RVSM doesn't have anything to do with it, but outside of Class A. if you report traffic the control can tell you to "maintain visual separation with traffic" and then separation responsibility falls onto the pilot.

This +1. Now if the loss of separation occurred before the WN flight called the cirrus in sight it's a different matter.

First, I don't know what the SWA crew did or didn't agree to do, so it's too early to pass judgement on them

However, please don't tell me that you believe it's OK to perform a little unbriefed formation flight in dissimilar aircraft types when one of them has a cabin full of paying pasengers just because it's VFR, because that's just poor judgement and we've got plenty of ANG pilots who get paid to do it and have far more practice at it than you.

And if you don't like my opinion, you might take a peek at FAR 91.111 which specifically prohibits unbriefed form flight and further prohibits any type of formation flight with paying PAX onboard

Well this will go the way that the landings in DCA did. The controller has been suspended. Lots of news and internet talk about it. Questions then start being asked about what the pilots were thinking. The FAA deciding a closer look needs to be taken at everything and whether or not the pilots did the safest thing. Another incident where the outcome is going to be "the pilots' failure to....."

I dont really consider it a form flight and I think that is pushing the definition a bit. I can honestly say I wouldnt have thought twice about doing the same thing the capt here did. Though I can see your point as well.

Thats what I was saying.

Controller, airline crew suspended over incident in Florida skies - CNN.com

I've read 91.111 and your right, it pertains to formation flights. However, there was nothing mentioned about this being a "formation" observation. Being familiar with the protocol for formation flying this wouldn't qualify.

Even if they were both under IFR flight plans, in VMC conditions the pilot can elect to maintain visual separation from traffic that waives the separation standards for IMC flight.

Was this a good idea on behalf of the controller and SWA crew? I would say no. Does this warrant a suspension? IMO, no.

I remember being in Atlanta's airspace on an arrival and there was a twin Cessna that had broken bravo and wasn't talking to anybody. The controller asked us to visually identify the aircraft, maintain separation while maintaining the integrity of the STAR, and to get the tail # if we could. Do you think it was unsafe for the controller to ask us to identify the make, model and tail number if we could?

IMO this was an example of the controller utilizing CRM without scrambling fighters that would have cost the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars. The safest idea? No, but there was nothing devious or malicious in this act.

Just my 2c.

They weren't on duty in a military capacity, so maybe they should have declared "SWARSA".

"we'll teach you to do 320kts below 10 so you can beat Delta to the marker"

In the spirit of what I quoted, and how I responded, don't anybody get too spun up. I'm NOT picking on SW in ANY way, shape, or form. It's SIMPLY satire.

True. And/or "what am I'm going to tell them in the hearing?"