Cheney's Plane Avoids Collision

AP Story

[moonman]

Cheney's Plane Avoids Collision

WASHINGTON (AP) - A military plane carrying Vice President Dick Cheney came within almost half a mile of a small private plane over Bridgeport, Conn., this month, forcing the pilot to take evasive action, the Federal Aviation Administration said Friday.

The plane, which is Air Force II when the vice president is aboard, was flying at about 7,500 feet Aug. 7 while en route to Westchester County Airport in White Plains, N.Y., when an on-board alert system alarmed, telling the pilot to climb to avoid colliding with the other plane.

The FAA said such an event ordinarily wouldn't require an investigation, but a report was written and sent to the Air Force because it involved the vice president.

FAA spokeswoman Arlene Salac said that both planes were operating under visual flight rules. That means pilots should avoid another flight if they see it, which is what the Air Force pilot did, she said.

``The Air Force II pilot was given a traffic advisory saying where the general aviation aircraft was,'' Salac said. ``Controllers were tracking the aircraft on their radar scopes.''

Dean Iacopelli, president of the New York air traffic controller's union, blamed inadequate staffing for the problem, which he said happens about once a week in New York.

Iacopelli, a controller, said a supervisor was working the radar scopes while on overtime to augment the staff. Supervisors are required to work aircraft for only eight hours a month, while controllers work 40.

``He's not as proficient on it as someone who does it everyday,'' Iacopelli said. ``We need more air traffic controllers.''

The National Air Traffic Controllers Association has been campaigning for the FAA to hire more controllers as a wave of retirements is expected to hit the agency in the next few years.

Salac said the FAA makes no connection between staffing levels at the New York air traffic control center and the event.

[moonman]

I wonder if the Dems think we'd have another Vice-President nomination.

[concerned about politics]

Whew! Close call!

[rdl6989]

That was scary!

[Mears]

Probably little Ahmed taking flying lesson.

[cmsgop]

That guy is soooooooooo screwed!

[ILS21R]

"Dean Iacopelli, president of the New York air traffic controller's union, blamed inadequate staffing for the problem, which he said happens about once a week in New York."

"He's not as proficient on it as someone who does it everyday, Iacopelli said. We need more air traffic controllers."

Playing around with the life of the Vice President to make your point is not funny.

[snopercod]

Close call? Scary? What are you talking about?

Do you panic when another car comes within half-a-mile of your vehicle?

This was in no way dangerous, and no Federal Aviation Regulations were violated.

Get a life, people.

[moonman]

LOL Maybe all those new air traffic controllers hired during the Reagan era have about 15 years on the job and want to retire or get fired again.

[Gunrunner2]

>>Dean Iacopelli, president of the New York air traffic controller's union, blamed inadequate staffing for the problem, which he said happens about once a week in New York. <<

Of course. . .it's always "we are over-worked and under-staffed."

EVERY job is over-worked and under-staffed.

Typical cheap-shot--take an incident and blow it into to a political agenda. We want more people and more money. (Just like the Post Office.)

[The KG9 Kid]

"... Close call? Scary? What are you talking about? Do you panic when another car comes within half-a-mile of your vehicle?

Try general aviation sometime at speeds of 400+ knots, and you'll see just how small a half mile is, genius.

[Gunrunner2]

Actually, when you are traveling at 400kts, and the other jet is flying at about the same speed, opposite direction (or nearly so), your reaction time is remarkably small, and in some cases measured in mere tenths of a second.

This is especially the case when it is an actual collision course, as relative motion is NOT detected until very late, as a converging aircraft is a stationary dot and does not move, and in a big sky the thing that you notice first is motion.

This was not an unsafe condition, but it was a situation that was approaching unsafe conditions if the TCAS did not command a climb.

While under flying in controlled airspace there are mandatory separation criteria, and separation is 1,000' and 5-miles.

The TCAS worked and separation was assured; whereas if TCAS was not functioning, the controller would likely have allowed the jets to violate separation mins.

