases involved aircraft flying to nearby airports with no common frequency, another was two Ag airplanes spraying fields near each other.
Ron Wanttaja
Or I was irritated at how many there were but was headed out of town and decided to see if anyone would care to analyze it.How about you listing them, rather than expecting us to do the detective work.
To start, you may have already committed one by “shifting the burden of proof”.
He who makes the assertion - in this case that there are “numerous logical fallacies in the post above” - bears the burden of proof. Unless you just wanted to give us a homework assignment, but don’t expect that to sit well with an adult audience.
Let's see...No, it's really more simple than that. Do radios make us safer? Clearly, yes they do.
Argument from IgnoranceJust how much safety we will never know, because most planes do have radios and avoided incidents are not reported. BUT, radios do add a layer of safety. Therefore, safety will increase if NORDO planes add radios.
That increase might be very small, some would say insignificant, but it might have been very significant to four people in Winter Haven.
I'm generally sympathetic, but the fact of the matter remains that they could have had a handheld and this accident still could have happened, because in fact the Warrior crew's scan was also inadequate.If someone chooses to fly over Iowa cornfields NORDO, no big deal. But to fly NORDO in the Winter Haven airport area, when $200 handhelds are available, is poor judgment and creates an unnecessary additional risk
True, but it's a start, and a sight more than any of the critics have done.Looking at comparative rates, using denominators, versus incidences, would make for much more meaningful analysis.
Sure. But, again, it all depends on how many airplanes are NORDO, and there's no data for it.Looking at comparative rates, using denominators, versus incidences, would make for much more meaningful analysis.
Sure. But, again, it all depends on how many airplanes are NORDO, and there's no data for it.
Another thing we might consider is what kind of airports these NORDO in-pattern accidents are happening.
From the 2008-2020 database, there are seven NTSB reports where the midair occurred in the traffic pattern with at least one NORDO airplane. Three occurred at/near private airports, one at a lake.
So far, I'm assuming no one wants to impose radio requirements at private airports (who could, if they wish, implement their own).
The remaining three happened at larger public airports where one might expect a greater variety of traffic.
One (WPR09LA228) was two NORDO Ag airplanes running into each other. Neither had radios.
Another was a NORDO Taylorcraft and a Cessna 185.
The third was a NORDO Pitts Special and a Cherokee.
So there we are. Out of nearly 22,000 accidents, only two involved the "classic" situation of a single NORDO airplane and a traditional modern airplane running into each other in the pattern. Seems like the odds are pretty low.
Oh, and those three at larger airports? No fatalities in any of them. Over the same time period, there were 41 fatalities in radio-equipped aircraft involved in midairs in traffic patterns.
Just don't see the NORDO planes being a threat.
Ron Wanttaja
I'll take imperfect data over emotion based arguments any day, especially when those who argue from emotional reactions are trying to create government mandates.True, but it's a start, and a sight more than any of the critics have done.
I'll take imperfect data over emotion based arguments any day, especially when those who argue from emotional reactions are trying to create government mandates.
Oh, and those three at larger airports? No fatalities in any of them. Over the same time period, there were 41 fatalities in radio-equipped aircraft involved in midairs in traffic patterns.
Bleeding from all the cuts from the vacuum tubes.....So you are more likely to die in a mid air if you fly with a radio?
I thought it may be mercury poisoning from the old displays ..
As much as I hate to say it, I think ADS-B to augment eyes is probably superior to the radio in some circumstances, especially where people may be on different frequencies, and also when there are too many people trying to talk all at once. If I'm south of Dallas Exec, where I sometimes fly my Luscombe, even if I'm using the the handheld radio, there could be people on at least four different freqs... Redbird Tower, Midway CTAF, Lancaster CTAF, or Flight Following with regional approach. If I have to guess which one they are on, it's crazy. The FAA really needs to figure out an ADS-B out option for those of us willing to put it on a small battery...I would never advocate for wig-wag lights, radios,chemsmoke trails, bright paint schemes, or ADSB to be mandatory. But I do believe that these things, in conjunction with a pilot that keeps his 20/20's looking out the window will help safety. I can't accept the argument that better awareness through radios and ADSB isn't going to have a positive impact on safety, even if it's small. But at this point we only kill a few people every now and again in a mid-air so it ain't no big concern.
From my recent analysis, I have also come to the conclusion that ADS-B would be an advantage in the outside-the-pattern environment. An area near my home airport is a common practice area for a number of FBOs; I noted several of the midairs involved planes involved in such areas doing airwork for training. There's supposedly a common frequency for coordination in this area (which I JUST learned about in a similar discussion in a different forum after flying over that area for 40 years). The distraction factor would be less for planes at altitude not jockeying for pattern position.As much as I hate to say it, I think ADS-B to augment eyes is probably superior to the radio in some circumstances, especially where people may be on different frequencies, and also when there are too many people trying to talk all at once. If I'm south of Dallas Exec, where I sometimes fly my Luscombe, even if I'm using the the handheld radio, there could be people on at least four different freqs... Redbird Tower, Midway CTAF, Lancaster CTAF, or Flight Following with regional approach. If I have to guess which one they are on, it's crazy. The FAA really needs to figure out an ADS-B out option for those of us willing to put it on a small battery...
I've actually worked comparisons to Putin into daily conversation, to stay relevant.Don't stop there; compare him to Hitler. Godwin's Law demands it!
I've actually worked comparisons to Putin into daily conversation, to stay relevant.