Midair Boulder, CO

Fearless Tower said:
One of the reasons I hate flying in Florida. It’s a freaking zoo and it seems half of the pilots down there have their heads buried in the cockpit.
Click to expand...

in Florida I try to cruise at 6,000 to 10,000 as there is nobody up there. Once while at 6,000 on an IFR flight plan and 40 miles from my destination at Lakeland, ATC asked me if I actually planned to land at Lakeland because I was so high.
 
PaulS said:
RIP. Mid airs really are one of the biggest dangers flying IMO.
Click to expand...
Certainly far from the top killer, however. Scariest? Perhaps; fire on the aircraft scares me more.
 
luvflyin said:
??? There are tracks on both planes when I look at it.
Click to expand...

The Skyhawk's tracking data is blocked through the Limited Aircraft Data Displayed, or LADD program, which essentially prohibits the FAA from sharing ADS-B-derived tracking information with commercial tracking sites like FlightAware. However, raw ADS-B Out data can still be picked up by independent tracking sources used by sites like ADSBExchange.

Operators can request an anonymous ICAO ADS-B code through the Privacy ICAO Address (PIA) program that doesn't link this ADS-B Out data to a specific operator, but all the information used by ATC will still be picked up.
 
luvflyin said:
@wanttaja ? Are there stats on this? Midair, one plane IFR, the other VFR.
Click to expand...
I don't track flight plan status in my accident databases (I leave that to the local news media :).

Midairs vary by aircraft type, probably due to the type of use. Cessna 172s have the highest of the ~5 types of production aircraft I track, probably due to their use as trainers. 4.6% of the C-172 accidents are midairs, vs. 2% of the Cirrus accidents, 1.1% of the homebuilts and ~0.7% of the Bonanza 36s. The homebuilt percentage is somewhat inflated in that ~1/3d of the homebuilt midairs occur during formation flying (and about 75% of them are RVs).

I took a look at the Cirrus midairs...five events, out of a total of 298 accidents in the 1998-2018 time period. One event involved two Cirrus aircraft. Looked up the flight plan status in the NTSB report.

LAX08FA265: Student pilot in a 172 and two occupants in the Cirrus, all deceased. 172 was VFR, Cirrus was on an IFR flight plan. Accident occurred in VMC.
CEN10FA115: Piper Pawnee towing a Schweizer glider, and a Cirrus. Pawnee pilot, Cirrus pilot, and the Cirrus passenger were both killed. Pilot and two passengers in the glider were unhurt. All operating VFR in VMC conditions. NTSB report states, "Visual meteorological conditions existed at the time of the accident with an overcast layer and visibility of 8 miles. The overcast sky conditions likely made it difficult for the Piper pilot to detect the primarily white-colored Cirrus."
CEN13LA149: Cessna 152 and Cirrus, no fatalities. Clear skies and 10 mile visibility. Cirrus pilot initially thought he'd hit a bird, since no ADS-B warning. Instructor in the 152 had forgotten to turn his transponder on. No flight plans.
ERA15FA025: Robinson R44 and Cirrus. Cirrus pilot and passenger with minor injuries (CAPS save), R44 on instructional flight had three deceased. Cirrus was on IFR flight plan, VMC conditions at the location of the accident...ten mile visibility with an overcast
ERA18LA109: Two Cirri, one SR-20, one SR-22. Aircraft collided on short final, no injuries. No flight plans.

Ron Wanttaja
 
wanttaja said:
I don't track flight plan status in my accident databases (I leave that to the local news media :).

Midairs vary by aircraft type, probably due to the type of use. Cessna 172s have the highest of the ~5 types of production aircraft I track, probably due to their use as trainers. 4.6% of the C-172 accidents are midairs, vs. 2% of the Cirrus accidents, 1.1% of the homebuilts and ~0.7% of the Bonanza 36s. The homebuilt percentage is somewhat inflated in that ~1/3d of the homebuilt midairs occur during formation flying (and about 75% of them are RVs).

