Resky wrote:Galen produced a map with "Fire Lookout Reporting Points" on the Idaho Aeronautical Chart. He has them at QED and can be had from Idaho Aeronautics. I think they're ~$10. The last one I believe says that its the 2009 Edition. Its hardly cost effective to reproduce this map every time the nav data is revised, but the airstrips and lookout towers won't move. It also has many strips that are not on a sectional or WAC chart.

Thanks Resky. This is the one I was thinking of. At the time it was discussed to add reporting points on it too. Guess it didn't happen. Thanks for the info.

The problem in the Idaho backcountry is that most every airstrip is on 122.9 and it gets very congested.
Imagine yourself in the canyon final for Wilson Bar and missing the Makay bar departure because jack ass calls
"backcountry traffic Cessna 12345 over Wilson Bar at 11,500' in bound for Boise".
You missed the departing traffic that probably will be flying the same side of the canyon as you are because he is around the corner and over a ridge and got drowned out by jack ass at 11.5 in bound for who cares.
We hear it all the time at MMV, such and such over McMinnville at 5,500 North bound last call.
Who gives a shit? Pattern altitude at MMV is 1000' and all he did was tie up the radio frequency that was set aside for traffic arriving or departing MMV.
Condolences to those affected by this accident.

What no more glider traffic at McMinnville anymore. A lot of people probably remember getting their ass chewed out from Judy if you weren't talking on the radio so that glider traffic could hear it.

Joe & Judy taught me to fly 15 years ago. I am still learning from them and they are still sharing airspace with Citations. My passengers got a kick out of watching a jet land below us just last Sunday.

Terry wrote:The problem in the Idaho backcountry is that most every airstrip is on 122.9 and it gets very congested.
Imagine yourself in the canyon final for Wilson Bar and missing the Makay bar departure because jack ass calls
"backcountry traffic Cessna 12345 over Wilson Bar at 11,500' in bound for Boise".
You missed the departing traffic that probably will be flying the same side of the canyon as you are because he is around the corner and over a ridge and got drowned out by jack ass at 11.5 in bound for who cares.
We hear it all the time at MMV, such and such over McMinnville at 5,500 North bound last call.
Who gives a shit? Pattern altitude at MMV is 1000' and all he did was tie up the radio frequency that was set aside for traffic arriving or departing MMV.
Condolences to those affected by this accident.

I wasn't aware occasional position reports were so offensive. We get tons of transitioning radio calls around Salida and Buena Vista, CO on account of the number of passes surrounding the valley. It's nice to hear since those of us in spam cans are often crossing said passes at similar altitudes and/or positions. If the radio traffic were confined to those only departing or arriving the airport you would miss a lot of what's happening in the area.
That's not even taking into account the sometimes heavy glider traffic in the summer. Those guys aren't necessarily inbound for landing when they make radio calls, but I sure do like knowing where they are.

I would hope that the guy departing Macky, as well as the one landing at Wilson Bar, would be making multiple radio calls so that one higher altitude position report wouldn't block the one and only chance for SA. Possible still I suppose though. All the more reason to be talking and listening.

I always announce my transition around MMV, though usually I'm at 2,500 or so. The frequency isn't THAT busy. You'd be surprised how often I hear a responding call from a guy traveling the opposite direction at the same altitude. I like overflying the field cuz I'm always hoping Terry will see me and be inspired.

Same thread last year at this time, similar scenario, similar discussion unfortunately, though this one is definitely unique in that it sounds like they may have been flying together. It reinforces my philosophy of being extra vigilant and communicative when flying somewhere in a gaggle. At busy fields, half the battle is managing expectations: sharing your intentions and then doing what you said you'd do. The other half of course is expecting the unexpected and looking around. Same goes for flying together.

It seems that hear and avoid is still more problematic than see and avoid.

Tragic loss of life. Certainly fuels the ADS-B requirement discussion. "In" could be required along with "out" with the stroke of a pen, eh?

contactflying wrote:It seems that hear and avoid is still more problematic than see and avoid.

