Story - Near Midair with same Cirrus TWICE

[PTK]

16 hours ago, DXB said:

Wow, how can you possibly equate Mike not specifying  entering 45 or direct downwind with  Cirrus guy making no calls at all? 

I do so with great effort and generosity. They both made similar mistakes but one called the other a jerk. At least and to his credit the Cirrus guy took the higher road.

[steingar]

I rather agree.  I think the only mistake made was our resident psittacine authority made was in the denigration of the other pilot.  I try not abstain from such for a number of reasons. First, it really doesn't accomplish anything.  Second, it is always possible that the mistake was on my part.  I've made plenty, some doozies.  All that said, our OP is only human. I do hope the issue with the other aircraft was simply a mistake or misunderstanding.  Intentional misbehavior in an aircraft is a perilous affair.

[cbarry]

IMO, the downwind-to-base turn inside of you by the Cirrus pilot was a reportable infraction.  The first near miss on downwind may have been incidental to him having his head up his axx.  Based on his following actions,  one could argue it was not simply incidental but deliberate.  I would rather see a few pilots’ privileges suspended or revoked than bad behavior continuing to endanger those (like yourself) trying to exercise safety.  Confrontation is never enjoyable, but neither is burying someone a family cares about.

[DXB]

1 hour ago, steingar said:

I rather agree.  I think the only mistake made was our resident psittacine authority made was in the denigration of the other pilot.  I try not abstain from such for a number of reasons. First, it really doesn't accomplish anything.  Second, it is always possible that the mistake was on my part.  I've made plenty, some doozies.  All that said, our OP is only human. I do hope the issue with the other aircraft was simply a mistake or misunderstanding.  Intentional misbehavior in an aircraft is a perilous affair.

I think we can agree it's always best to control any anger when something happens in the pattern and not call anyone names on CTAF.

First get on the ground, drive home, and safely log in to Mooneyspace before calling anyone a jerk  

[steingar]

I try very hard to never loose my temper, and not to act out of anger. I don’t always succeed in either, for I am but an imperfect human. But I do try. I just feel denigrating someone accomplished little, and should be avoided if at all possible.

 

[Tom]

11 hours ago, PTK said:

Coming from 47N you entered the standard pattern directly on downwind. The Cirrus entered on a 45. Sounds like there was miscommunication or no communication of intent from both of you. He didn’t announce his intentions on entering on a 45 and you didn’t announce yours to enter direct downwind. You can't read his mind and he can't read yours. This is why we communicate clearly our intentions.

This is correct.  At minimum each aircraft should have reported entering the pattern with intentions with the entry call; per the video neither did.  This is a textbook low wing descent to TPA atop another accident scenario. 

Also per the video, neither aircraft stated intentions to land until after completing the base turn.  The Cirrus could have reasonably assumed that the Mooney was departing the pattern, particularly if going relatively long (again, unless a radio call in the pattern stated otherwise) while it was obvious that the Cirrus was entering the pattern ostensibly to land (why else do people enter patterns).

---

Otherwise the confirmation bias of ganging up on Cirrus pilots (the dominant theme in responses here) doesn't really help anything.  If the video fully reflects all the communication that occured then the blame between the "two" incidents nets out to 50/50 plus or minus.      

 

[kmyfm20s]

7 hours ago, 201er said:

Wow, I didn't dig that far but now that you mentioned it I looked up the company. Pretentious is probably an understatement:

"We are professional pilots who believe in pilot safety first and foremost. Given this core tenet, it would be irresponsible and hypocritical not to fly the very best equipment available. The Cirrus SR Series (w/ Garmin Perspective+ avionics) is a highly advanced general aviation piston aircraft and in some ways, more advanced than the jets that we flew in the Part 121 world."

I guess the guy I ran into must have thought I'm the irresponsible one for flying an unsafe piece of junk Mooney and looking out the windows instead of flying behind the most sophisticated Garmin Avionics...

Print this quote and tape in on the wind shield with your favorite packing tape. Maybe like 20 strips of it!

[carusoam]

8 hours ago, Rwsavory said:

...and my dear old dad told him to "drop dead." 

A phrase used loosely south of Boston... amongst family and friends to show disbelief with a touch of disdain...

usually preceded with a long ....aaaaah, and a staccato... drop dead.  Often used with other references of being slow, dense, or thick (a skull dimension)... and others that are no where near being PC any longer...

The first time you hear this phrase it can be a bit unnerving... especially when it’s from a close relative, you hold great respect faw...

 

PP thoughts on language differences I have encountered around the globe... not a speech therapist...

Best regards,

-a-

[carusoam]

One great lesson we have learned...

1) Coming in on an IFR flight plan, requires being ready to monitor/communicate with both ATC and local traffic... somewhat simultaneously...

2) Expect The VFR traffic may have no idea what an FAF is or where it is...  even if you have the world class big G avionics in your super panel...

We can see how non-standard our language can be...  I have been fully trained in the arts of the New English, before moving to NJ.  The New English is a tad more coarse than the NY/NJ English...

Controlling what we say actually takes time and effort... and a whole bunch of practice...  

