F/A-18's and Citation Jet Near-Collision at Austin

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 พ.ย. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 20

  • @RebeccaLerch
    @RebeccaLerch 13 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

    Flying with big Guns. Thanks for all your Services ❤

  • @shawon_rahaman
    @shawon_rahaman 15 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

    Great content

  • @n108bg
    @n108bg 15 วันที่ผ่านมา +7

    First picture is a pair of SU-24s in formation, not f-18s

  • @kevinsummers9449
    @kevinsummers9449 15 วันที่ผ่านมา +4

    Gotta stay 100% all the time
    Guys.

  • @fhuber7507
    @fhuber7507 15 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    Bad idea to give pilot discretion for that "break" while close above other traffic.Get better separation first.

  • @FallenAngel53
    @FallenAngel53 15 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    Dont understand

  • @FallenAngel53
    @FallenAngel53 15 วันที่ผ่านมา +4

    First 🍪 🍪

  • @Arthur-ke9vz
    @Arthur-ke9vz 15 วันที่ผ่านมา +4

    So who made the mistake?

    • @Mentaloow
      @Mentaloow 15 วันที่ผ่านมา +11

      The ATC obviously. He’s allowed two FA18 to roam free, any speed any altitude, on top of the airport - while there was a poor citizen trying to land right here and there.

    • @brandspro
      @brandspro 15 วันที่ผ่านมา +8

      And two hotdogging F-18s that thought a busy commercial airport was a good place to show off. And make no mistake, that’s what this was.

    • @rogerburdette8040
      @rogerburdette8040 15 วันที่ผ่านมา +4

      @@brandspro Absolutely not the "hotdogging F-18s. They made a request that was approved by the controller that he didn't understand. From over 36 years of ATC experience, I would have clarified the request before just approving it. Controllers fault.

    • @DragNetJoe
      @DragNetJoe 15 วันที่ผ่านมา +7

      @@rogerburdette8040 The controller approved something he didn't understand and the FA-18s asked for something they shouldn't have asked for and isn't really IAW FAR/AIM or 3710.7, and ultimately they broke at the approach end when told to break at the departure end. There is really no such thing as unrestricted speed and altitude for the break. ATC doesn't have that authority. Military aircraft get a waiver of maximum speed below 10,000 (normally 250kts waived IAW flight manual, usually to 300kts). Inside the class D of a military airfield you are cleared IAW the field course rules (maybe 350kts). There is no reason to go to burner unless you lost an engine or something like that. The call for "burner if you need it" gives away that this was unnecessary.

  • @nadineb2726
    @nadineb2726 15 วันที่ผ่านมา +3

    Citations and Cessna's seemed to be a problem at a lot of airports in a lot of different areas. It's concerning

    • @hewhohasnoidentity4377
      @hewhohasnoidentity4377 15 วันที่ผ่านมา +5

      This comment wins the Internet! You manage to conflate a singular rare incident at one airport to being a frequent issue at many airports. You imply blame on an aircraft that did nothing wrong. You even prove your lack of knowledge about anything you are speaking of by naming the model of the aircraft and the manufacturer as if they are different aircraft.
      That is like saying F150s and Fords get in a lot of crashes in a lot of intersections in a lot of different areas.

    • @nadineb2726
      @nadineb2726 15 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @hewhohasnoidentity4377 oh it's not a single incident don't convince yourself of that. Also the dei hires as far as commercial airliners is concerning as well. Just go stick your head back in the sand you'll be okay

    • @nadineb2726
      @nadineb2726 15 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @hewhohasnoidentity4377 and you like your own comment which speaks volumes to your mental. Keep it moving crazy

  • @SnakeWhite-i9q
    @SnakeWhite-i9q 6 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Bruh litterally over 14 months old. Get a life kid find something new and stop taking crap from other channels. Plus use the correct models.