ADVERTISEMENT

OT: any pilots here....RE: DC plane crash...

T

ttowncoug

Hall Of Fame
Sep 9, 2001
5,153
1,076
113
Curious why in the world they would let a helicopter take off in "direct landing lanes" from the tower.

Also curious if the plane itself has any "warning lights" going off that there is a helicopter in front of you.

Seems like a massive mistake and I suspect this is going to point to tragic mistake by air traffic control.
 
ttowncoug said:
Curious why in the world they would let a helicopter take off in "direct landing lanes" from the tower.

Also curious if the plane itself has any "warning lights" going off that there is a helicopter in front of you.

Seems like a massive mistake and I suspect this is going to point to tragic mistake by air traffic control.
Click to expand...
Potentially a mistake by multiple parties. Gotta think this is the helicopters fault in the air, a lot easier to maneuver a helicopter than a passenger jet.
 
ttowncoug said:
Curious why in the world they would let a helicopter take off in "direct landing lanes" from the tower.

Also curious if the plane itself has any "warning lights" going off that there is a helicopter in front of you.

Seems like a massive mistake and I suspect this is going to point to tragic mistake by air traffic control.
Click to expand...
Well our President wasted no time in blaming Biden and Obama and DEI hiring for this tragedy. While they were/are still fishing bodies out of the water. And of course, Vance and Hegseth chimed in with the same.

 
Loyal Coug1 said:
Well our President wasted no time in blaming Biden and Obama and DEI hiring for this tragedy. While they were/are still fishing bodies out of the water. And of course, Vance and Hegseth chimed in with the same.

Click to expand...
Well Forrest Trump will fix this too.
 
ttowncoug said:
Curious why in the world they would let a helicopter take off in "direct landing lanes" from the tower.

Also curious if the plane itself has any "warning lights" going off that there is a helicopter in front of you.

Seems like a massive mistake and I suspect this is going to point to tragic mistake by air traffic control.
Click to expand...
I really like to watch the show called "Air Disasters", where they follow/re-enact the causes of plane crashes. Very interesting, and amazing how sometimes they are able to sift through all the wreckage and use cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder, medical and training records, weather data, etc to determine the causes. Often rather than being one single thing it is instead a series of events that combine to bring the plane down. I think it is on the National Geographic channel if you want to catch the re-runs.

I saw a graphic overlay onto like Google Earth showing the flight path of both aircraft. The chopper appeared to have been on a path following the river, it doesn't appear that it had just "taken off" right in the landing path.
There is no indication I have seen or heard of at this time that there was any kind of malfunction aboard the craft that would cause the crash.

Thoughts of possible factors:
  • Chopper flying at unusual height for the area (under 100' was stated as normal for the area)
  • Chopper pilots possibly using night vision goggles which can be problematic in urban areas
  • Chopper pilots looking at wrong plane after being told to avoid air traffic
  • Air Traffic Control not noticing chopper at wrong height
  • ATC not giving specific instruction to chopper about traffic location ("Incoming traffic at your 10:00")
  • Late change of runway from ATC
  • Late runway change may have caused plane to bank and be less visible to chopper
  • Allowing air traffic to cross landing and takeoff traffic too close to the airport
  • Too much traffic at the airport, creating overload on ATC
  • Something else entirely
I hope this is one where they can quickly identify any and all factors and take immediate steps to eliminate all factors. Such a tragedy, should never have happened.
 
Not so sure this looks like an ATC problem anymore. I just read a transcript of their traffic, and they confirmed with the helicopter that they could see the plane, then told them to maintain visual contact and fly behind it. I'm thinking that "maintain visual contact" part got missed.

Hard to imagine that a passenger plane at this altitude on approach to land was going to have made sudden moves, and it's certainly on a predictable path. Seems like it's incumbent on the helicopter at that point to stay out of the way.

Doesn't seem likely that the black boxes on the plane are likely to be much help. Maybe there will be some sort of comment on the cockpit voice recorder, but the flight data is just going to confirm that the plane's systems suddenly went batshit. I don't know if there are data recorders on a military helicopter, and if not...it might be that we never really get an explanation.
 
95coug said:
Not so sure this looks like an ATC problem anymore. I just read a transcript of their traffic, and they confirmed with the helicopter that they could see the plane, then told them to maintain visual contact and fly behind it. I'm thinking that "maintain visual contact" part got missed.

