Show multiple plane flight tracks at same time?

imwithtuxedo

imwithtuxedo

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Nov 4, 2016
Messages
163
Location
OKC
Display Name
Display name:
J
Had a situation yesterday that caused me some serious concern involving a controller and a 737 heavy going over the top of my nose WAY too close for comfort. Would like to retrieve the flight data from both my flight and that commercial flight to overlay the two. I tried messing around in flightaware but couldn't figure it out.

Anyway to accomplish this?
 
I would think if u download the kml's from both flights you might be able to do something with those. just a guess though.
 
I don't know of any way to do that in FA, although it would be a nice feature. However, if you're on the web version, you could use the time slider to see where the other plane is and where you were each minute along the way.

However, if you were VFR, also be aware that the separation standard is only 500 ft between IFR and VFR aircraft, and 500 feet away from an airliner looks really really close.
 
imwithtuxedo said:
Had a situation yesterday that caused me some serious concern involving a controller and a 737 heavy going over the top of my nose WAY too close for comfort. Would like to retrieve the flight data from both my flight and that commercial flight to overlay the two. I tried messing around in flightaware but couldn't figure it out.

Anyway to accomplish this?
Click to expand...
737 heavy ???? Were you VFR or IFR? Was traffic called? Where was this?
 
RussR said:
I don't know of any way to do that in FA, although it would be a nice feature. However, if you're on the web version, you could use the time slider to see where the other plane is and where you were each minute along the way.

However, if you were VFR, also be aware that the separation standard is only 500 ft between IFR and VFR aircraft, and 500 feet away from an airliner looks really really close.
Click to expand...

That 500ft of vertical separation only applies in Class Bravo airspace, and can be replaced with 1 1/2nm lateral separation, or visual separation. In Class C, they can use target resolution, too (ie, targets don't merge on the scope). In Class D/E, there is no separation provided.
 
RussR said:
I don't know of any way to do that in FA, although it would be a nice feature. However, if you're on the web version, you could use the time slider to see where the other plane is and where you were each minute along the way.

However, if you were VFR, also be aware that the separation standard is only 500 ft between IFR and VFR aircraft, and 500 feet away from an airliner looks really really close.
Click to expand...

500' separation is fine is most cases. But I was on a 262 heading and the 737 was on a 18 heading. I was at 8500' he was descending and the controller made him hold at 9000'. The controller crossed him over and in front of me to the point I pulled the power and diverted to avoid any possible wake turbulence. AC-90-23G states: "Flight tests have shown that at higher altitude the vortices from large aircraft sink at a rate of several hundred feet per minute (fpm), slowing their descent and diminishing in strength with time and distance behind the wake-generating aircraft." https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_90-23G.pdf

14 CFR 91.113- Converging. When aircraft of the same category are converging at approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly so), the aircraft to the other's right has the right-of-way.

I remember vividly this accident report of a Saratoga that crossed under a 737 causing the wings to be ripped off. https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/44106

With wake turbulence concerns, is less than 500' separation over my flight path directly in front of my nose good controller work? Should the 737 have altered course to overfly me or pass behind me? This was not in busy airspace nor was the 737 on an approach path at that point.
 
Search the tail numbers you want to see, use the History tab on the left to see past legs. Select the M button to show multiple.
 
midwestpa24 said:
Search the tail numbers you want to see, use the History tab on the left to see past legs. Select the M button to show multiple.
Click to expand...

I tried that. It's not showing data for the AA2716 flight from DFW to TUL on 1-30-22.
 
imwithtuxedo said:
I tried that. It's not showing data for the AA2716 flight from DFW to TUL on 1-30-22.
Click to expand...

Probably need the actual tail number. Not sure of the easy way to do that with American. United's website gives tail numbers, but not American.
 
I don’t know the answer, but let me pose questions based on the OP’s situation. Since the OP was presumptively 500ft below and behind the crossing path of a heavy, is it better to continue in that essentially right angle path which would have gotten in and out of the problematic area faster?
Is it better to decrease power to get the airplane at/or below maneuvering speed to successfully transit the turbulence at the expense of slowing down the transition of the danger zone?
 
MajorTurbulence said:
I don’t know the answer, but let me pose questions based on the OP’s situation. Since the OP was presumptively 500ft below and behind the crossing path of a heavy, is it better to continue in that essentially right angle path which would have gotten in and out of the problematic area faster?
Is it better to decrease power to get the airplane at/or below maneuvering speed to successfully transit the turbulence at the expense of slowing down the transition of the danger zone?
Click to expand...

