Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 73

Thread: Two too close for comfort.

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    6,457
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thanks tedwaltman1 thanked for this post
    Likes CharlieN, soyAnarchisto liked this post

  2. #2
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    11,704
    Post Thanks / Like
    YOW!!!! THAT is a wee bit too close for comfort. Any idea specifically where it happened? That's what you call "dodging a bullet" for sure. Gent needs to buy lottery tickets.

    MTV

  3. #3
    BC12D-4-85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Fairbanks, AK.
    Posts
    3,024
    Post Thanks / Like
    Bet there were a few more "skid marks" than reported

    Gary
    Likes Utah-Jay, hotrod180 liked this post

  4. #4

    Join Date
    May 2021
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    267
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by BC12D-4-85 View Post
    Bet there were a few more "skid marks" than reported

    Gary
    Yes, but it seems to have landed on the same water it departed from so easy to get a quick rinse.
    Likes BC12D-4-85 liked this post

  5. #5

    Join Date
    May 2021
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    267
    Post Thanks / Like
    Image shows ADS-B position 15 seconds before reported collision time. No ADS-B data available for the other aircraft.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	N737DM at 03_14_44 Z.PNG 
Views:	2407 
Size:	216.1 KB 
ID:	57431

  6. #6
    skukum12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    The Last Frontier
    Posts
    1,236
    Post Thanks / Like
    What happened? The link doesn't seem to work.
    "Always looking up"

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    6,457
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote from the report-

    AIRCRAFT DOVE TO AVOID ANOTHER AIRCRAFT N21132, LANDED AND POST FLIGHT INSPECTION REVEALED WING TIP DAMAGE WITH TIRE MARKS, ANCHORAGE, AK.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Wonder who was where at what altitude. Most days the controllers call out traffic and altitude especially coming into Lake Hood. That has always been a congested area and eyes outside is my rule when transitioning through. Not the area to look down and fiddle with toys. I can see the suspension of part 93 deviations and more strict adherence to altitude assignments coming from this.

    Glad everyone made it home.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    May 2021
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    267
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by StalledOut View Post
    Wonder who was where at what altitude.

    Well I already posted the where (based on reported collision time). The ADS-B altitude at that time was 1475 ft and after landing the ADS-B altitude shows 450 ft so, at collision time, the aircraft was at about 1,000 ft agl which is consistent with entry to traffic pattern.
    Likes Airguide liked this post

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    486
    Post Thanks / Like
    In all my 50 years at Lake Hood the lake has always been about 70 feet MSL depending on the rains and who's controlling the outflow or pumps. If the ADSB shows 450 AFTER landing something isn't right.

    Inbound for the water or the strip, when you enter the north edge of Lake Hood segment until mid channel your supposed to be below 1200 or above 2000. The 185 on floats was quickly approaching the shoreline and if he was at 1475 he either needed to go higher or get down. But then the whole ADSB altitude reporting is suspect if it really does show 450 after landing.
    Thanks Bowie thanked for this post

  11. #11

    Join Date
    May 2021
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    267
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by StalledOut View Post
    But then the whole ADSB altitude reporting is suspect if it really does show 450 after landing.
    The absolute altitude reported by this ADS-B site may not be correct (and obviously is not). GE shows the elevation of the lakes to be 65 ft. However, the difference between the reported altitude at collision time and the report altitude at landing is quite likely to be correct.

  12. #12
    BC12D-4-85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Fairbanks, AK.
    Posts
    3,024
    Post Thanks / Like
    Different matter but I've seen lots of IFR traffic and a few accident histories reported by ADS-B on Flightrader24 to be off expected altitudes. They provide a GPS Altitude which is sometimes different than what FT24 calls Calibrated Altitude. Needs further explanation.

    More - especially the comments section: https://pilotworkshop.com/tips/vfr_altitude_gps/ It's all different sometimes I guess

    Gary
    Last edited by BC12D-4-85; 09-08-2021 at 10:21 PM.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    6,457
    Post Thanks / Like
    It appears airplane number two didn’t have a transponder. How well does ATC see no Txp airplanes?

