Hostile aircraft in the PHX area.
01-29-2015, 02:48 PM
#11
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Posts: 38
Well, hostile may not have been the right term I guess.
How about a *** that likes to play chicken with airplanes. As in intentionally flying within a couple hundred feet. Apparently it's not the first time this has happened in that area from the PM's.
Yes, hopefully Darwin will work everything out.
Now, does anybody have the number for that truck driving school?
How about a *** that likes to play chicken with airplanes. As in intentionally flying within a couple hundred feet. Apparently it's not the first time this has happened in that area from the PM's.
Yes, hopefully Darwin will work everything out.
Now, does anybody have the number for that truck driving school?
Last edited by UAL T38 Phlyer; 01-30-2015 at 06:36 PM. Reason: TOS
01-29-2015, 05:44 PM
#13
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,003
Originally Posted by BlackPaw
Well, hostile may not have been the right term I guess.
How about a ****** that likes to play chicken with airplanes. As in intentionally flying within a couple hundred feet. Apparently it's not the first time this has happened in that area from the PM's.
How about a ****** that likes to play chicken with airplanes. As in intentionally flying within a couple hundred feet. Apparently it's not the first time this has happened in that area from the PM's.
Two hundred feet and you couldn't see the registration number?
Apparently visual detection of this "hostile" aircraft hasn't been a problem.
Within 200 feet? It's a wonder the aircraft don't both reach critical mass, and explode. Is that even possible, getting that close in flight? Good Lord.
After a life altering experience such as that, write a book.
Most areas of the Phoenix valley have radar coverage, even if below Class B and outside Class D. It's not that difficult to notify ATC; it won't take very many times before the offending aircraft is located. It won't take much time at all if someone notes the N number and reports it.
Last edited by UAL T38 Phlyer; 01-30-2015 at 06:37 PM. Reason: Don't do that
01-29-2015, 06:13 PM
#14
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,228
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
"Fukktard?" How might an adult phrase that?
Two hundred feet and you couldn't see the registration number?
Apparently visual detection of this "hostile" aircraft hasn't been a problem.
Within 200 feet? It's a wonder the aircraft don't both reach critical mass, and explode. Is that even possible, getting that close in flight? Good Lord.
After a life altering experience such as that, write a book.
Most areas of the Phoenix valley have radar coverage, even if below Class B and outside Class D. It's not that difficult to notify ATC; it won't take very many times before the offending aircraft is located. It won't take much time at all if someone notes the N number and reports it.
Two hundred feet and you couldn't see the registration number?
Apparently visual detection of this "hostile" aircraft hasn't been a problem.
Within 200 feet? It's a wonder the aircraft don't both reach critical mass, and explode. Is that even possible, getting that close in flight? Good Lord.
After a life altering experience such as that, write a book.
Most areas of the Phoenix valley have radar coverage, even if below Class B and outside Class D. It's not that difficult to notify ATC; it won't take very many times before the offending aircraft is located. It won't take much time at all if someone notes the N number and reports it.
If it was unintentional, probably just one of those things...pay attention out there.
If intentional, then us the feds need to hear about, and not just the aviation feds.
01-29-2015, 08:04 PM
#15
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Posts: 38
Without getting more specific than I'm willing to on a public forum, I can assure you due to the sequence of events it was very much intentional on the other pilots part and not just one pass by either.
At certain angles like at your 4:00 and pointed right at you, or at your 6:00 it is in fact pretty difficult to read N numbers.
Mr. Burke, yes, unfortunately it IS possible to get that close in flight if your're a dumb enough pilot. And YES, that IS CLOSE (but you certainley do sound really cool making it sound like no big deal). There are already enough mid air collisions around here without morons like this in the sky.
RickAir, the appropriate authorities were notified as far as the FAA.and reports were made. I would appreciate any input you have on other people to contact.
I posted this to find out if it's a recurring problem in that area, which apparently it is. I'm just pointing people in the right direction to make reports so they can catch this idiot.