So, yes, something to be concerned about and discuss. . .like why the controller let a situation develop to the point an automated system had to step in to ensure separation.

Oh, and I do have a life. Into my third life now, actually.

[Sloth]

Try general aviation sometime at speeds of 400+ knots, and you'll see just how small a half mile is, genius.

Uh, if you're aimed directly AT each other maybe, but under normal circumstances, big deal.

[Gunrunner2]

My Post 11 addresses how hard it is to detect another aircraft and why it was a situation that deserves concern and scrutiny.

While it was not a panic situation, the mere fact the TCAS kicked in tells you that they were on a collision course (or very nearly so), and the TCAS could no longer wait for the controller to act so it had to step in---safety was being compromised. So, because the TCAS functioned the separation was increased and it became a situation where is was, in your words, "no big deal."

Actually, the big deal is why the controller let the situation develop like it did. Oh, TCAS commanded maneuvers are not gentle for civilian standards.

[ExSES]

Try general aviation sometime at speeds of 400+ knots, and you'll see just how small a half mile is, genius.

Having encountered two F-4s while at a 500 feet altitude on a CAP search mission in Florida..., I'd have to agree! The F-4s came and went in about 2 seconds (not even enough time to cause a laundry problem)! Luckily..., they were about 800 feet off the deck but... the vortex they created nearly put us into the swamp!

So much for FAA clearances!

In all fairness, this took place 30 years ago and the radars (even today) wouldn't have detected the situation at our altitudes!

Just another "Military and Civilian Aircraft often don't play well together event"....

[AlaskaErik]

This isn't even newsworthy. As a pilot, I can tell you that 3000 feet of separation is plenty. When you see another plane at your altitude you simply alter course and/or change altitude. That's how it works under VFR (visual flight rules). Nothing to report folks...just keep on moving.

[Gunrunner2]

Oh, and if an aircraft is approaching from the side, that means he is actually approaching at 400kts or better, and that is fast and dangerous, especially when you can't see that dot until he is within a mile or so (that makes reaction time about 10secs or less).

Having flown countless air-to-air engagements where you actually look for another aircraft, I assure you, it is darned difficult to locate the guy even when you know the area to scan.

[Sloth]

If they were on a head-on collision course, then the fact that they never came within a half-mile of each other even after the correction would seem to indicate there was quite a bit of time to react. BTW, could you elaborate on "1000' and 5 miles"? Is that 1000' vertical separation & 5 miles horizontal?

[Gunrunner2]

3,000' altitude separation = no problem.

3,000' horizontal separation while on a converging vector and it is a problem.

[Gunrunner2]

2.5 g pull to execute the anti-collision maneuver. 2.5 g's generates significant separation quickly.

1,000' ft altitude and 5-miles horizontal is correct. If both aircraft are under radar control they have a separation of 1,000' and 5-miles between them. This is to ensure time to react if a situation develops and also allows for instrument errors (rare these days).

Again, the significant thing is the TCAS system detected a collision vector and directed an evasive maneuver. If not commanded we do not know how close they would have come to actually exchanging a little paint.

[Poundstone]

"While it was not a panic situation, the mere fact the TCAS kicked in tells you that they were on a collision course (or very nearly so), and the TCAS could no longer wait for the controller to act so it had to step in---safety was being compromised."

As a pilot and aircraft owner, I assure you that the TCAS "kicking in" in no way means you're on a collision course. TCAS sensitivity is such that the device will issue an alert based on proximity and approximate flight paths -- and 99 percent of the time, a collision is NOT in prospect. The whole theory behind TCAS sensitivity is that it's better to alert pilots whenever other planes enter (or are predicted soon to enter) a defined protective "bubble" around each plane than to wait until a much more narrowly defined "collision course" is confirmed.

These are facts of which the general public (most of whom have no idea what TCAS is in the first place) is ignorant. But now you know!