I took a look at the Cirrus midairs...five events, out of a total of 298 accidents in the 1998-2018 time period. One event involved two Cirrus aircraft. Looked up the flight plan status in the NTSB report.

LAX08FA265: Student pilot in a 172 and two occupants in the Cirrus, all deceased. 172 was VFR, Cirrus was on an IFR flight plan. Accident occurred in VMC.
CEN10FA115: Piper Pawnee towing a Schweizer glider, and a Cirrus. Pawnee pilot, Cirrus pilot, and the Cirrus passenger were both killed. Pilot and two passengers in the glider were unhurt. All operating VFR in VMC conditions. NTSB report states, "Visual meteorological conditions existed at the time of the accident with an overcast layer and visibility of 8 miles. The overcast sky conditions likely made it difficult for the Piper pilot to detect the primarily white-colored Cirrus."
CEN13LA149: Cessna 152 and Cirrus, no fatalities. Clear skies and 10 mile visibility. Cirrus pilot initially thought he'd hit a bird, since no ADS-B warning. Instructor in the 152 had forgotten to turn his transponder on. No flight plans.
ERA15FA025: Robinson R44 and Cirrus. Cirrus pilot and passenger with minor injuries (CAPS save), R44 on instructional flight had three deceased. Cirrus was on IFR flight plan, VMC conditions at the location of the accident...ten mile visibility with an overcast
ERA18LA109: Two Cirri, one SR-20, one SR-22. Aircraft collided on short final, no injuries. No flight plans.

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...
Aeromexico 498 was an IFR vs VFR. VFR guy not talkin' or squawkin'. PSA 182. Both talkin' and squawkin'.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
Certainly far from the top killer, however. Scariest? Perhaps; fire on the aircraft scares me more.
Click to expand...

According to this, mid-airs were #8, for the time period studied.
I suspect that the total number of fatals from the first 7 causes is vastly greater than the handful we have with mid-airs.
We need to use all resources to avoid midairs of course…. but if it is seen in perspective, we really need to put more effort into preventing the other causes.




2E016F7B-0D46-4518-B05B-F0782F4E53F2.jpg
 
eman1200 said:
is it even in the top 5 biggest dangers?
Click to expand...
I thought my wife finding out how much I spend was the biggest danger! Joking aside, it's really tragic and lately something that has me on edge in non-towered fields. I heard a story today of a tow-plane pulling a glider at Cumberland Maryland and released near the airport never once communicating with the tower and traffic in the area! Seriously, some of this is solvable
 
Flying in the SoCal area will have you thinking more about midairs than just about any other danger. I can vividly recall 3 near misses (before ads-b), 2 of them close to KSNA. I even worked with a man that was a survivor of a midair between a Globe Swift and a Stearman on final to Corona airport. Traffic density has a lot to do with your chance of being involved in one.
 
Yup, the loads of rules and procedures work pretty well to keep us from running into each other. But just because it is number 8 on the list of things that kill pilots does not make it any less of a concern. You have to be careful when studying stats not make the assumption that just because something isn't in the top 5 it's nothing to be overly concerned about.

The threat of a mid-air is always there, it can be mitigated by vigilance, but as we saw in the Jet prop accident in Nevada, you can be doing everything correctly and some pilot not doing thing correctly can take you out. I don't think see and avoid would have helped the pilot who got run over. Adsb if he was paying attention (tough to do on short final) or traffic alert may have helped.

Brad Smith said:
Flying in the SoCal area will have you thinking more about midairs than just about any other danger. I can vividly recall 3 near misses (before ads-b), 2 of them close to KSNA. I even worked with a man that was a survivor of a midair between a Globe Swift and a Stearman on final to Corona airport. Traffic density has a lot to do with your chance of being involved in one.
Click to expand...

