Jump to content

F-16's Get Too Close To ASA

drumkitwes

By drumkitwes
in Squadron Bar

 Share

Recommended Posts

drumkitwes SNAP

drumkitwes

Posted
Posted

Discuss

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100408/NEWS01/4090355/National-Guard-F-16-jets-nearly-hit-Atlantic-Southeast-Airlines-flight-over-Ohio

National Guard F-16 jets nearly hit Atlantic Southeast Airlines flight over Ohio

DAN SEWELL,Associated Press Writer • April 8, 2010

Comments (51) Recommend (8) Print this page ShareThis Font size:AA CINCINNATI — An official with the Ohio National Guard says it appears two of its F-16 fighter jets were flying too high when they had a near miss with a commercial flight over southern Ohio this week.

The Guard's vice chief of staff says the F-16s were on normal training flights on Thursday and it does appear they were above their ceiling. Officials are not sure how much above the ceiling they were but plan a full investigation.

The fighters came so close to a 70-seat Atlantic Southeast Airlines flight that they triggered a cockpit alarm. The pilots of the commuter plane maneuvered away while headed from Cleveland to Atlanta and landed safely in Georgia on time.

FAA radar showed the F-16s were flying at 30,000 feet when they should have been no higher than 29,000 feet.

Atlantic Southeast Airlines said there were no injuries among the 58 passengers, two pilots and two flight attendants. The plane landed on time and safely in Atlanta, ASA spokeswoman Kate Modolo said.

"The crew had visible sight of (the planes)," Modolo said. "But the pilots were able to keep the plane on its assigned flight path."

Soon after the close call around 10 a.m. Thursday, the airline contacted the FAA, said FAA Great Lakes Region spokesman Tony Molinaro.

The FAA's radar center in Indianapolis showed that the military planes, operated by members of the Ohio National Guard, were flying at 30,000 feet, Molinaro said.

"We'll have to look and see what happened," Molinaro said. "The military will have to do the investigation."

Pilots contacted controllers, who cleared them to climb to 36,000 feet as a precaution.

Enquirer reporter Carrie Whitaker contributed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Crew Report

Guest Crew Report

Posted
Posted

So they busted their altitude, caused an TA/RA, and the airliner reported it? This is news?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
moosepileit Flight Lead

moosepileit

Posted
Posted (edited)

Excuse me for jumping in. This isn't the high sector at UPT. Part 121 has to report RAs, period. It's in their FOMs. Heavies probably all have it too if you dig enough- either 97 or HATR. Keep it in the container. TAC Airlifter, your answer is yes. IFR, whether VMC or IMC (Do not confuse the rules and the flight vis. conditions)You WILL be following the RA, period. Normally, the climb or descent is gentle. A big violation in terms of climb, descent and speed (400 TAS min, right in this case? plus lots of VVI) will drive the TCAS nuts and the RA may seem to need enough pull or push to hurt someone in the airliner (SHOULD not really happen).

If VMC and VFR, YMMV. Remember, ATC suppresses the mode 1200s, you have to ask about them sometimes- like getting a coastal visual into Patrick or similar.

Fly safe, have fun when you can. I'm on mil leave from part 121 cargo, the one of the big 2 about to furlough... wthdik.

I'm no Tim Martins...

Edited by moosepileit
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DFRESH Gray Beard

DFRESH

Posted
Posted

You think it was a RA or a TA? The only thing I've ever got a TA on (or in) was a bug smasher, so I can't really claim to know much about part 121 or vipers (I'm no Tim Martin), but this story stinks...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sledy SNAP

sledy

Posted
Posted

CAPS for this scenario

IFF BUTTON -- PRESS

3 -- ENTER

5 -- ENTER

UPON RE-ENTERING ALTITUDE

3 -- ENTER

5 -- ENTER

Buckeye MOA is a tough MOA though. Lots of traffic, and for some reason, ATC likes to keep them just above it. I know a guy that tried, and came damn close to suceeding, doing a rejoin on a United A320 after some HABFM. Springfield was a schoolhouse.

Sledy

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tac airlifter Gray Beard

tac airlifter

Posted
Posted

Excuse me for jumping in. This isn't the high sector at UPT. Part 121 has to report RAs, period. It's in their FOMs. Heavies probably all have it too if you dig enough- either 97 or HATR. Keep it in the container. TAC Airlifter, your answer is yes. IFR, whether VMC or IMC (Do not confuse the rules and the flight vis. conditions)You WILL be following the RA, period. Normally, the climb or descent is gentle. A big violation in terms of climb, descent and speed (400 TAS min, right in this case? plus lots of VVI) will drive the TCAS nuts and the RA may seem to need enough pull or push to hurt someone in the airliner (SHOULD not really happen).

If VMC and VFR, YMMV. Remember, ATC suppresses the mode 1200s, you have to ask about them sometimes- like getting a coastal visual into Patrick or similar.

Fly safe, have fun when you can. I'm on mil leave from part 121 cargo, the one of the big 2 about to furlough... wthdik.

I'm no Tim Martins...

Thanks for the answer. I figured you guys (civ airliner) would have to report an RA, we just have a different mind set about it. VMC if I see the traffic, I'm not necessarily following the RA; IMC is a different situation, obviously.

But what makes you think these guys would be squawking 1200 at FL 290? I thought everyone in class A was IFR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hvydvr SNAP

Hvydvr

Posted
Posted

Why is this even news? I get a TA on almost every flight. Even an RA isn't worth reporting. Do airliners have to report this stuff?

If you´re not reporting RAs, I suggest you peruse 91-223, a pesky tome about aviation safety....

1.3.1.7. Hazardous Air Traffic Report (HATR) Events. Report any air traffic or movement area

hazardous occurrence that endangers the safety of an aircraft or UAV. The intent of the HATR program

is to identify potentially hazardous aviation practices or procedures based on a particular

event and to disseminate information that might prevent similar hazardous conditions at other

USAF locations or operations. See paragraph 6.2. for specific HATR reporting guidance. Report

the following:

1.3.1.7.1. Near Mid Air Collision (NMAC): Aircrew took abrupt evasive action to avoid a

collision or would have taken evasive action if circumstances allowed.

1.3.1.7.2. TCAS Resolution Advisories (RA): TCAS RAs (involving USAF aircraft/UAV)

that require the aircraft/UAV to deviate from an assigned clearance. This includes USAF aircraft/

UAV triggering TCAS RA aboard civil or other DOD aircraft.

Not really your "call" about a hazardous RA. Let your flight safety shop compile the reports to ID hazardous trends.

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Clayton Bigsby Gray Beard

Clayton Bigsby

Posted
Posted (edited)

Yeah TCAS RAs are handled entirely differently in the civvie/FAA sector. It's a big deal regardless of whether one party has visual contact.

It's not MARSA, besides, don't you have to ask permission for that?

Edited by Clayton Bigsby
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LJDRVR Flight Lead

LJDRVR

Posted
Posted

An RA is a big deal. AP/AT disconnected and pitch on the red guidance bar. Gentle maneuver, but mandatory compliance - regardless of in sight or not. Mandatory report to ATC and mandatory Captain's irregularity report. (The latter goes unfiltered directly to our Principle Operations Inspector at the FAA.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...