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,489
    Post Thanks / Like
    Sooooooooo ANYONE that has half a brain and has flown in Anchorage airspace understands that this is some real no $hit flying. You have everything from 30,000 hour heavy pilots, military fast movers/heavys, 135 tours, bush pilots, regular pilots, student pilots, and 15 hour solo pilots all an airspace Less than a few miles wide and 1.000 ft high. Just stacking on more rules/restrictions is not the answer or we can just stop GA in Anchorage. ADSB is not the answer!! The tower can only hold so many hands!! Keep looking outside and planes are not that big, look for the little dot!
    DENNY
    Likes Grant, WayneK49, BC12D-4-85, Brandsman liked this post

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    6,457
    Post Thanks / Like
    So…. from a guy who’s flown that corridor a lot? Airplanes not lighted are extremely hard to see against the cluttered background of the city. Sometimes lighted ones are, too. I always wished controllers would keep planes on published routes. Inbound and outbound each have specific lanes and altitudes. Nobody pays attention until something bad happens.
    Likes Grant, DENNY, BC12D-4-85, Brandsman, 68Papa liked this post

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    486
    Post Thanks / Like
    My understanding is that the 182 was outbound off Merrill. I can't find a factual reference to that so maybe I just heard it around the lake.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    486
    Post Thanks / Like
    My point exactly about ADSB and GPS's and anything else you look down to fiddle with. Over the boat hull and over Point Mac is not the place to be looking anywhere but outside.

    Once you get past there things open up some.

    And yes, this summer seems to be a bad year for flying at whatever altitude you want. Few ask for deviations but most don't.

    Part 93.51 is written specifically for this airspace and it's not adhered to well. (I didn't look it up but pretty sure it's .51)

    My 2 cents says that will be changing and controllers will be issuing more altitude advisories.

  18. #18

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    6,457
    Post Thanks / Like
    My ADS-B has audible warnings inside the distance I’ve set. I rarely look at it. That’s rhetoric from guys who don’t use it. Monday in the Su Valley was LOW and I appreciated locating the Maule in front of me when I lost visual. And once more in the open over Knik Arm I appreciated being called by a guy on opposite heading so we both saw each other. ADS-B works well.
    Likes Scooter7779h, soyAnarchisto liked this post

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,489
    Post Thanks / Like
    The best thing that you can do as a new/old pilot learning to fly lake hood is get a Lake Hook experienced CFI to fly in any slow plane around the area and approach from all directions. Ya I have told people how to do it and read the pink book but once you get to just look for all the landmarks without trying to fly it is so much better. I had a much smarter and younger pilot do that for me when my 180 was being placed at Lake hood it was a huge game changer!!!
    DENNY

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    33
    Post Thanks / Like
    Traffic really piles up at point Mackenzie and you have to be on your toes. Traffic callouts help but especially coming in on the west route you can lose the ones right in front of you pretty easily with the city background.
    Thanks JeffP thanked for this post
    Likes JeffP liked this post

  21. #21
    BC12D-4-85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Fairbanks, AK.
    Posts
    3,024
    Post Thanks / Like
    Wag the wings and light the lights. It's been a few years but i recall siting other aircraft against the city being a challenge. How do they do it at Oshkosh?

    Gary

  22. #22

    Join Date
    May 2021
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    267
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by StalledOut View Post
    But then the whole ADSB altitude reporting is suspect if it really does show 450 after landing.
    ADS-B site is reporting barometric altitude which is actually pressure altitude (Altimeter 29.92). Historical weather data for Anchorage shows the barometric pressure close to the time of the accident was 29.46. Apply that correction and the reported landing altitude looks very reasonable.
    Thanks soyAnarchisto thanked for this post

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    6,457
    Post Thanks / Like
    The AK Supplement has Lake Hood routes starting on pp 355 and Merrill routes after that. If everyone is honest we’ll find nobody actually uses the published procedures. I was at Hood yesterday and noticed more guys climbing to 2000’ than usual. A near miss improves awareness but historically it doesn’t last very long.

    For the unfamiliar, crossing at 2000’ requires contacting departure so you’re being handled until you pass the altitude boundary or descend and terminate radar following. Not many Hood pilots use that service. Lots of Hood airplanes don’t have transponders. And few wheel planes are comfortable over the water at 700’. Nothing new. When it was my home base I didn’t use the procedures, either.

  24. #24
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    11,704
    Post Thanks / Like
    It’s been a while since I flew in there regularly, but back when, I regularly requested a deviation from 93 airspace procedures, especially outbound. The good news there was it took me out of some of the traffic conflicts, and let me operate higher. I was rarely denied that request.

    But, just DOING it without a waiver is NOT good. That is some of the most complex airspace on the planet, folks.

    Seriously.

    MTV

  25. #25

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    6,457
    Post Thanks / Like
    In reality all it does is raise the ceiling to 1400’ because that’s the ceiling as soon as you cross the north shore unless you have permission and ADS-B. Without ADS-B I don’t think you can do above 1400’ at all unless you can get to 1900’ before the shoreline and stay east of the 4100' Class C ceiling until clear on the north side. I’ve never seen anyone do that. I’ve used the deviation for test flights and post-maintenance flights. It has limited usefulness.
    Last edited by stewartb; 09-09-2021 at 04:13 PM.