Don't planes to the right have right of way? I was to his right, he was crossing my path, therefore I had right of way as I understand it.

Once he did cross and I realized how close he was (less than 500' according to flight tracks) I chopped power and diverted because I wasn't willing to risk my life or that of my passenger.
 
imwithtuxedo said:
500' separation is fine is most cases. But I was on a 262 heading and the 737 was on a 18 heading. I was at 8500' he was descending and the controller made him hold at 9000'. The controller crossed him over and in front of me to the point I pulled the power and diverted to avoid any possible wake turbulence. AC-90-23G states: "Flight tests have shown that at higher altitude the vortices from large aircraft sink at a rate of several hundred feet per minute (fpm), slowing their descent and diminishing in strength with time and distance behind the wake-generating aircraft." https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_90-23G.pdf

14 CFR 91.113- Converging. When aircraft of the same category are converging at approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly so), the aircraft to the other's right has the right-of-way.

I remember vividly this accident report of a Saratoga that crossed under a 737 causing the wings to be ripped off. https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/44106

With wake turbulence concerns, is less than 500' separation over my flight path directly in front of my nose good controller work? Should the 737 have altered course to overfly me or pass behind me? This was not in busy airspace nor was the 737 on an approach path at that point.
Click to expand...
http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2013/07/piper-pa-28r-200-arrow-ii-n1549x.html?m=1

This is the one I remember. Going to Oshkosh ended up in lake Michigan. One was a 33,000 hour pilot. Good on you flying your plane.
 
Racerx said:
http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2013/07/piper-pa-28r-200-arrow-ii-n1549x.html?m=1

This is the one I remember. Going to Oshkosh ended up in lake Michigan. One was a 33,000 hour pilot. Good on you flying your plane.
Click to expand...

I saw A LOT of similarities between that one and what I probably would have experienced had I not slowed down and diverted.

This part stood out: “According to recorded radar data, the flight path of N1549X crossed the flight path of DAL931at 1437:51 at 1,800 feet, which was 39 seconds after DAL931 passed the same point at the same altitude.”
 
As was mentioned before, there is a separation standard between IFR/VFR aircraft in Class B & Class C airspace, otherwise there is none. I think most controllers working a descending airliner would stop the descent at 9,000' if they saw VFR traffic at 8,500' that might come in close proximity. Traffic calls would be appropriate. Were you on frequency receiving flight following? Was there any indication that the 737 responded to a TCAS RA (a sudden climb from 9,000')?

I'm curious about your question about right of way. If two aircraft are separated vertically, do you think lateral separation is also still a factor?
 
ADSBexchange archives all TCAS RAs that it hears. What day did this occur?
 
imwithtuxedo said:
Don't planes to the right have right of way? I was to his right, he was crossing my path, therefore I had right of way as I understand it.

Once he did cross and I realized how close he was (less than 500' according to flight tracks) I chopped power and diverted because I wasn't willing to risk my life or that of my passenger.
Click to expand...
Right of way rules are about collision avoidance. They have nothing to do with wake turbulence.
 
imwithtuxedo said:
Don't planes to the right have right of way? I was to his right, he was crossing my path, therefore I had right of way as I understand it.

Once he did cross and I realized how close he was (less than 500' according to flight tracks) I chopped power and diverted because I wasn't willing to risk my life or that of my passenger.
Click to expand...

Right of way doesn't come into effect here. You were both under ATC service. I assume you were assigned 8500 and he was assigned 9000. You were VFR, the airliner was (presumably) IFR. The controller applied appropriate separation standards and the two of you did not collide. If you both had been IFR, the separation standards are larger (both horizontally and vertically). But you were VFR, so while the controller is responsible to keep you from colliding (and separated by their requirements), if there is additional separation you feel is necessary, it is your responsibility to do what you need to do, to include informing ATC if necessary.

I do think a "Caution Wake Turbulence" would have been appropriate, but I can't find any requirement in the 7110.65Z for the controller to issue it in this scenario.

I get that it was closer than you'd like, and maybe even uncomfortably close. But as a VFR aircraft, you are still responsible for see-and-avoid. ATC called the traffic and you reported it in sight (I'm assuming). You weren't comfortable with the separation provided, so you did something about it. That's exactly how it works for a VFR flight.

The opposite scenario can also happen - where ATC gives you an avoidance vector or altitude change, but you have the other airplane in sight and don't think it's a factor at all, and don't want or need the avoidance vector. I do hear this comment sometimes too - "I was VFR, why are they jerking me around?" So it's both sides of the coin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top