Descending/climbing on Victor airways

[Nelson L.]

... as, in this example, I'll be climbing through a westbound flight altitude (6500) of possible traffic heading my way.

Just make sure there's no traffic along your climb path, and if you do encounter other traffic, consider FAR Part 91.113.

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?rg ... 3.10.2.4.7

Unfortunately, drones are unable to comply with that section so the standing rule on PE is drones have right-of-way and you're to get out of it.

This is also a situation where having flight following can help.

Huh, learned something new:

(e) Approaching head-on. When aircraft are approaching each other head-on, or nearly so, each pilot of each aircraft shall alter course to the right.

I seem to recall Peter mentioning taking over from a student pilot and swerving left and right with another plane before turning and yanking - hmmmm

[stealthbob]

....just don't dive down when you see traffic, then call the controller.

[Peter Grey]

I seem to recall Peter mentioning taking over from a student pilot and swerving left and right with another plane before turning and yanking - hmmmm

Yes, but that wasn't a head to head situation, it was converging traffic at a 90 degree angle. It was also in the traffic pattern at a controlled airport. Technically I had the right of way (I was to the right), but I'm not going to argue that point with a plane heading right at me. Due to poor ATC control (the controller directly caused the conflict), we ended up in the "which way do we turn situation" you allude to.

[Ryan B]

I'd like to make a comment hopefully not too far out of context

Victor airways aren't specifically for VFR. The discussion seems to assume that one flies VFR on victor airways. Obviously some people in the thread know this isn't true. But to the OP - you don't need to fly on victor airways - but if you're en route on one I would 100% of the time be at an even or odd altitude plus 500 ft. I say this because IFR traffic will be at the nearest thousand. If you weren't receiving radar advisories / traffic advisories / flight following that 500 ft buffer helps us controllers a little to issue traffic for IFR aircraft. Of course if you weren't keeping up with local altimeter settings your altitude could be a few hundred feet off.

[NameCoin]

Huh, learned something new:

(e) Approaching head-on. When aircraft are approaching each other head-on, or nearly so, each pilot of each aircraft shall alter course to the right.

I seem to recall Peter mentioning taking over from a student pilot and swerving left and right with another plane before turning and yanking - hmmmm

It's important not to forget that you should follow this rule only if a collision is not imminent. If there is a collision threat, you should do whatever is necessary to protect the occupants of both aircraft (i.e. you are in emergency status).

---------------

I also wanted to address Keith's query about pilot advisory frequencies:

If there's a pilot advisory frequency available and the airspace is busy, you might do a callout to say "N123VB is 20 miles east of the Paradise VOR eastbound on V388, climbing from 5500 to 9500"

What would be an example of a pilot advisory frequency? The closest thing I can think of would be a CTAF for a non-towered airport, or the NY SFRA and LAX SFRA. This call wouldn't be applicable for any of those cases.

The Los Angeles terminal area actually has one for the corridor along the 91 Freeway, starting from around the Corona airport and ending near the beach. There's a wall of text describing it on the TAC: https://skyvector.com/?ll=33.8143881450 ... 114&zoom=3.

Caution: At or below 2000' when operating along a line parallel to and one mile North along the 91 Freeway Corridor from West where the extension of that line intersects the beach just South of Manhattan Beach pier, East along the 91 Freeway to Prado Dam and all areas SOUTH of this line in the LA Basin, pilots are encouraged to make regular position reports on 122.85 when not in contact with ATC. ATC flight following is recommended.

I fly through this area pretty regularly, especially when I want to get to and from the Catalina airport, but I don't know how many people actually use or even know about this frequency. I always take advantage of ATC services.

[Nelson L.]

It's important not to forget that you should follow this rule only if a collision is not imminent. If there is a collision threat, you should do whatever is necessary to protect the occupants of both aircraft (i.e. you are in emergency status).

Indeed - I also seem to recall 2 jetliners colliding because one followed ATC instructions (to avoid imminent collision), while the other crew was trained to follow the TCAS regardless of ATC. Apparently there was something where the 2 planes had to be a certain distance apart for the computer to recognize the two were still on a collision course and issue revised instructions. Think everyone onboard both planes lost their lives. No idea about the aftermath, but I'd assume something was done about it.

[Peter Grey]

Indeed - I also seem to recall 2 jetliners colliding because one followed ATC instructions (to avoid imminent collision), while the other crew was trained to follow the TCAS regardless of ATC. Apparently there was something where the 2 planes had to be a certain distance apart for the computer to recognize the two were still on a collision course and issue revised instructions. Think everyone onboard both planes lost their lives. No idea about the aftermath, but I'd assume something was done about it.

This was an incident in Europe which started when a controller issued a wrong way altitude to 1 airplane on an airway with another airplane at that altitude in opposite direction.

The controller caught the mistake very very late and issued a climb and descent to fix it. However TCAS alarms had already gone off and ordered the opposite (descend and climb). 1 airplane followed the TCAS and 1 followed ATC. The 1000% correct procedure in this situation is to follow TCAS.

No procedures were changed as this was pilot error by not following the proper procedure.

Regarding the overall question in the thread. I (and FAA regulations) have no issue with a VFR airplane on an airway at VFR altitudes. Obviously see and avoid is needed when climbing/descending and the risk is slightly higher being on an airway vs off airway. I don't consider that risk high enough to warrant anything except maybe getting flight following and increased outside scanning.

Airborne CTAF's are ultra rare outside practice areas and any airplane on an airway is likely to not be on it (as it's IFR with ATC), as a result I consider the availability/non-availability of a CTAF to not be a factor in all of this.

[Peter Grey]

Minor clarification: This accident resulted in some clarification of procedures in the countries involved (the accident in question happened in Germany and involved a Russian and a Bahrain airline)

No US clarifications was needed as the regulations have been crystal clear since 1995 (the accident was in 2002).

Here's the relevant US regulation:

§91.123 Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.
(a) When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory. However, except in Class A airspace, a pilot may cancel an IFR flight plan if the operation is being conducted in VFR weather conditions. When a pilot is uncertain of an ATC clearance, that pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC.

Note the "in response to a TCAS RA" section.

Here is the crash in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Cber ... _collision

[Nelson L.]

Ah, it's all coming back to me now. Apologies for hijacking the thread.