  26. #26
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    11,704
    Post Thanks / Like
    Airspace must have changed. Used to be, you could request a waiver of 93 airspace and depart to the north through Elmendorf's approach corridor as long as there was no conflicting traffic. Saved circling to altitude over Hood to cross, or crossing at low level.

    MTV

  27. #27

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    6,457
    Post Thanks / Like
    ADS-B changed. Before when tower gave a deviation it was assumed it also was permission for entry into C airspace. Now we can't go there without ADS-B. At least that was my take-away when I asked about ADS-B deviations through Class C.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	maxresdefault.jpg 
Views:	103 
Size:	367.0 KB 
ID:	57445  
    Last edited by stewartb; 09-09-2021 at 04:05 PM.
    Likes soyAnarchisto liked this post

  28. #28

    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Anchorage Alaska
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    I fly in and out of Lake Hood a lot. Definitely a lot of cross traffic at Point MacKinze and big jet vortexes propagating through. There was talk of moving the Lake Hood control area to sleeper strip. Maybe that would help?

    Couple of F35's the other night as well.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_5746[1].JPG 
Views:	89 
Size:	44.6 KB 
ID:	57447  
    Thanks tedwaltman1 thanked for this post

  29. #29
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    11,704
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by stewartb View Post
    ADS-B changed. Before when tower gave a deviation it was assumed it also was permission for entry into C airspace. Now we can't go there without ADS-B. At least that was my take-away when I asked about ADS-B deviations through Class C.
    Stewart,

    Sorry, I didn’t explain myself well. The waiver from 93 I spoke of was so I could use the airspace between 1200 and 1900 over the north half of the channel. So, take off LHD northbound, stay IN LHD segment. Cross channel climbing to over 2000, which I was at by north shore, flying OVER the 1900 foot top of Charlie A/S shelf.

    All that does is allows you to cross the channel at a safer height over water. BUT that 1200 to 1900 foot slice over the north half of the Inlet is approach corridor for EDF.

    I don’t recall ATC ever saying no, however.

    I was never warm and fuzzy about crossing the Inlet below 1200. And, yes, that’s all same as last time I went through there.

    MTV
    Thanks BC12D-4-85 thanked for this post
    Likes DENNY liked this post

  30. #30

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    486
    Post Thanks / Like
    The reality is people in and out of Lake Hood segment fly at all kinds of altitudes with or without deviations and most don't think about class C until Powerline bend.
    They cut the corner all the time to the west.

    Every once in a while someone gets snippy about it, but there is a lot of lax behavior going in and out of the lake.

  31. #31

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    6,457
    Post Thanks / Like
    If a deviation isn’t available that means the Air Force guys are flying. I’ll cross at 700’ if it provides me more clearance under those guys. I have two friends, very experienced Lake Hood guys, who’ve bent spars in Cessnas from military wake turbulence. I’ll pass!

  32. #32

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    412
    Post Thanks / Like
    Don't fly Lake Hood unless it's really necessary (which isn't often), but even going to / from little 'ol Merrill, the Point Mac area gets pretty busy and as previously noted, one probably needs to focus on what's outside rather than inside.

    "....but there is a lot of lax behavior going in and out of the lake.": unfortunately true and for those of us who haven't internalized the LHD approach and departure procedures, it's always a bit of "wait, am I supposed to be doing what he's doing?" voice in the background.
    Thanks tedwaltman1 thanked for this post

  33. #33

    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Location
    ANC
    Posts
    113
    Post Thanks / Like
    I guess I'm a weirdo but out of merrill I do the city high, inlet, chester creek or shoreline, take a squawk and get flight following above 2,000 across the inlet when wx permits. That doesn't stop me from needing to look out the window but it sure feels a whole lot better. Might helps if the motor stops too.

    Did some lake hood flying recently too and it's just bonkers how small that strip of land between the boat hull and point MacKenzie is that everyone funnels through. You would need some pretty good performance to get above 2200 by mid channel on that outbound.
    Likes DENNY liked this post

  34. #34

    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Anchorage Alaska
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    A lot of planes coming out of Hood are float and/or wheel planes loaded with as much stuff as they can carry and also trying to conserve gas to get to a remote location. So climb rate is an issue. Hood traffic coming out will typically be low. Incoming Hood traffic is typically starting to descend for landing at Point Mackinze.