It may be better to say the Ci pilot was ill-advised to make those pattern short cuts... kinda means the same thing, but you have shown great self control when launching it...

Best regards,

-a-

[DXB]

2 hours ago, Tom said:

Otherwise the confirmation bias of ganging up on Cirrus pilots (the dominant theme in responses here) doesn't really help anything.   

I hope my statements don’t come across that way-   I’ve actually never noticed any difference in Cirrus pilot behavior in the real world. Agree it’s a cheap shot to base criticism  on what anyone flies.

[Shadrach]

7 hours ago, Tom said:

This is correct.  At minimum each aircraft should have reported entering the pattern with intentions with the entry call; per the video neither did.  This is a textbook low wing descent to TPA atop another accident scenario. 

Also per the video, neither aircraft stated intentions to land until after completing the base turn.  The Cirrus could have reasonably assumed that the Mooney was departing the pattern, particularly if going relatively long (again, unless a radio call in the pattern stated otherwise) while it was obvious that the Cirrus was entering the pattern ostensibly to land (why else do people enter patterns).

---

Otherwise the confirmation bias of ganging up on Cirrus pilots (the dominant theme in responses here) doesn't really help anything.  If the video fully reflects all the communication that occured then the blame between the "two" incidents nets out to 50/50 plus or minus.      

 

Per the video the OP announced his intentions on CTAF at 10 miles out and then again at 5 miles out.

[Shadrach]

4 hours ago, DXB said:

I hope my statements don’t come across that way-   I’ve actually never noticed any difference in Cirrus pilot behavior in the real world. Agree it’s a cheap shot to base criticism  on what anyone flies.

I have noticed differences but it is purely anecdotal so I do my best not to prejudge. I think the airfcraft and the branding are top notch, but I don’t have much experience with airframe operationally. 

After visiting the website of the operators affiliated with this particular Cirrus I can say there is good reasons to make fun of people who take themselves this seriously on a web page but can’t be bothered to announce on CTAF.

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Tom said:

This is correct.  At minimum each aircraft should have reported entering the pattern with intentions with the entry call; per the video neither did.  This is a textbook low wing descent to TPA atop another accident scenario. 

Also per the video, neither aircraft stated intentions to land until after completing the base turn.  The Cirrus could have reasonably assumed that the Mooney was departing the pattern, particularly if going relatively long (again, unless a radio call in the pattern stated otherwise) while it was obvious that the Cirrus was entering the pattern ostensibly to land (why else do people enter patterns).

---

Otherwise the confirmation bias of ganging up on Cirrus pilots (the dominant theme in responses here) doesn't really help anything.  If the video fully reflects all the communication that occured then the blame between the "two" incidents nets out to 50/50 plus or minus.      

 

Dislike of Cirrus airplanes and owners is a universal theme here.

Clarence

[PTK]

On 7/4/2019 at 6:18 AM, Shadrach said:

Per the video the OP announced his intentions on CTAF at 10 miles out and then again at 5 miles out.

Per the self-aggrandizing video the OP’s specific intention to enter a straight in left dw, as he did, was not what’s expected procedurally and unannounced. The Cirrus’ specific intention to enter dw on a 45, as he did, was proper procedure but unannounced. May have received a late freq change release from ATC. But he followed expected procedure. These actions are very different than the initial calls “Mooney 10 miles out, or 5 miles out...”

The op here is the proverbial pot calling the kettle both black and a jerk!

[FloridaMan]

That’s common in the Jacksonville airspace. Foreigners who haven’t ever driven a car more than 40mph get selected by some half baked government process to learn to fly. 

[Shadrach]

40 minutes ago, PTK said:

The OP’s specific intention to enter a straight in left dw, as he did, was unannounced. The Cirrus’ specific intention to enter dw on a 45, as he did, was unannounced. These actions are very different than the initial calls “Mooney 10 miles out, or 5 miles out...”

The op here is the proverbial pot calling the kettle black... and a jerk!

Most pilots are clear about their intentions by 5 miles out. That’s typically about 3 minutes from pattern entry for me.  I call position, altitude, how I plan to enter the pattern and runway I intend to use.  It would go something like “ Linden traffic Mooney 6339Q is five to the west 3,500, extended left downwind for 27. Linden”  I assume the OP did this. The fact that you assume otherwise likely has more to do with a petty online feud between you and the OP than any basis in reality. 

Edited July 4, 2019 by Shadrach

[Shadrach]

15 hours ago, M20Doc said:

Dislike of Cirrus airplanes and owners is a universal theme here.

Clarence

Says the guy universally maligning the whole board over the actions of a few. Pot meet kettle.

Edited July 5, 2019 by Shadrach

[eman1200]

I’m curious if you received a ‘jerk alert’ via adsb?

 

EDIT: this is a legit question btw.

[PTK]

2 hours ago, Shadrach said:

..That’s typically about 3 minutes from pattern entry for me... I assume the OP did this. The fact that you assume otherwise...