This, I'm not in SoCal, but I'm close to the Boston Bravo and as I've said many times before, I am pretty regularly turning for traffic. Most pilots out there are good, but there are big sky believers out there who never see another aircraft and think they are safe. Those are the pilots that scare me.
 
One issue is, close in to an airport, ADSB can become a jumbled mess…. And one is usually too busy with their head outside the cockpit anyhow.
 
I'm concerned that ADSB is becoming counter-productive. It's training people to stay heads-down. Lot's of older airplanes at the little airports that I frequent will never have ADSB (or radios for that matter). Somebody who is flying a more expensive airplane and who may be focused on a screen is going to run these older airplanes over.

I'm also beginning to wonder if ADSB has more to do with enforcement than with safety.
 
TCABM said:
Everyone keeps bringing ADS-B up. That tool likely creates more danger in the terminal environment than it does improve safety.
Click to expand...

patrickw said:
I'm concerned that ADSB is becoming counter-productive. It's training people to stay heads-down. Lot's of older airplanes at the little airports that I frequent will never have ADSB (or radios for that matter). Somebody who is flying a more expensive airplane and who may be focused on a screen is going to run these older airplanes over.

I'm also beginning to wonder if ADSB has more to do with enforcement than with safety.
Click to expand...

Adsb is a great tool, short final is not the place to be looking at it though. While I'm sure there are people out there with eyes focused inside instead of outside, I'd bet it's the rare exception rather than the rule. The idea is to use the tools you have when appropriate. I've never had training where the instructor said "keep your head down, focus on the traffic display" when I was looking outside. I have had instances where a glance at the traffic screen helped me find traffic visually though.
 
This weekend I was flying in a SE direction, VFR, at 7500 feet. During my 20 minute flight, I saw 3 different airplanes on ADSB coming toward me, all were flying in a NW direction and none were climbing or descending. One was at 7500' with me, one was at 7700' and one was at 7300'. All close enough to really get my attention, but I don't think I would have seen any of them without ADSB. All 3 were flying at the wrong altitude. The one at 7500 didn't show an N-Number on ADSB, it showed "VFR". ADSB can really be helpful and when using Foreflight and my Bose headsets, I get an audible warning, which helps me keep my eyes outside of the cockpit.

It can get interesting up there. Still, the only two times I'll say I was close to a mid-air was in controlled airspace when talking to towers.
 
PaulS said:
Adsb is a great tool, short final is not the place to be looking at it though.
Click to expand...
While flying yesterday, I had warnings for traffic on final on both of my landings. Both were planes ahead of me that were landing. Not information I needed, but still nice to know it was looking out for me!
 
TCABM said:
Everyone keeps bringing ADS-B up. That tool likely creates more danger in the terminal environment than it does improve safety.
Click to expand...

I see this comment so often and I have to categorically disagree.
Do you have and use ADSB?
I fly looking outside the windows in VMC, that doesn't mean I don't have time to check my altitude, my airspeed, ADSB, gear position etc. It's a part of flying the plane.
Keep your head up looking for traffic but it sure is nice to have *most* of the traffic identified for you.
Those that don't see the value in ADSB don't know how to use it properly IMO. It's a tool, just like your gauges.

I have avoided more close calls than I can count with ADSB.
I fly primarily in a very busy uncontrolled environment with a large training school right up the road.
I'm much more concerned about the guys flying around willfully without ADSB than I am about those with it and not looking outside the aircraft.
If absolutely nothing else it gives you a better ability to spot aircraft in the sky, I'm constantly seeing planes on ADSB that take a hot minute to find with my eyes even when I know right where they are. I'm 100% confident I would never see half or more of them by just visually scanning. The increase in situational awareness is orders of magnitude IMO.
 
Justin Brady said:
I see this comment so often and I have to categorically disagree.
Do you have and use ADSB?
I fly looking outside the windows in VMC, that doesn't mean I don't have time to check my altitude, my airspeed, ADSB, gear position etc. It's a part of flying the plane.
Keep your head up looking for traffic but it sure is nice to have *most* of the traffic identified for you.
Those that don't see the value in ADSB don't know how to use it properly IMO. It's a tool, just like your gauges.

