F-16 ace pilots a Cessna 150 in south carolina

[Puma44]

...and the Cessana wasn't talking to controllers.

[Zimme83]

No because it was in uncontrolled airspace and did not have any obligation to do so.

[SysError]

No because it was in uncontrolled airspace and did not have any obligation to do so.

   

[Serenity]

No because it was in uncontrolled airspace and did not have any obligation to do so.

"HAVE" to do, and "SHOULD" do are two very different things. In aviation in particular, it would behoove you to go above and beyond.

[eagl]

No because it was in uncontrolled airspace and did not have any obligation to do so.

Pilots who do only what they're obligated to do often die young, and many times they take others with them when they die from something completely avoidable if they had simply gone beyond what they were obligated to do.

[Zimme83]

But in this case it wasnt the Cessna that screwed up. It followed all the rules it had to follow. The F-16 pilot on the other hand were warned about the traffic and adviced to take action to avoid it and still failed to follow the ATC commands. How hard can it be to do a turn that ATC tells u to do?

In uncontrolled airspace u dont even need to have a radio or transponder when flying VFR. the cessna had a transponder and the ATC could see him. Why blame the cessna pilot for not do more than he had to when the F-16 pilot failed to do what he was told to do by ATC?

Even if it is desirable to have radio contact with all traffic in uncontrolled airspace its not anything u can count on since its not mandatory, The F-16 pilot were vectored by ATC and alerted  about the traffic. He is the one to blame if he failed to follow ATC commands.

[eagl]

But in this case it wasnt the Cessna that screwed up. It followed all the rules it had to follow.

He's dead so clearly he didn't do enough.  Why is that so freaking hard to understand, that the minimum required rules compliance is not enough if you want to live very long in the aviation world?  I'd be dead 10 times over if I only ever did what the minimum rules required, and I've saved at least 5 aircraft by going beyond the minimum requirements.

I repeat - he's dead, so he clearly didn't do enough.  Legal doesn't mean safe, compliance doesn't mean a mistake or error or natural occurrence won't sneak up on you and kill the unwary or lazy pilot.

That viper driver could have been squawking 1200 (or 4000) and legally not talking to anyone either, and they'd still have collided, both complying with their minimum obligation under the rules.  Just because something is legal or rules-compliant doesn't mean it is effective or safe.

That's why the FAA has the "see and avoid" rules in place, because when it comes down to it you can easily die or collide with an object, another plane, the ground, etc, with 100% compliance, meeting every obligation except the obligation to preserve your life and the lives of those in your aircraft.  The PIC is responsible for safe execution of the flight, and that goes well beyond simple rules compliance.

The cropduster who flew VFR without a transponder through Sheppard AFB's high training volume transit corridor was compliant.  He's dead.  The T-37 that he collided with was also 100% compliant.  The ATC controllers who were providing VFR advisory services to the T-37 were fully compliant.  Compliance with the bare minimum requirements and obligations left 2 pilots descending in their parachutes and a cropduster pilot who didn't value his life enough to have a working transponder or 2-way radio comm with Sheppard controllers probably died screaming since he augered in from about 7,000 ft.

I could give a poop about minimum compliance...  Lots of dead people out there who were fully rules-compliant and thought that was enough.  Idiots.  Not my fault they didn't value their lives enough to truly comply with the one rule that actually mattered, the one about the PIC being the sole person responsible for the safe execution of the flight from takeoff to landing.

[eagl]

And by the way, an ATC traffic callout is not directive in nature.  If all the F-16 pilot got was traffic advisories, he's not "obligated" to do anything but say "roger" on the radio.  You have NO IDEA what he was doing with that information.  Did he miss seeing the traffic because he was heads down fiddling with the radar trying to find it on the scope?  Did he not see the traffic on radar because he was eyes out looking for the traffic?  What other things were competing for his attention at that time?  Was he on an assigned altitude or just motoring around VFR?  Was he going above and beyond by even talking to ATC in the first place?

We don't know.  We also don't know if the Cessna pilot bothered to find out if he was in a high volume military training corridor, or operating in a high traffic volume corridor, or if he even tried to deconflict his flight path and altitude from known traffic.

[Zimme83]

Or u can say that because the F-16 pilot failed to follow the instructions from ATC he killed two people that did nothing wrong.

But If it is a lot of military traffic in the area flying IFR, why isnt it controlled air space? It is unwise to assume that people will do more than they have to just because u want to fly fighters trough uncontrolled air space. That is how u create a situation where bad things can happen.

Imo the situation could have been avoided by:
1: If possible, make sure that GA traffic are aware of the fighter activity and strongly advice them to keep contact w aerial control.
2: If there still are traffic in the area, make sure that the fighters have a routine for it and can respond to ATC advices in a  better way then in this case.

If a GA pilot following all the rules can be killed by a F-16 flying IFR in uncontrolled air space then u have a flaw in the system. In uncontrolled airspace ATC and the fighter pilot can only assume that GA pilots will follow the rules, nothing more, and must have routines to handle situation like this. They knew the cessna were there so ATC and the fighter pilot must be able to handle the situation. It is not an unnormal or unexpected situation in uncontrolled airspace.

[eagl]

Zimmie it sounds like you've never flown GA aircraft in the US.  This situation could have happened just as easily between 2 civilian aircraft.

I have noticed a trend in my years as a USAF safety officer, that Europeans in general tend to place blame on military pilots, either out of spite, a lack of consideration for the pilots, or from ignorance.  I've also noticed that Europeans tend to want to place blame even in truly random accidents where there is no real fault.  In France for example, a pilot involved in a mishap can expect to be immediately thrown in jail since he's assumed to be at fault and guilty of manslaughter before there has even been any sort of investigation.

I'm glad I don't have to operate in those conditions.

[Puma44]

No because it was in uncontrolled airspace and did not have any obligation to do so.

You are correct, but had he simply made contact with the controllers (a free service over here, maybe not in your environment), he and his passenger might very well be alive today. 

[Zimme83]

You are correct, but had he simply made contact with the controllers (a free service over here, maybe not in your environment), he and his passenger might very well be alive today.

It would be desirable if he had but it might not have changed anything either. Point is that it is known that GA traffic can fly in uncontrolled air space without radio or transponder so ATC and fighter pilots must be prepared for it and have a plan to handle it if they are flying in the area.
But  if this is a busy area with both fighters and GA traffic it should not be uncontrolled airspace.

[eagl]

You're using that "should" word again.

[Zimme83]

Yan u are not? "The cessna Should have contacted ATC"...

If a F-16 and a cessna can collide even if they all follow the rules and depsite ATC having radar contact with them both then u have a flaw in the system. It is a foreseeable and avoidable accident.  U are making it very easy for u by blaming the cessna pilot.

[PR3D4TOR]

The whole point about uncontrolled airspace is that it's... well, uncontrolled. There is no "system" there. It's like a road with no traffic lights where you have to use your own eyeballs to look for other cars. Or in this case a pedestrian is perhaps a more appropriate analogy.

Oh, and "Yan" is not a word I know the meaning of.