Hard to imagine that a passenger plane at this altitude on approach to land was going to have made sudden moves, and it's certainly on a predictable path. Seems like it's incumbent on the helicopter at that point to stay out of the way.

Doesn't seem likely that the black boxes on the plane are likely to be much help. Maybe there will be some sort of comment on the cockpit voice recorder, but the flight data is just going to confirm that the plane's systems suddenly went batshit. I don't know if there are data recorders on a military helicopter, and if not...it might be that we never really get an explanation.
Click to expand...
There was another plane in the air at that time. The helo may have identified a plane other than the one they collided with. With the reports of the chopper crew wearing NVG's, I think they would restrict vision a fair amount, giving some tunnel vision. Not saying that is the primary cause, way to early for conclusions, just saying that it may have been a contributing factor.
 
Stretch 74 said:
There was another plane in the air at that time. The helo may have identified a plane other than the one they collided with. With the reports of the chopper crew wearing NVG's, I think they would restrict vision a fair amount, giving some tunnel vision. Not saying that is the primary cause, way to early for conclusions, just saying that it may have been a contributing factor.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what I heard was the going conclusion given the current known information today. The helicopter identified a plane via their lights, but it was the wrong plane. The night goggles likely playing a role. I'm assuming the only instruments the helicopter was using for the exercise were the night goggles?

This was predicted at Reagan, avoidable, and a tragic shame.
 
Stretch 74 said:
There was another plane in the air at that time. The helo may have identified a plane other than the one they collided with. With the reports of the chopper crew wearing NVG's, I think they would restrict vision a fair amount, giving some tunnel vision. Not saying that is the primary cause, way to early for conclusions, just saying that it may have been a contributing factor.
Click to expand...
Link below showing the flight paths of the aircraft. Lots of WTF's. At one point the aircraft were headed right at each other, the plane turns toward the runway, and the Blackhawk turns right into the plane's new path. WTH was the Blackhawk doing anywhere near a busy international airport in the first place? And then to turn towards the landing approach of the airport?

 
WillieThePimp said:
imagine if you had family on that flight and our loser Presidente diminished your loss by politicizing it to appeal to his base of wackos.
Click to expand...
I think even our Trump-loving friend Stretch will agree that for that POS to jump on the "air" waves and post that shit is just F-ing disgraceful. Too bad it wasn't Marine One. I mean how can any decent human being, as bodies are being fished out of the water, come out and blame the hiring practices of a President 8 years out of office? As the evidence increasingly suggests it was the Blackhawk's fault. So who's next to blame? Mark Milley?

And I don't typically reply to 5591, but in this case, F-you asshole. What a POS you must be in real life.
 
Loyal Coug1 said:
I think even our Trump-loving friend Stretch will agree that for that POS to jump on the "air" waves and post that shit is just F-ing disgraceful. Too bad it wasn't Marine One. I mean how can any decent human being, as bodies are being fished out of the water, come out and blame the hiring practices of a President 8 years out of office? As the evidence increasingly suggests it was the Blackhawk's fault. So who's next to blame? Mark Milley?

And I don't typically reply to 5591, but in this case, F-you asshole. What a POS you must be in real life.
Click to expand...
You wanna bet? Stretch, Uber, Gibbons, and the gang coming in hot with Hunter controlling ATC from his laptop.
 
SaveFerris said:
That's exactly what I heard was the going conclusion given the current known information today. The helicopter identified a plane via their lights, but it was the wrong plane. The night goggles likely playing a role. I'm assuming the only instruments the helicopter was using for the exercise were the night goggles?

This was predicted at Reagan, avoidable, and a tragic shame.
Click to expand...
There was an article by John Solomon posted on RCP today about a 2023 (?) study on the marked increase of near misses. So, yeah-predicted and unable to avoid an incident like this from eventually happening. We can only put off the odds for so long. Let's hope it is a long, long time before we have another one of these crashes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cougini5591
Coug90 said:
You wanna bet? Stretch, Uber, Gibbons, and the gang coming in hot with Hunter controlling ATC from his laptop.
Click to expand...
Of course it is Hunter Biden. Heck he was making 50k at Barisma, which is 1/5 the daily interest on Jared's 2 billion dollar fund....but yeah it is Hunter's fault. Probably did coke with the pilot before they went up.
 