    Merrill outbound traffic may be heavy as well for the same reasons Hood traffic is heavy. Merrill traffic is typically running perpendicular to Hood and trying to get under Elmendorf's flight path which is more restrictive because they are closer to Elmendorf. They are also wanting to conserve fuel to/from remote locations. Incoming Merrill is getting ready to land as well.

    So lots of folks in the same area at lower elevations trying to optimize performance.
    Thanks tedwaltman1 thanked for this post

  35. #35
    ak-flyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    ANC, AK
    Posts
    20
    Post Thanks / Like
    It definitely is a congested area, but mid-airs in the Lake Hood segment are actually relatively small. Most of the trouble happens outside of the Lake Hood segment in the vicinity of power line bend where the traffic is all converging. Maybe some better communication on a CTAF type frequency that is more localized to going in and out of Anchorage would help. Because as of right now only 122.90 is for that area which has the half the valley talking on it. Which is almost worthless to get a word in on edge wise when itís busy and thatís when itís most important, when coming in/out of Anchorage. Additionally, you have half the pilots on 122.80 thinking itís the right frequency, so thereís several problems on just the radio side of things.


    Sent from my iPad using SuperCub.Org
    Thanks tedwaltman1 thanked for this post

  36. #36

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    6,457
    Post Thanks / Like
    When I’m inbound I’ve listened to ATIS and am on tower frequency a few miles before I get to the powerline corner so I can get a picture of who’s coming out. The same is true when leaving. I don’t switch away from tower til I’m a couple of miles past the powerline. There’s no reason to be on CTAF in that area. The two problems with my use are Merrill traffic isn’t on 126.8 but controllers are usually good at calling their positions, and the biggie? Guys aren’t very good at calling position. Some guys will announce powerline bend or Lost Lake when they’re 3 miles away. That doesn’t serve anyone.
    Thanks akmarty, tedwaltman1 thanked for this post

  37. #37
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    11,704
    Post Thanks / Like
    Why wouldn't you talk to Approach Control anywhere within 25 miles?? They actually have radar, after all. I ALWAYS worked Approach in and outbound when within 25 or 30 miles. Get ATIS for wherever you're going before you go to Approach, and traffic advisories and vectors, if you get.....errrr, a bit confused about 93 airspace.

    When I worked in Kodiak, and was going to LHD, I called Approach from the Forelands, for flight following across the Inlet, and traffic advisories.

    It's a free service, BTW. Well, sorta....

    MTV

    MTV
    Likes Narwhal, C130jake liked this post

  38. #38

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    6,457
    Post Thanks / Like
    Because approach will hand us off to Hood Tower at the same areas I described. Past those areas isn’t an issue. Squawking 1200 works just fine.

  39. #39

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    AK, ME, ID - what time of year is it?
    Posts
    643
    Post Thanks / Like
    It’s amazing to me how many Anchorage area pilots haven’t upgraded to led’s or for that matter even turn their lights on.

    Quote Originally Posted by BC12D-4-85 View Post
    Wag the wings and light the lights. It's been a few years but i recall siting other aircraft against the city being a challenge. How do they do it at Oshkosh?

    Gary

  40. #40

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    AK, ME, ID - what time of year is it?
    Posts
    643
    Post Thanks / Like
    I don’t agree with opinions that ADS-B isn’t a benefit or advisable in very busy airspace. It only takes literally a few seconds to cross-reference and confirm ADS-B traffic displayed on iPad or panel display - about the length of time it takes to bracket a few sectors over in your scan and much less than scan time from one side of windscreen to the other. It shouldn’t be stared at, but with careful glances it’s a helpful tool providing additional info.

    Agreed about LHD controllers tightening up. I heard two chidings in last few days for pilots cutting corners into ANC airspace off the Tudor departure Southbound.

    Quote Originally Posted by StalledOut View Post
    My point exactly about ADSB and GPS's and anything else you look down to fiddle with. Over the boat hull and over Point Mac is not the place to be looking anywhere but outside.

    Once you get past there things open up some.

    And yes, this summer seems to be a bad year for flying at whatever altitude you want. Few ask for deviations but most don't.

    Part 93.51 is written specifically for this airspace and it's not adhered to well. (I didn't look it up but pretty sure it's .51)

    My 2 cents says that will be changing and controllers will be issuing more altitude advisories.
    Likes alaskaoe liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Too Close for Comfort: Reno
    By stewartb in forum In The News
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-27-2016, 08:48 AM
  2. Aileron Balance Cable - How close is too close?
    By Marty57 in forum Experimental Cubs
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-29-2014, 10:27 AM
  3. back seat comfort in Cubcrafters Light Sport Cub
    By jimpattensc in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-02-2009, 10:03 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •