FAA, Pilots Clash on Use of Sight Rule Over Cerritos

Could vigilant pilots--using the “see and avoid” rule to scan for other aircraft--have avoided the fiery 1986 midair collision over Cerritos in which 82 people died?

Probably, Federal Aviation Administration officials say. They contend that the regulation is the best way to separate commercial jetliners from smaller planes not fitted with sophisticated instrument-flying equipment.

No way, counter some aviation experts and many pilots. “It’s antiquated at best,” said airline Capt. Don McClure, head of the Air Line Pilots Assn.’s accident investigations board. “There are physical limitations over what a pilot can do given the duties in the cockpit.”

In Restricted Airspace

It is a lingering controversy that has been rekindled as the civil trial over responsibility for the Aug. 31, 1986, collision between an Aeromexico DC-9 and a small Piper Archer airplane enters its third month. More than 50 lawsuits have been consolidated in the Los Angeles federal court case brought by the families of the crash victims against the FAA, Aeromexico and the estate of William K. Kramer, 53, the pilot of the small plane.

Experts agree that Kramer’s plane was in airspace restricted to only jetliners on approach to Los Angeles International Airport. But his liability is not a major issue since his estate, consisting of a $1-million insurance policy and $20,000 in other assets, will not cover the damages sought by the plaintiffs.

Instead, the plaintiffs have accused the FAA and Aeromexico of gross negligence, hoping to collect millions of dollars from the two defendants.

The trial’s testimony has centered so far around the FAA and whether Walter White, the air traffic controller guiding the DC-9 in the minutes before the accident, saw the Piper Archer on his radar screen. White testified that it was not there.

Several radar experts have testified that data stored in FAA computers shows that Kramer’s plane should have been visible on White’s radar scope. Thus, they said, White was negligent by not advising the jetliner of the small plane.

But now, the FAA has gone on the offensive by calling several experts who have testified in recent days that Kramer and the DC-9’s crew were not vigilant because they apparently did not look out for each other.

If they had been, two experts testified, the pilots involved would have seen each other and avoided a collision.

Flying in Straight Lines

They noted that both planes were flying in straight lines, taking no evasive action, and that the Aeromexico crew made no radio transmissions about other planes in its area for 90 seconds before the crash.

Asked why Kramer, a pilot unfamiliar with the Los Angeles airspace, ended up in airspace reserved for jetliners, FAA witness Bernard Coogan, an accident investigator who has been a pilot for 40 years, replied:

“The only way to account for it is that he was careless. He was not diligent.”

Another FAA witness, John Olson, vice president of flight operations for Braniff International Airways, added that the DC-9’s pilot, Capt. Antonio Valez-Prom, 46, and co-pilot Jose Hector Valencia, 26, also had duties to see and avoid.

“The Aeromexico crew was not vigilant,” Olson concluded. “(If it had been) . . . they would have seen the Piper Archer.”

Given the sunny skies at the time of the accident, the pilots should have seen each other at a distance of 5 to 7 miles and taken evasive action, Olson added.

The FAA’s insistence that the “see and avoid” rule is valid has elicited heated rebuttals that date back to the 1920s, when the regulation was first imposed.

‘Physical Limitations’

“It doesn’t work,” Aeromexico attorney Frank Silane said outside the court. “It has physical limitations with the function of the eye and a pilot’s workload in the cockpit.”

Reminded of Olson’s conclusion about the Aeromexico crew, Silane replied: “It’s easy to say that in a vacuum when you’re not confronted with cockpit duties at the time.”

Chicago lawyer George Archer, who is representing the families of the DC-9’s crew, said that the FAA rule was implemented at a time when planes traveled 100 m.p.h. Now, he said, jetliners move at 500 to 600 m.p.h.

McClure, who has investigated accidents for the pilots association for 17 years, said that pilots have frequently complained that a complete scan of the windshield could take as long as one minute--looking in prescribed sectors for about 10 to 15 seconds each. That’s a particularly long time when a plane may travel one mile in as little as 14 seconds, he said.

Given a jetliner pilot’s other duties, McClure concluded in a telephone interview, “you can’t do both.”

Justice Department attorney Steven J. Riegel, who is representing the FAA, pointed out that there have been adjustments that make the rule applicable today.

For example, the introduction in the early 1970s of traffic control areas, setting aside specific airspace for commercial jetliners over large urban areas, was an important improvement. Los Angeles, which has seen a deluge of small planes competing for airspace with jetliners, was one of the first areas in the country to restrict the use of airspace.

Also, radar control systems have been instituted to help separate planes, especially in heavily congested areas like Los Angeles. These three-level systems track aircraft during takeoffs and landings, approaches and at cruising altitudes.

The case is expected to go to the jury by early March.