I have avoided more close calls than I can count with ADSB.
I fly primarily in a very busy uncontrolled environment with a large training school right up the road.
I'm much more concerned about the guys flying around willfully without ADSB than I am about those with it and not looking outside the aircraft.
If absolutely nothing else it gives you a better ability to spot aircraft in the sky, I'm constantly seeing planes on ADSB that take a hot minute to find with my eyes even when I know right where they are. I'm 100% confident I would never see half or more of them by just visually scanning. The increase in situational awareness is orders of magnitude IMO.
Click to expand...

I construct most of my situational awareness by looking outside and listening to the radio. Almost every plane that is squawking is talking and the planes that aren't talking usually aren't squawking, either. I've discovered it's much easier for me to keep an "up to date" picture in my head by using the radio and my eyes than it is for me to spend enough time looking at the screen to remember where all the planes are in relation to me in the sky, but that's just me.
 
patrickw said:
I'm concerned that ADSB is becoming counter-productive. It's training people to stay heads-down. Lot's of older airplanes at the little airports that I frequent will never have ADSB (or radios for that matter). Somebody who is flying a more expensive airplane and who may be focused on a screen is going to run these older airplanes over.

I'm also beginning to wonder if ADSB has more to do with enforcement than with safety.
Click to expand...

You have a common GA pilot misunderstanding of what ADS-B is all about. ADS-B has everything to do with the S. It improves the ability for ATC surveillance, the S in ADS-B. The traffic target aspect is not intended for collision avoidance, it is simply intended for enhanced visual acquisition. ADS-B Out is required in certain airspace, ADS-B In is not required at all. There are limitations of ADS-B that are not widely understood by pilots, particularly with respect to traffic. It is not a substitute for see and avoid or TCAS.
 
Justin Brady said:
I see this comment so often and I have to categorically disagree.
Click to expand...
Ok

Justin Brady said:
…Do you have and use ADSB?…
Click to expand...
Yes. In & Out, in panel and on tablet. Being heads down dorking around with the tablet or GPS while on a leg in the traffic pattern creates more danger than using eyeballs and communicating between aircraft. Add to it non-ADS-B users and/or NORDO aircraft and it gets worse.

ETA: @John Collins out it much more eloquently, but ADS-B is not TCAS.
 
Last edited:
John Collins said:
Yes. In & Out, in panel and on tablet. Being heads down dorking around with the tablet or GPS while on a leg in the traffic pattern creates more danger than using eyeballs and communicating between aircraft. Add to it non-ADS-B users and/or NORDO aircraft and it gets worse.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I use it more for pattern entry than I do while actually flying the pattern.
I will agree that trying to turn base while looking at your iPad is a bad idea :)
 
Justin Brady said:
I see this comment so often and I have to categorically disagree.
Do you have and use ADSB?
I fly looking outside the windows in VMC, that doesn't mean I don't have time to check my altitude, my airspeed, ADSB, gear position etc. It's a part of flying the plane.
Keep your head up looking for traffic but it sure is nice to have *most* of the traffic identified for you.
Those that don't see the value in ADSB don't know how to use it properly IMO. It's a tool, just like your gauges.
Click to expand...
Agree 100%... "It's a tool, just like your gauges", and I'm super happy that I have ADS-B Out&In (plus TAS) as a supplement to my eyeballs. Oh, and my traffic displays are up at gauge level, not heads-down in my lap.
Wayne
 
Last edited:
Time of day and geography are being brought up in another Forum. Like the eastbound guy was looking into the morning sun and the westbound guy had the background of the rockies which the eastbound plane would have been in. And they say it's usually pretty hazy there.
 
patrickw said:
I'm concerned that ADSB is becoming counter-productive. It's training people to stay heads-down. Lot's of older airplanes at the little airports that I frequent will never have ADSB (or radios for that matter). Somebody who is flying a more expensive airplane and who may be focused on a screen is going to run these older airplanes over.