At certain angles like at your 4:00 and pointed right at you, or at your 6:00 it is in fact pretty difficult to read N numbers.
Mr. Burke, yes, unfortunately it IS possible to get that close in flight if your're a dumb enough pilot. And YES, that IS CLOSE (but you certainley do sound really cool making it sound like no big deal). There are already enough mid air collisions around here without morons like this in the sky.
RickAir, the appropriate authorities were notified as far as the FAA.and reports were made. I would appreciate any input you have on other people to contact.
I posted this to find out if it's a recurring problem in that area, which apparently it is. I'm just pointing people in the right direction to make reports so they can catch this idiot.
01-30-2015, 06:00 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2014
Posts: 269
Originally Posted by rickair7777
The FBI needs to know. Best case I'm sure there s some applicable federal law for this sort of stupidity. Worst case, somebody's practicing to ram an airliner.
DARPA considers formation flight autopilot - 8/6/2009 - Flight Global
A US Air Force study has concluded that close formation flying involving as few as two aircraft could deliver fuel savings of up to 14%, and additional work on the concept is being considered by the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.
Speaking at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics' 45th Joint Propulsion Conference in Denver, Colorado, the USAF's chief scientist Werner Dahm said the research is intended to ensure that "two aircraft can maintain the sweet spot [for formation flight]".
With the air force having concerns about pilot fatigue and the ability to maintain the precise formation needed to maximise the fuel saving, the solution is expected to come via the automation of the formation flight mode.
01-30-2015, 06:43 PM
#18
Moderate Moderator
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Blackpaw:
You have a legitimate complaint and concern, and the others on here need to recognize that.
Any Walter Mitty-type would probably have his transponder off. I would encourage you to report this clown real-time to the closest ATC agency with a radar. That means you will need to be high enough so he doesn't fade into ground-clutter.
If he keeps harrassing you, proceed to the nearest airport. He'll leave. If not, the tower will see him.
It would be nice if PHX Approach would vector an F-16 from Luke towards him, even if it was to just scare him.
You have a legitimate complaint and concern, and the others on here need to recognize that.
Any Walter Mitty-type would probably have his transponder off. I would encourage you to report this clown real-time to the closest ATC agency with a radar. That means you will need to be high enough so he doesn't fade into ground-clutter.
If he keeps harrassing you, proceed to the nearest airport. He'll leave. If not, the tower will see him.
It would be nice if PHX Approach would vector an F-16 from Luke towards him, even if it was to just scare him.
01-30-2015, 06:58 PM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 3,978
Originally Posted by NotPart91
Or maybe he's just trying to follow the AF and save on fuel.
DARPA considers formation flight autopilot - 8/6/2009 - Flight Global
A US Air Force study has concluded that close formation flying involving as few as two aircraft could deliver fuel savings of up to 14%, and additional work on the concept is being considered by the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.
Speaking at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics' 45th Joint Propulsion Conference in Denver, Colorado, the USAF's chief scientist Werner Dahm said the research is intended to ensure that "two aircraft can maintain the sweet spot [for formation flight]".
With the air force having concerns about pilot fatigue and the ability to maintain the precise formation needed to maximise the fuel saving, the solution is expected to come via the automation of the formation flight mode.
DARPA considers formation flight autopilot - 8/6/2009 - Flight Global
A US Air Force study has concluded that close formation flying involving as few as two aircraft could deliver fuel savings of up to 14%, and additional work on the concept is being considered by the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.
Speaking at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics' 45th Joint Propulsion Conference in Denver, Colorado, the USAF's chief scientist Werner Dahm said the research is intended to ensure that "two aircraft can maintain the sweet spot [for formation flight]".
With the air force having concerns about pilot fatigue and the ability to maintain the precise formation needed to maximise the fuel saving, the solution is expected to come via the automation of the formation flight mode.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
AZFlyer
Flight Schools and Training
3
01-10-2013 05:58 AM
