Or when the Royal Swiss Navy attacked Pearl Harbor?
Can you give me the time stamps for the audio involved that indicate this was due to a post-9/11 change, or that a “VIP” was training, or that Larry’s dying mom would be denied that route?
Ah…aviation safety is all about emotion, not procedures or facts. I understand now.
That would be the traffic in sight part
I didn’t think you could.
Well there was a comment earlier about how this route isn’t supposed to be used with 33 arrivals. As bad as the media reports have been, I’d take that with a grain of salt though. It’s possible but I’d think ATC would’ve squashed the route 4 request in a heartbeat if that were true.
Yes, these routes do exist and yes indeed ,airline pilots do need to pay attention when landing parallel but my point is that we should be in the business of minimizing risks and having a route like that being accessible to anyone for any reason is the very opposite of minimizing risks.
Maintaining visual separation didn't allow the helicopter pilots to go off route and bust altitude. That's unless they were avoiding traffic. These pilots weren't avoiding anything because they were likely looking at / 'avoiding' the wrong plane that was further away.
I have no idea what you're saying.
The route hugs the eastern edge of the Potomac. For some reason, that helicopter was a little west and gained about 150' of altitude right before impact. Watch Blanco Lirio for confirmation of that.
Do your night training when there are no passenger jets landing.
I agree and am confused. It seems like everyone here and on TV are saying the Helo route was 200 or below. Yet the PAT25 was well above that for the crash and leading up to it.
Maybe they were concerned, so climbed above it? Emergency authority and all that?
Might not have seen the correct jet or misjudged closing rate. Or another one of those optical illusion scenarios like this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1965_Carmel_mid-air_collision
And when are they supposed to do that? They’ve got quiet hour / noise abatement rules, fuel restriction times in effect at Davison AAF. They’ve got to get off at a decent time to get back before those restrictions are in place.
Which was my point earlier. Maintaining visual separation is a fallacy. Especially at night. It's not the first time it's gone horribly wrong. Sure there's seemingly other factors in play. But 150 foot visual separation at night is playing a 110 knot game of chicken.
An RJ on final for 01 in front of the mishap aircraft was asked if they would accept a visual for 33, and the reply was "unable." ATC immediately cleared them to land on 01.
100% Agree on the understaffing and night time issues. I could be wrong, but I understand TCAS is silenced below 500ft.
The controller told PAT25 "PAT 25, traffic just south of the Woodrow Bridge, a CRJ, it's 1200 feet setting up for runway 33."
Don’t care about noise restriction at Davidson AF or if Davidson AF even exists.
It's not a "controller on duty" ATC issue, it's a systemic ATC issue with the procedures that seem to be in place that put traffic in close proximity in this particular area.
It's very easy to spot traffic at night if it's near or above your altitude. It's much harder to spot if it's mixed in with a billion city lights, unless there's relative motion. In the case of a mid-air about to happen, there's no relative motion.
Agreed.
Again, I don't view this as "lazy" on the part of the controllers. It's a procedure that appears to be in constant use, and I'm sure it isn't something that was made up on the fly. I'd love to see what the LOA binder in DCA tower has in it.
The "jinking" is most likely an artefact of the not-very-accurate MLAT positioning system that sites like Flightaware use to track non-ADS-B flights like the helicopter, rather than being reflective of the physical reality.
Who ignored it?
Why are you so obsessed with the VIP thing? This was not a VIP flight, there were no VIPs on board. Assuming it was correctly reported as a proficiency check flight, it was probably a standard Army currency requirement for chopper pilots; this one just happened to be in a squadron that often carries VIPs.
Well, this one certainly got a "smack"... (Too soon?)
I see it as there were a bunch of levels of safety in the system, and because of one reason or another they were not effective at the time of the crash.
Serious questions here.
This has not been confirmed beyond people like you saying it to be true. Do you have any actual authoritative source showing this to be true?
In today's world, we are nearly to the point where looking at the screen would be a better use of time. Sort of like when backup cameras in cars started showing up; people complained they weren't as good as your head on a swivel. But overall, they are vastly superior, and supply most of the information needed.
That MIGHT be true when they do what they’re supposed to, but polishing backup camera lenses every time you get in the car takes way more time than putting your head on a swivel.