I'm also beginning to wonder if ADSB has more to do with enforcement than with safety.
Click to expand...
I think most people flying with ADSB in use it like most other... instruments. As in glance at it periodically.

I have a hard time believing that most people in the pattern are staring at their display to watch the movement of another airplane while ignoring the airspeed, altimeter, AI and what's outside. If that were the case, the ground beneath the pattern would have piles of wrecked planes that flew into the ground while their pilots were intent on the screens.
 
luvflyin said:
Time of day and geography are being brought up in another Forum. Like the eastbound guy was looking into the morning sun and the westbound guy had the background of the rockies which the eastbound plane would have been in. And they say it's usually pretty hazy there.
Click to expand...
It wasn’t hazy on this day, it was a sunny warm Saturday morning and apparently everyone wanted to fly. There was exceptionally heavy traffic in the area, at least more than I’ve ever noticed before. It felt good to land.
 
ADS-B In is useful enroute. The sky is very big and approaching aircraft are very small. However, it is less effective than Flight Following, which sees targets that ADS-B does not.

ADS-B is useful when planning a pattern entry, to give a feel for general activity and traffic flow.

ADS-B is not useful for actually entering the pattern, and could be potentially dangerous, since it does not see all traffic.

JMHO. YMMV.
 
Ed Haywood said:
...and could be potentially dangerous, since it does not see all traffic.
Click to expand...

I've seen several occasions flying within the SAN's mode C ring where I've spotted airplanes visually that are not showing up on my tablet. ADS-B in is only so good.
 
The Associated Press reports the Sonex was not broadcasting ADS-B Out: https://coloradosun.com/2022/10/10/airplanes-not-not-transmitting-signal-boulder-county/
Somewhat superficial information, of course, but it states the "Sonex Xenos, a light aircraft registered to Henry Butler, 69, was not and had not transmitted such a signal since about two months before the crash, according to air traffic records, the NTSB said."

As many have said, that's an active and crowded area amidst several airports and lots of weekend flyers, student pilots, and traveling GA aircraft. There's not enough information to answer the important question why the Sonex had no ADS-B Out, or if it would have made the difference, but I suspect many people will want to know why the Sonex had an apparent two-months of ADS-B Out failure and non-compliance.
 
G-Man said:
There's not enough information to answer the important question why the Sonex had no ADS-B Out, or if it would have made the difference, but I suspect many people will want to know why the Sonex had an apparent two-months of ADS-B Out failure and non-compliance.
Click to expand...

ADSB coverage is spotty in my area, and I'm accustomed to seeing the track of my airplane drop on and off pretty much every time I fly, and always dropping off when I'm at pattern altitude. Perhaps the motoglider (the Sonex Xenos) owner became complacent if similar spotty coverage exists in his home area, and he didn't know he had a problem.

Kind of an odd situation. He had ADSB installed, so legally it had to be functional, and could not be "turned off". Had ADSB never been installed in the first place, then such legalities disappear. Be that as it may, I imagine some (especially in the press) will simply focus on the motorglider "not transmitting a required signal". Even if the ADSB system has spotty coverage in the area.
 
patrickw said:
ADSB coverage is spotty in my area, and I'm accustomed to seeing the track of my airplane drop on and off pretty much every time I fly, and always dropping off when I'm at pattern altitude. Perhaps the motoglider (the Sonex Xenos) owner became complacent if similar spotty coverage exists in his home area, and he didn't know he had a problem.

Kind of an odd situation. He had ADSB installed, so legally it had to be functional, and could not be "turned off". Had ADSB never been installed in the first place, then such legalities disappear. Be that as it may, I imagine some (especially in the press) will simply focus on the motorglider "not transmitting a required signal". Even if the ADSB system has spotty coverage in the area.
Click to expand...

