4 ms·
Is it really the F-16's pilot's responsibility to ensure separation when under ATC control? Doesn't the US have MARSA (Military Accepts Responsibility for Sepa
by berkut 11y ago
Is it really the F-16's pilot's responsibility to ensure separation when under ATC control?
Doesn't the US have MARSA (Military Accepts Responsibility for Separation of Aircraft) rules that military flights can occasionally use, and which point they are then fully responsible, but otherwise I thought they'd still have to generally follow ATC directions.
- ubernostrum 11y agoIs it really the F-16's pilot's responsibility to ensure separation when under ATC control? Yes: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9965658 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9965658
- berkut 11y agoThat post doesn't really prove anything: obviously, if you can see you're heading towards another aircraft and it's likely you'll collide, you'll take evasive action irrespective of ATC control. I was talking more about deciding which flight level to use and general legal responsibility. Unless the F-16 pilot turned on his radar or could see other aircraft, how does he know exactly what other aircraft there are. Admittedly, ATC only generally knows squarked aircraft, but this is generally a good picture of what's happening, and will probably be more complete a picture than what the F-16 has access to under non-military conditions (AWACS, datalink, etc).
- ubernostrum 11y agoATC provides a lot of guidance, but in the end responsibility for the safety of the aircraft rests with the pilot in command. If you collide with another aircraft and say "well, it can't be my fault because ATC didn't tell me there was traffic", you are not going to have a good time.