Clearly the army helicopter was the one who made the mistake. My point it seems like some sort of a "no fly zone" by the army helicopter would make sense. You don't see helicopters hoovering around Burien where the planes are landing. This seems so avoidable and is truly tragic. No reason it should have happened.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KRUSTYtheCOUG
Coug90 said:
You wanna bet? Stretch, Uber, Gibbons, and the gang coming in hot with Hunter controlling ATC from his laptop.
Click to expand...
Nah. I'm sure that laptop has been all gummed up with cocaine, lube, bodily fluids and the Big Guy's prune juice for many years. You could ask the 51 former intelligence officials that signed that letter to confirm though.
 
ttowncoug said:
Clearly the army helicopter was the one who made the mistake. My point it seems like some sort of a "no fly zone" by the army helicopter would make sense. You don't see helicopters hoovering around Burien where the planes are landing. This seems so avoidable and is truly tragic. No reason it should have happened.
Click to expand...
SeaTac isn't right by the White House, Capitol, Pentagon, and all the other restricted airspace close to DCA. The air traffic control seems to have worked for the 23+ years after 9-11 in which a lot of airspace was shut down.

For something that catastrophic a number of things must have went bad.
 
ttowncoug said:
Clearly the army helicopter was the one who made the mistake. My point it seems like some sort of a "no fly zone" by the army helicopter would make sense. You don't see helicopters hoovering around Burien where the planes are landing. This seems so avoidable and is truly tragic. No reason it should have happened.
Click to expand...
This appears to be the case. Per NYT the helicopter crew requested and was granted “visual separation” from the incoming plane which means the helicopter crew took “responsibility for maintaining a safe distance from the jet”. A minute later the control tower asked the helicopter if they had a visual on the jet and to pass behind it. The helicopter crew responded with “aircraft is in sight”.
 
CougEd said:
Of course it is Hunter Biden. Heck he was making 50k at Barisma, which is 1/5 the daily interest on Jared's 2 billion dollar fund....but yeah it is Hunter's fault. Probably did coke with the pilot before they went up.
Click to expand...
Are you talking about Jared’s fund that as of September 2024 charged 112 million in fees but delivered zero profits to investors?

Hunter Biden’s laptop, Hunter Biden’s laptop, Polly want a cracker.
 
WillieThePimp said:
This appears to be the case. Per NYT the helicopter crew requested and was granted “visual separation” from the incoming plane which means the helicopter crew took “responsibility for maintaining a safe distance from the jet”. A minute later the control tower asked the helicopter if they had a visual on the jet and to pass behind it. The helicopter crew responded with “aircraft is in sight”.
Click to expand...
Again, my big question is why an Army helicopter on some sort of training exercise out of Norfolk VA was anywhere near Reagan Airport? And approaching plane or not, why did they turn (apparently) right into the landing airspace?
 
Loyal Coug1 said:
Again, my big question is why an Army helicopter on some sort of training exercise out of Norfolk VA was anywhere near Reagan Airport? And approaching plane or not, why did they turn (apparently) right into the landing airspace?
Click to expand...
Doh - just saw the earlier posts by Stretch and SaveFerris - seriously have to wonder if the helicopter crew was tracking the wrong plane as I think there was another plane in front of the one that got hit.

That said your questions frame the bigger issue. Army helicopters Operating that close to Reagan’s flight path just seems like an accident waiting to happen. Probably a very small probability enhanced by potential encounters over time and possibly overworked air-traffic controllers and human error.
 
WillieThePimp said:
Doh - just saw the earlier posts by Stretch and SaveFerris - seriously have to wonder if the helicopter crew was tracking the wrong plane as I think there was another plane in front of the one that got hit.

That said your questions frame the bigger issue. Army helicopters Operating that close to Reagan’s flight path just seems like an accident waiting to happen. Probably a very small probability enhanced by potential encounters over time and possibly overworked air-traffic controllers and human error.
Click to expand...
Listened to a a former pilot Anthony Roman discuss the crash. He said he had a similar event where his plane nearly collided with a helicopter. From what he saw it was a clear night although "extremely dark". At the altitude of the crash the plane and helicopter crews would be fully focused on the landing and likely wouldn't see surrounding area. Also indicated there is normally 1 ATC for the military and 1 for the civilian flight. In this case there was 1 ATC to manage both the military and civilian flight. Having only 1 ATC is legal.

I heard another guy talk about instruments to detect aircraft in the area but at the altitude of the crash it can return a lot of false positives. Anyway, still a lot of speculation at this point.
 