And that's the bottom line in this accident.

Flight took off "together" for a breakfast run. Not knowing any details about how tight they planned to fly, it's all a guess, but somewhere along the line basic see and avoid wasn't used.

Radio chatter, maps, reporting points... All moot point if your eyes aren't outside the airplane.

Gump

Zzz wrote:Same thread last year at this time, similar scenario, similar discussion unfortunately, though this one is definitely unique in that it sounds like they may have been flying together...

No doubt.... and no, not so much.... remember, it's only been a year or two since the Ryan air / Grant air BF/GF tragedy

And I agree, this thread would have been better served by not having the standard radio pissing match... But I don't mind calling a spade a spade so I'll pour some on the fire as well....

I agree with Sky Trucks initial post on many levels...

I agree with the notion that asking Zzz or Chris to come up with a map concept is asinine... I'm sure they don't need the reminding, but can you just imagine the legal shit storm they're going to be in at the very first accident that occurs after one of their maps is mis-interpeted... Surely by now everybody knows that's just how it works, shit (lawsuits) get flung everywhere in hopes of it sticking somewhere... and it always sticks to the ones who can't afford the protection... so where does that leave us? That leaves up with a govt provided map... first problem is they will say it already exists (vfr chart) second problem is that because not even Idaho is as GA friendly as AK, someone is going to take this suggestion as evidence that a problem exists, and therefore we need to solve it...How that someone perceives 'solving the problem' may not be as simple as a map... Pandoras box?

BTW, O-180, if you are wasting valuable vacation time on this thread, that map I referred to on your vaca thread is the one DP posted here. Great Map!

I think an area vfr map is a valid idea, and a great one! I think expecting it to change much in these type of accidents is a pipe dream... These are accidents right down to the core of the word.... that means someone F'd up...... period... I'm not beating on fellow aviators, I'm calling a spade a spade, I F-up routinely, and probably twice as much as those handy with radios The point I'm making, is giving people one more thing to F-up isn't going to make them F-up any less.... F!

AVIATE, Navigate, Communicate. Anybody remember that? Fly the the airplane with EYES OUTSIDE! Shit still happens, but when you're flying close quarters canyons, pay attention to what's around you, it'll save your ass. Since when did radios become required equipment? Yeah, I agree you're probably not too bright not to have one, but DOES everyone have them? I think not.

A tragic loss and my sincere condolences to the friends and families of the deceased.

Brent

contactflying wrote:It seems that hear and avoid is still more problematic than see and avoid.

Why are these somehow mutually exclusive? Do you close your eyes when you listen?

Nobody needs to publish a map. Put the gps coordinates in a sticky thread - and plug them in as a user waypoint of your favorite gps device.

I fly around a shit-ton of glider traffic. I'm very familiar with the local landmarks around here - but when people make position reports relative to features that are not on everybodys map - you might as well not.

Like.... gliders saying they are climbing up in the box. WTF is this box you speak of? It's not on the sectional - and you're talking to a bunch of powered punters who have no clue where you are. Also - common around here to make position reports over a big prominent building - happens to be IBM. But a noob to the area will have no idea where IBM is. A third one is that it's common around here to report glider ops climbing out over "Lee Hill" - not on the sectional. I've lived here for over 20 years and I still can't tell you which of the thousands of peaks in the front range is lee hill - and i ride my bike up it 2-3 times a week.

Make your calls relative to airfields or extremely prominent features marked on the sectional.

soyAnarchisto wrote:Make your calls relative to airfields or extremely prominent features marked on the sectional.

I agree.

Zane,

No; but the failure mode is less functional with radio and other devices. Pilots tend to accept that they can't see everything and stay concerned. We instructors find, where radio use is common, pilots often assuming that they are hearing everyone. This has been a problem at uncontrolled airfields since radios became common.

Of course you are correct about using both. I am just concerned with emphasis. I have always emphasized looking outside over all other means of obtaining situational awareness.