Unlike you, I don’t assume anything. Certainly not at 3 min to pattern entry. The OP said he didn’t announce his intentions to enter straight in dw. In an earlier post and in retrospect he says: “Wouldn't have mattered because the Cirrus said he didn't hear me make any calls at all until the one where I said Mooney was right in front of him.” The Cirrus may have assumed the OP would be entering on a 45 behind him.

You can go on assuming all day long. If we all assume and try to read minds we don’t need radios. 

[Hank]

1 hour ago, Shadrach said:

Says the guy universally maligning in the whole board over the actions of a few. Pot meet kettle.

I thought it was Peter Dentist who is universally maligning the whole board, not Eagle Eye Clarence Piper . . . .  

[DXB]

10 hours ago, Tom said:

This is correct.  At minimum each aircraft should have reported entering the pattern with intentions with the entry call; per the video neither did.  This is a textbook low wing descent to TPA atop another accident scenario. 

Also per the video, neither aircraft stated intentions to land until after completing the base turn.  The Cirrus could have reasonably assumed that the Mooney was departing the pattern, particularly if going relatively long (again, unless a radio call in the pattern stated otherwise) while it was obvious that the Cirrus was entering the pattern ostensibly to land (why else do people enter patterns).

It's a fair point that saying nothing upon entering the pattern is an error made by both planes. But saying nothing at all seems a far more hazardous error by the Cirrus, in addition to flying in very close proximity to the Mooney followed by cutting him off in the pattern. Totally a jerk move.  It's bizarre to  simply assume someone at TPA on downwind is not landing but rather leaving the pattern so that's probably not what happened.  One could reasonably argue calling someone a jerk on CTAF equalizes he scales here, but that point seems to be an afterthought to the initial conflict.  I probably would have held my tongue in the air but called him far worse once on the ground.  

[bradp]

I like cirrus as an aircraft idea - on paper it would do better for my mission.   No hate for cirrus drivers in general.  Everyone has a reputation- Mooney too miserly to properly take care of their planes want more for less. Cirrus horrible sticks... some of it is deserved and some of it isn’t. 

@201er There’s a similar thread over on beechtalk about a purposeful cutoff of a member by an instructor with a student in the pattern in Florida.  Read that for comparison  I’ll see if I can find the link.

This makes me recall quite vividly a flight to OXB when I was flying a rental 172.  I was meeting another friend who was also flying a 172.  I was making radio calls and entering on a 45 for a left downwind to 32.   As I get established on d/w I find a NORDO twin cessna, white with blue and yellow stripes about 100 ft below me.  He makes a short approach to land.  I had never been so pissed off in an airplane for the balsiness and stupidity of the whole thing.  I was going to words with the guy but he never shut down.  Instead a few little kids and an adult climb off the back wing with the engine running and off he goes no radios again.  Holy $hit people are stupid and just don't get the seriousness of what we do.  

Mike how sure are you that it wasn’t a know nothing student in a fancy plane? 

Best you could do is file an ASRS (not for cya but for shared safety reporting purposes).  I’m sure that the 801/501/GND shelves in close proximity invariably had something to do with the loss of separation. 

If I were you I would call the flight school that owns the aircraft and talk to Richard Greene or whomever about a clear violation of 91.111.  Ask them to look into it for purposes of improving safety and ask them to follow up with you for a resolution.  If it’s an instructor flight it’s pretty egregious.  If it’s a student solo it’s pretty bad and they student needs help.  If a rental flight they can talk to the pilot as the plane and the way it is flown reflect poorly on their company.  If they are jerks tell them you’re going to talk to their FSDO - they are a 141 school so you’ll get somewhere with that stick .  

[bradp]

Doc’s not anti-American.  Many of his political views expressed on the forum are right in line with mine (and I'm sure many others) as a living breathing American.  There are a plurality or viewpoints among our Mooney members and some of those American views happen to overlap more closely with citizens outside our boarders than within.   

 

What were we taking about again..: oh yeah not crashing in the pattern  

[bradp]

Wait Jim before I get off my high horse, was that supposed to be in green font (ie tongue in cheek?) 

[Shadrach]

9 hours ago, bradp said:

Doc’s not anti-American.  Many of his political views expressed on the forum are right in line with mine (and I'm sure many others) as a living breathing American.  There are a plurality or viewpoints among our Mooney members and some of those American views happen to overlap more closely with citizens outside our boarders than within.   

 

What were we taking about again..: oh yeah not crashing in the pattern  

We all have political viewpoints on many things.  I have viewpoints on US politics.  I also have viewpoints on Andrés Obrador, Justin Trudeau, The CHRC, as well as policies of several of the provincial governments in Canada.   I could not care less with whose politics mine align.  Oh wait, one thing I care even less about is with whom your politics align.  You seem to be insinuating that your politics are some sort of bar by which to measure appropriate political messaging on an aircraft forum (how humble).  I've seen little to no constructive political discourse on this forum. Mostly it degrades into tribal talking points, platitudes or the occasional snarky retort peppered with an Ad Hominem attack on a member or the politician they appear to support.  It is not constructive.  It is not what this board is about. And it has caused rifts in the past. Most importantly it has driven away quality posters that have checked out due to political content.

Edited July 5, 2019 by Shadrach