SaveFerris said:
Listened to a a former pilot Anthony Roman discuss the crash. He said he had a similar event where his plane nearly collided with a helicopter. From what he saw it was a clear night although "extremely dark". At the altitude of the crash the plane and helicopter crews would be fully focused on the landing and likely wouldn't see surrounding area. Also indicated there is normally 1 ATC for the military and 1 for the civilian flight. In this case there was 1 ATC to manage both the military and civilian flight. Having only 1 ATC is legal.

I heard another guy talk about instruments to detect aircraft in the area but at the altitude of the crash it can return a lot of false positives. Anyway, still a lot of speculation at this point.
Click to expand...
And now we learn that a Republic Airways flight had to abort its landing at Reagan due to a helicopter. Happened just 24 hours before this collision.
 
SOme additional factors to include in the speculation:
  • Runways at Reagan are only 7,000 feet - a little over half the length of many airports, which makes it challenging for pilots. There's little room for error and they need to be laser-focused on their approach in order to avoid overshooting.
  • Some pilots say that with the city in the background, it is not difficult to lose sight of the lights of an approaching plane. Especially if it's approaching you and not moving across your horizon.
  • The approved helicopter flight corridor here actually intersects with the approach corridor for jets. Helicopters are supposed to stay below 200 feet (which seems pretty insanely low) and jets are supposed to stay above 500. Both of them get a fudge factor of 75 feet....so might only be separated by 150 feet before anyone even blinks. Given their speed and rate of descent, 150 feet of separation is effectively no separation.
Here's one I just noted myself - I looked at the flight radar track for the commercial flight (FlightRadar 24). Looks like it got just below 500 feet before the descent turned into a plummet. There was no track of the helicopter. I'm not sure exactly what the flight trackers work on, but in this corridor, even military helicopters are supposed to have a transponder that's visible to ATC and other flights. Maybe - just maybe - they either didn't have one, or didn't turn it on.

As for the theory of the other plane - the flight tracks don't show another one in proximity. There was a flight that took off from Reagan shortly before the accident, bound for Chicago...but it took off to the north, and was barely off the runway when the CRJ700 went over the riverbank. There was another on approach to Reagan, coming from New Orleans, that was miles to the south over Alexandria. There does not appear to have been anything closer.
 
95coug said:
SOme additional factors to include in the speculation:
  • Runways at Reagan are only 7,000 feet - a little over half the length of many airports,
  • The approved helicopter flight corridor here actually intersects with the approach corridor for jets.

Hmmm. Couple of thoughts:
Click to expand...
First, while I usually (OK occasionally) :) take 95's word as fact, I had to look up this Reagan runway length of 7,000 feet. Confirmed at least by the article below (6,869 per usatoday). WTF? I guess smaller international airports can get away with runways that length. For instance, the recently expanded Pullman-Moscow International Airport only has a runway length of 7,101, feet. Cropduster and Schweitzer jet size, basically. Oh wait - Reagan, 819 flights/day: 6,869 feet. M-P Internat'l, 3 flights plus cropdusters and Schweitzer: 7,101 feet.

Second, why in the F is there an "approved helicopter flight corridor" in the first place? They should not be anywhere around the F-ing landing approach, EVER. And while Reagan accepts helicopter traffic (stupid?) this military helicopter sure as shit wasn't landing there.

 
Loyal Coug1 said:
First, while I usually (OK occasionally) :) take 95's word as fact, I had to look up this Reagan runway length of 7,000 feet. Confirmed at least by the article below (6,869 per usatoday). WTF? I guess smaller international airports can get away with runways that length. For instance, the recently expanded Pullman-Moscow International Airport only has a runway length of 7,101, feet. Cropduster and Schweitzer jet size, basically. Oh wait - Reagan, 819 flights/day: 6,869 feet. M-P Internat'l, 3 flights plus cropdusters and Schweitzer: 7,101 feet.

Second, why in the F is there an "approved helicopter flight corridor" in the first place? They should not be anywhere around the F-ing landing approach, EVER. And while Reagan accepts helicopter traffic (stupid?) this military helicopter sure as shit wasn't landing there.

Click to expand...
Yep, it’s a 1940 airport with no room for expansion being used to land jets in one of the busiest airspaces in the country. What could go wrong?
 
95coug said:
Yep, it’s a 1940 airport with no room for expansion being used to land jets in one of the busiest airspaces in the country. What could go wrong?
Click to expand...
Other than military aircraft flying into the landing approach, absolutely nothing could happen. This is a tragic day for sure. Do I need to verify your 1940 figure, or can I rely on it?
 