Best regards,

Jim

This thread has gone an interesting direction and I have to wonder if we are creating a problem that doesn't really exist? Based on what we know, this accident was a calculated trip between two airplanes flying close to each other that didn't have a big enough margin for error. Whether it was the sun, or a sneeze, a downdraft or even a medical problem they ended up to close to each other and tragedy ensued. This was not a random mid-air in the middle of nowhere because someone said the wrong thing in the radio. And I don't have the statistics but it seems that random mid-air collisions are very rare with the exception of two things: 1. Flying in Alaska where the only way from point A to point B is through a specific narrow pass in weather that is not always desirable, and 2. During the landing and take off phase of flight in which a failure of proper communication is almost always part of the problem.

As certified pilots we have all been taught the proper way to communicate on the radio. As backcountry enthusiasts most of us have taken it upon themselves to receive further instruction and/or training on the ins and outs of flying and communicating in the canyons. There will always be those who talk way too much on the radio as well as those who talk too little but it seems that if we all fly the way we've been taught then it will keep working!

There are a lot of threads on here complaining about how government is placing more and more regulations on "us" for no reason and infringing on our freedoms as pilots to just go and fly! And here we are talking about how we can over regulate ourselves to keep us safe from a problem that I wonder if it even exists! We can be our own worse enemies. Maybe the best way to police ourselves is to safely fly and communicate the way we were all taught to fly.

Merely my observations, FWIW.

CW

This thread has gone an interesting direction and I have to wonder if we are creating a problem that doesn't really exist? Based on what we know, this accident was a calculated trip between two airplanes flying close to each other that didn't have a big enough margin for error. Whether it was the sun, or a sneeze, a downdraft or even a medical problem they ended up to close to each other and tragedy ensued. This was not a random mid-air in the middle of nowhere because someone said the wrong thing in the radio.

Exactly....

Simple solution. Make all of Idaho Class B airspace, and have a couple approaches for each of the wilderness airstrips. You get to talk on the radio a lot, have reporting points that are on everyone's charts, and ATC keep airplanes from running into each other. Be a good test ground for ADS-B equipment, like it was up in Bethel, AK.

Gump

robw56 wrote:

soyAnarchisto wrote:Make your calls relative to airfields or extremely prominent features marked on the sectional.

I agree.

Very well said Soy. I agree.

clippwagon wrote:This thread has gone an interesting direction ....but it seems that random mid-air collisions are very rare with the exception of two things: 1. Flying in Alaska where the only way from point A to point B is through a specific narrow pass in weather that is not always desirable, and 2. During the landing and take off phase of flight in which a failure of proper communication is almost always part of the problem.....

Merely my observations, FWIW.

CW

The only problem with this statement is that most of the mid airs I know of have been in big wide open areas.. yes there have been some fish spotters that tangled up in a narrow inlet, but by and large I know of more that happened over great big wide open areas... Some with one party in the take off or landing phase, others just two planes out enjoying the scenery that come down in a flaming ball of shit..

Most of the fish spotter problems went away when it was required that the pilot fly the plane and a passenger was spotting the fish that way the pilot would be looking all around him and tracking the other planes in the area and not staring at the water. Trying to keep people from running into each other as they fly around spotting game or just day dreaming is a tougher one. Radio communication helps, but being more visible helps even more. We all know that a wig wag light is much more likely to be spotted than a constant light. Aircraft color plays a HUGE roll in being spotted.

Last, as we all know, if your playing with your latest wiz bang ipad app or lost in the world of glass panel engine monitoring and your geeking out on electronics versus flying the fn plane YOU are the biggest part of the problem. Some areas I fly I relax a bit and enjoy the day, others my head is on a swivel as I am looking for traffic thats calling themselves out to be 3 miles from where they really are.

How many pilots actually are good at dead reckoning anymore... A bunch that I know couldn't get out of the pattern without a GPS telling them that the airport is 1/8th mile off the left wing. You give them a map with all these cute reporting points and they couldn't tell which peak they were over or what river was under them unless it was showing on the GPS.