i have always been taught to keep my head on a swivel, for all kinds of traffic. i practice right over the old MCAS El Toro, and there is a corridor at 4500′ above there, with all kinds of traffic going by [i smash bugs around 3500']. i was on a spin training hop in a decathalon inside a aerobatic training area and had an extra 300 go by vertical 150′ off the port side [not quite as fast as the F-22]. building solo time in the pattern with 5 other aircraft i made a radio call to prevent someone who started turning final from cutting off the guy in front of him, who was inbound on final from an extended downwind start. he thought he was number 2.

big sky, little airplane.

so after 40 or so hours logged i keep a lookout for the guy not looking out. much like the guy’s who took off on the wrong runway not too long ago, all it takes is a few seconds loss of situational awareness and you are dead. i wonder if the guy in the 182 ever even saw the other guy’s. he was in a big hurry to get a departure, on a route he was most likely familiar with. i’m not sure if he could have picked up the intentions of the 172 on the radio, but with what sounded like a pretty crowded day he should have had better [read: increased] visual/situational awareness.

With the relative closure rates in effect, this really shouldn’t have happened.

Ironically, the opposite is the case. Consider the new Light Sport Airplane (LSA) rules: no medical required, no night training, no hood training, etc.

Regarding hood work, I always said that the worst possible day for hood work was a bright, shiny weekend day when the renters and weekend fliers are out in force. Part of the responsibilty lies with the IFR guys. A 100 hour renter just isn’t going to know what “procedure turn inbound” means. When self-reporting on Unicom, I’d report “6 miles East” rather than referencing the procedure turn, marker, or any IFR term I didn’t think would be understood by a VFR-only pilot.

A lot of VFR piots are also going to be surprised by the straight-in approach inherent in most instrument approaches, and in many cases I’ve seen IFR students approach opposite direction to prevailing traffic because that particular approach is the one they wanted to practice. When flying VFR, I pay particular attention to the extended centerline when making the base leg, looking for a possible straight-in.

When I was out shooting non-precision practice approaches at uncontrolled fields, I’d fly them at 3000′ or so above the traffic pattern and use a “floor” 1000′ above traffic pattern altitude as my “field.” I still got the practice of flying the approach, but didn’t run as much risk of getting mixed up with a guy doing touch & goes.

Precision approaches are easier since they almost always include a control tower.

I do agree that widespread deployment of TCAS would certainly help, and if it weren’t so gosh darned expensive, I’d have it myself in my lowly bug smasher. But the reality is that mid-air collisions between unrelated planes (meaning not flying formation or dog-fighting) is statistically about the lowest item on the totem pole of preventable accidents.

B2, I strongly disagree that all the fun is gone from aviation these days. However, mandating your IRF requirement would go a long way to making that the case.

And finally, I have to disagree with Lex and others: BOTH the 172 and the 182 were at fault for not seeing and avoiding. Had either one of them been paying attention, we wouldn’t be talking about this today. Even if the 172 was IFR, that doesn’t excuse them from the responsibility of traffic avoidance while clear of clouds.