He was operating within the 30nm Mode C/ADS-B veil of KDEN, so unless he didn’t have an electrical system and/or had a waiver to operate with it inop, it was not legal.
 
dans2992 said:
i wonder if this incident will increase ADSB non-compliant enforcement actions?
Click to expand...

And if so, could that have the unintended consequence of people choosing to not install ADSB in the first place...?
 
patrickw said:
And if so, could that have the unintended consequence of people choosing to not install ADSB in the first place...?
Click to expand...

In the airspace in which the incident occurred, it’s not optional.
 
Flying Keys said:
In the airspace in which the incident occurred, it’s not optional.
Click to expand...

It would be for any aircraft that does not have an engine driven electrical system. It is likely that the motorized glider did not require ADS-B Out to be installed and still be able to operate in the airspace outside of B airspace, which would have been below B airspace and inside the mode C veil.
 
John Collins said:
It would be for any aircraft that does not have an engine driven electrical system. It is likely that the motorized glider did not require ADS-B Out to be installed and still be able to operate in the airspace outside of B airspace, which would have been below B airspace and inside the mode C veil.
Click to expand...


Hmm, I mentioned that criteria earlier, but I thought we already established in this thread that the Sonex did have ADS-B. As such, I was conversing under that schema.
 
Flying Keys said:
Hmm, I mentioned that criteria earlier, but I thought we already established in this thread that the Sonex did have ADS-B. As such, I was conversing under that schema.
Click to expand...

What was not established is whether or not the Sonex had an engine driven electrical system installed.

If an aircraft has an engine driven electrical system added, then it would require ADS-B Out, even if the engine driven electrical system was subsequently removed. It is not clear that if there wasn't an engine driven electrical system ever installed, but the aircraft had an ADS-B Out system installed, that said ADS-B system could legally be removed or not. The wording of 91.225(e) only deals with the effect of the electrical system.

(e) The requirements of paragraph (b) of this section do not apply to any aircraft that was not originally certificated with an electrical system, or that has not subsequently been certified with such a system installed, including balloons and gliders. These aircraft may conduct operations without ADS-B Out in the airspace specified in paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(4) of this section. Operations authorized by this section must be conducted -
(1) Outside any Class B or Class C airspace area; and
(2) Below the altitude of the ceiling of a Class B or Class C airspace area designated for an airport, or 10,000 feet MSL, whichever is lower.
Click to expand...

The FAA General Counsel has issued an opinion on the meaning of the words "an electrical system" in a response to David Schober, Jan 5, 2017:

You note that the exception for aircraft to be equipped with a transponder in§ 91.215(a)(5) uses the term "engine-driven electrical system" rather than simply "electrical system" as in the ADS-B Out exception in§ 91.225(e). In the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) and final rule for ADS-B Out, the FAA did not indicate that the omission of the word "enginedriven" from§ 91.225(e) was intended to mean something different from the transponder regulation. In fact, in describing the transponder exception in the ADS-B Out NPRM, the FAA used the term "electrical system" rather than "engine-driven electrical system." 72 FR 56947, 56958 fu.23 (Oct. 5, 2007). As such, we have concluded that the same aircraft excluded from the transponder requirement are excluded from the ADS-B Out equipage. Accordingly, an aircraft that subsequently has been installed with batteries or an electric starter would not be required to equip for ADS-B Out. The FAA may consider a technical amendment in the future to remove any confusion due to the discrepancy between the language in§ 91.215(a)(5) and§ 91.225(e).
Click to expand...
 
JeffBe said:
I've seen several occasions flying within the SAN's mode C ring where I've spotted airplanes visually that are not showing up on my tablet. ADS-B in is only so good.
Click to expand...

Saw this in cruise last weekend. Saw several aircraft that did not show on ADSB.

And entering the pattern, ADSB showed a plane climbing out that supposedly passed nearby, opposite direction, within 100 feet altitude (climbing through our altitude), we never saw it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top