Near miss today, would like feedback.

Everskyward said:
But sometimes there is a glitch, like the time I was given a go-around when I had already reduced power to flare. I couldn't believe what I was hearing because I saw no reason for it. It's the only time I've ever gone back to listen to us on live ATC. You couldn't hear them giving me the go-around, but you did hear the other pilot ask "what was the wave-off for?" I guess he was reverting to the military days, haha. The "wave off" was because an airplane had rolled across the hold line midfield...
Click to expand...

They're ultra paranoid about runway incursions, mostly because they've had far too many of them. Hell, the other day I pulled up to the exit line and stopped like a moron, and the controller was nice enough to say, "just keep rolling there to the next one..." Meanwhile I'm saying obscenities at myself out loud without keying the mic.

The current LiveATC feed is a scanner that's scanning all the frequencies, and it misses interesting things on Tower when ground gets busy, which is why I volunteered to run the "Tower only" feed when I lived close enough to do that.

I think it's also missing the secondary tower frequency and the tertiary "secret" one used in case of malicious interference, or other failures. I had all three freqs in my scanner for the tower only feed. :)
 
Just curios... Was it a true "near miss"?? I believe there is a definition for that, and it's likely reportable... Especially in a class D.
 
obelix said:
Of course my CFI said he should have been more diligent in looking at his scope. .
Click to expand...

It's a control tower. The controller working that position (local control) should be watching his/her traffic. That's what those big windows all around the tower are for. The "scope" is just a repeater usually from approach and does not relieve the controller from watching AND controlling his/her traffic. A similar deal happened in KLEX w/ one controller on duty and he didn't notice that the Comair flight he cleared had entered the wrong runway (too short) nor apparently watched the flight's takeoff roll. Couldn't get airborne and crashed. I think one survivor.
 
obelix said:
Of course my CFI said he should have been more diligent in looking at his scope.
Click to expand...
Does that tower even have radar, or a radar feed? Many towers do not and they could have easily lost sight of the other guy just like you did.
 
A few questions:

Did you know that the preceding aircraft was going to stay in the closed traffic pattern?
Were you going to stay in the closed traffic pattern or depart the airfield?
Did you hear the controller give the preceding aircraft closed traffic?
If you were not going to stay in the closed traffic pattern, why did you turn crosswind instead of flying straight out or turning a 45 degree turn from the airfield?

A few comments:

The controller should have been paying attention and if he didn't know the intentions of both pilots then he should have asked. There should have been some sort of sequence such as you continue upwind until you have the preceding aircraft in sight OR he should have told the other guy that you were turning crosswind at the departure end. As a controller, I've always found that if you keep yourself and your pilots informed of what is going on in the pattern, they will help you with the sequence. And like was said before, all towers especially class D do not have scopes. There are several here in AZ that do not.
 
Mind telling us what airport this was? If you were given cleared for takeoff, proceed on course I'm not sure why you would enter a downwind leg since that is 20 degrees off your intended course. I've had my wrist slapped for turning prior the end of the runway because I had not "asked for an early turn". No one has mentioned that the controller at a "D" airport is responsible for maintaining separation on the ground.

Glad no one was hurt and everyone got to talk about it.
 
@EppyGA might be a coincidence, but it sounds like LZU -> WDR to me. Maybe I'm biased ;)

OP: sounds like you lost situational awareness. Did you or your CFI realize the plane ahead of you was staying in the pattern? If I had known that in this situation, I personally would not have turned into the pattern not knowing where the other guy was.

Glad everyone is OK.
 
That's why I asked. If it is, my experience is when plane #1 was cleared for takeoff and was going to stay in the pattern there would have also been a directive for left or right traffic making it clear he was staying in the pattern. I've, personally, never heard of being taught to head downwind before leaving the pattern on course.

rpadula said:
@EppyGA might be a coincidence, but it sounds like LZU -> WDR to me. Maybe I'm biased ;)

OP: sounds like you lost situational awareness. Did you or your CFI realize the plane ahead of you was staying in the pattern? If I had known that in this situation, I personally would not have turned into the pattern not knowing where the other guy was.

Glad everyone is OK.
Click to expand...
 
I'm a little bit confused. The only reason for wearing foggles departing the airport is if you are practicing an instrument departure, but from the description it otherwise sounds like VFR pattern work.

If it were an IFR departure (simulated or otherwise) I would either expect the controller to delay you to prevent a turn conflict, should one exist, or give you an extended straight climbout. If it was VFR pattern work, then yes I would expect that you would clear the end of the runway before commencing your crosswind.
 
wsuffa said:
Doesn't "near miss" imply that you almost missed - and collided? Isn't "near collision" more accurate?

(Yes, I'm being a troublemaker)....
Click to expand...

You're confusing NEAR MISS (at or to a short distance away; nearby) with NEARLY MISSED (very close to; almost)

:p
 
ATC does not provide separation to VFR traffic in a class D.