Loyal Coug1 said:
First, while I usually (OK occasionally) :) take 95's word as fact, I had to look up this Reagan runway length of 7,000 feet. Confirmed at least by the article below (6,869 per usatoday). WTF? I guess smaller international airports can get away with runways that length. For instance, the recently expanded Pullman-Moscow International Airport only has a runway length of 7,101, feet. Cropduster and Schweitzer jet size, basically. Oh wait - Reagan, 819 flights/day: 6,869 feet. M-P Internat'l, 3 flights plus cropdusters and Schweitzer: 7,101 feet.

Second, why in the F is there an "approved helicopter flight corridor" in the first place? They should not be anywhere around the F-ing landing approach, EVER. And while Reagan accepts helicopter traffic (stupid?) this military helicopter sure as shit wasn't landing there.

Click to expand...
Reagan Airport has three runways:
Runway 1/19 is 7169'x150'
Runway 15/33 is 5204'x150'
Runway 4/22 is 5000'x150'
Data provided by airnav.com, very detailed info.

Keep in mind that during the approach the plane was asked if they could switch runways at the last minute. Plane confirmed that they could land on shorter runway #33. 2200' shorter.

I bet that the ATC guy is going to have trouble sleeping for a long time. He has to be second guessing himself about the whole situation.
 
Stretch 74 said:
Reagan Airport has three runways:
Runway 1/19 is 7169'x150'
Runway 15/33 is 5204'x150'
Runway 4/22 is 5000'x150'
Data provided by airnav.com, very detailed info.

Keep in mind that during the approach the plane was asked if they could switch runways at the last minute. Plane confirmed that they could land on shorter runway #33. 2200' shorter.

I bet that the ATC guy is going to have trouble sleeping for a long time. He has to be second guessing himself about the whole situation.
Click to expand...
I stand corrected on the main runway length. 7.169 feet. Goddam internet. Can't rely on it for anything. So 68 feet longer than Pullman-Moscow International Airport.

And why the F would a commercial jet need to switch runways "at the last minute"? In deference to a military helicopter? More to that (?) - although as usual I doubt the veracity of anything you say. :) As opposed to others here, for which I know that every word out of their keyboards is utter nonsense, lies and/or BS. And plain stupidity. Or early onset dementia as Gibby has proven.

Oh and c'mon Stretch, what did you think about your feckless leader's comments on the crash blaming Obama, Biden and DEI as bodies were being pulled out of the frigid river? It's OK to say that it was a classless bunch of shit.
 
Loyal Coug1 said:
First, while I usually (OK occasionally) :) take 95's word as fact, I had to look up this Reagan runway length of 7,000 feet. Confirmed at least by the article below (6,869 per usatoday). WTF? I guess smaller international airports can get away with runways that length. For instance, the recently expanded Pullman-Moscow International Airport only has a runway length of 7,101, feet. Cropduster and Schweitzer jet size, basically. Oh wait - Reagan, 819 flights/day: 6,869 feet. M-P Internat'l, 3 flights plus cropdusters and Schweitzer: 7,101 feet.

Second, why in the F is there an "approved helicopter flight corridor" in the first place? They should not be anywhere around the F-ing landing approach, EVER. And while Reagan accepts helicopter traffic (stupid?) this military helicopter sure as shit wasn't landing there.

Click to expand...
No wide bodies at DCA and the only international flights are to and from Canada.
DCA is a really neat airport to be honest, and the approach is pretty awesome right over the Potomac with landmarks all around you. And it’s short train ride to anywhere you would want to go.

There is all kinds of military installations close by, and there is a lot of restricted airspace. So, why is there a helicopter corridor? Because there is no where else for a helicopter corridor to be.
 
dgibbons said:
No wide bodies at DCA and the only international flights are to and from Canada.
DCA is a really neat airport to be honest, and the approach is pretty awesome right over the Potomac with landmarks all around you. And it’s short train ride to anywhere you would want to go.

There is all kinds of military installations close by, and there is a lot of restricted airspace. So, why is there a helicopter corridor? Because there is no where else for a helicopter corridor to be.
Click to expand...
Well I think there are 61 people who would disagree with your described awesomeness of the approach over the Potomac. What would possess you to say something like that right now?

And there is nowhere else for a helicopter corridor to be other than right in the landing approach of a major airport? How about anywhere else but that? WTF was a military training flight doing there? No where else to go train?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back