I've missed somewhere in this where you give the pattern altitude (or perhaps the field elevation so we may intuit it). Frankly, climbing up to or down into downwind is going to be problematic for see and avoid. The one time I got close to hitting another plane in the pattern was when some clown in a biplane descended into downwind darn near on top of me.
 
Glad that everyone is okay. No metal was bent and frankly, the best outcome of this is the lessons learned.
At our local field, the tower sees a lot of students and training so they usually issue traffic advisory early, such as during take-off clearance. Maybe your tower controller could look into that.
Also, as a PIC, I don't like NOT knowing where other airplanes are if I know there are some. I would have head my head on a swivel looking for him and if I lost him, I'd ask the tower. Remember, most mid-airs happen in traffic pattern and I'd like to avoid being another statistic if I can help it.
Another thing to consider is reliability of the information provided to you. I take it with a grain of salt and make my own mental picture in my head. I almost lost a friend when he was on left downwind and encountered another plane head-on who was reporting to be on right downwind .... he was but for the wrong runway direction.

Safety is not a passive granted thing. Safety happens actively, though us.

Anyway, be safe, go fly and have fun.
 
FlySince9 said:
You're confusing NEAR MISS (at or to a short distance away; nearby) with NEARLY MISSED (very close to; almost)

:p
Click to expand...
This is a very gray area for many since it has been used incorrectly for decades and became the norm.
"Near miss", just like "near death", describes something that almost happened but, in the end, did not. Unfortunately, the FAA actually also defined the words incorrectly, forever embedding them in their clay tablets (or whatever modern medium they used back then) for generations to see. :D
 
BigBadLou said:
This is a very gray area for many since it has been used incorrectly for decades and became the norm.
"Near miss", just like "near death", describes something that almost happened but, in the end, did not. Unfortunately, the FAA actually also defined the words incorrectly, forever embedding them in their clay tablets (or whatever modern medium they used back then) for generations to see. :D
Click to expand...

The AIM uses the term near midair collision.
 
BigBadLou said:
This is a very gray area for many since it has been used incorrectly for decades and became the norm.
"Near miss", just like "near death", describes something that almost happened but, in the end, did not. Unfortunately, the FAA actually also defined the words incorrectly, forever embedding them in their clay tablets (or whatever modern medium they used back then) for generations to see. :D
Click to expand...

Maybe, originally, the intent was to refer to "death" as a proper noun... ie; the grim reaper... in that case you could be near death (an entity) and not an event that didn't, ultimately, occur. :rolleyes:
 
I was taught turning before the departure end is an early turn. If you want to do that, you let the tower know you're doing that. Even if you have a 60 knot headwind and you're up to TPA in 1,000 feet, you wait until you are past the departure end to make your turn.

I echo Timbeck2's questions of:

Did you know that the preceding aircraft was going to stay in the closed traffic pattern?
Did you hear the controller give the preceding aircraft closed traffic?

If you knew there was another plane in the pattern, why would you feel comfortable making the turn without knowing where he is?

At my tower if we're going to play in the pattern, the tower will say something to the effect of "turn crosswind after the Cessna/Mooney/Piper on downwind" or "continue upwind, I'll call your turn." If your takeoff request didn't include the downwind departure information, and the take off clearance didn't include departure information, there's two breakdowns before you even left the hold line.
 
Latest Guideance I have heard from the FAA/ATC is they are really working to understand why these kinds of issues might occur. As a result they are trying to emphasize reporting of these incidents with ATC and encouraging it by emphasizing compliance rather that enforcement. I.e. They want to teach everyone involved instead of just punishing them. While I don't see anything in this incident that would warrant enforcement, there is a lot to learn from it, and I would expect you may hear from the FAA about it. (BTDT) If you do they will probably just ask for your side of the story and perhaps ask that you attend a meeting (like their normal FAA Safety meetings). In simple turns if the FAA hears about it, they need to write up a report about what was done, something like "met with all involved and discussed safety procedures."

Some very good points made about the Early turnout already.
Others have illuded to the "Situation Awareness" aspect. I.e. What was happening around you. We recently had an incident where an Airbus was cleared to land 28R and the King Air cleared to Depart 28L. The king air checked the location of the landing Airbus and thought it didn't look right so, held short while the Airbus landed 28L, missing them by less than 100ft.

Point being, Situational Awareness saved the day. You knew there was another airplane in the pattern, especially with two pilots in the plane, you should have been working on the mental picture of what he was doing. The other airplane and the Controller should have been doing the same, obvious all three of the pictures were flawed, or not considered properly.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL
 
Mtns2Skies said:
Me too 500' has been the rule for me among many CFI's.
Click to expand...
That makes 3 of us. Really glad I read this. Thanks for posting. Will fly past the DER from now on, not just wait for 500'. Not sure how I missed this. Clear as can be in the AIM and very logical.

This helps a lot, as something always felt a bit arbitrary about the first turn for closed traffic.
 
wsuffa said:
Doesn't "near miss" imply that you almost missed - and collided? Isn't "near collision" more accurate?

(Yes, I'm being a troublemaker)....
Click to expand...
IIRC that's the paraphrased FAA definition.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top