Crash at Reagan National Airport, DC. Small aircraft down in the Potomac.

KE5BM said:
I'm really not understanding y'all's points. Fact of the matter is - planes gotta fly, pilots (especially military) gotta train. What we have here is a very unfortunate accident. Like nearly ALL accidents, it could probably have been avoided. Now we wait for the professionals to do what they do and make whatever changes may be necessary. Thousands die everyday from avoidable accidents.
Click to expand...
Largely agree with your assessment but I do question why that heli route even exists. So far it seems either it should have been NA when landing Runway 1 or 33, but there is no public evidence afaik of that policy existing (and you still seemingly have some conflicts for the opposing runways), or it requires ATC to actively slot helis between landing traffic as vertical separation of 500’ is seemingly not assured. It also seems PAT has a history of using visual separation to be able to shorten flight times.

It seems that a significant portion of the users of that heli route are PAT whose primary job is to fly big wigs around. Is their time so valuable that they *have* to fly down the river and can’t circumnavigate a few miles to stay out of the very close in final approach path to this riverside airport?

I don’t really buy that this was actually a “continuity of government” training mission. In such a scenario, if they have enough knowledge of an attack and time to get a heli to the pentagon, they would have enough time to divert traffic from DCA so it isn’t a factor (either for the heli pickup or a threat to the capitol). It doesn’t seem like forcing PAT to weave between normal and scheduled landing traffic is actually relevant or needed to simulate “continuity of government” conditions. It is, however, needed to simulate transporting General Smith so he doesn’t have to sit in traffic or whatever…

Maybe there’s a perfectly rational and more defensible reason that PAT has to fly down the river, but so far I’m not really seeing it.
 
Roller said:
Sometimes, it’s time to stop making excuses and own up to the mistakes with some damn honor. Honor ain't just a slogan, it’s for taking responsibility.
Click to expand...
I question your understanding of that H word that rolls off your tongue so easily. Nobody is shirking responsibility for anything. Like everybody else has said, wait for the report to come out. You ever lost friends or family to an event like this?
 
KE5BM said:
What would you like to know?
Sincerely,
An Active Servicemember

Aside from that, I'm 100% certain that you hold (or once held and have now retired from) a job with some company/business...maybe even your own that produces a product or service that someone purchases. Or you wouldn't have a job. Therefore, by your logic I should know "a lot more about what goes on inside <insert your business here>" because I, as the customer contribute to your salary.



I'm guessing you've never worked in a job where you use the services or buy the product your outfit produces? Or a product that your outfit supports?

I'm really not understanding y'all's points. Fact of the matter is - planes gotta fly, pilots (especially military) gotta train. What we have here is a very unfortunate accident. Like nearly ALL accidents, it could probably have been avoided. Now we wait for the professionals to do what they do and make whatever changes may be necessary. Thousands die everyday from avoidable accidents.

This whole perspective of "what were they doing there, anyway" reminds me of an instance in the Coast Guard back in 2011. Station Washington, DC was conducting routine small boat tactics training on the Potomoc River. Some radio wizard heard the training callouts and freaked out thinking there was a real attack that the Coast Guard was defending us from. Called 911, called the media. For about 6 hours, all the news networks were freaking out "WHY WOULD THEY BE DOING THIS!?" Oh, did I mention it was September 11th of that year? It didn't matter to us. We train when/however we can to ensure we're ready for the worst day imaginable.

Those pilots don't just train for that particular mission they're assigned to today...they're training and honing their skills for any mission they will fly in that aircraft for the rest of their career.
Click to expand...
Thanks for writing this. I was going to reply with essentially the same thing, but you were much more eloquent.

If @Roller has some sort of business, a customer should be able to get all of his records.

But the irony is, I think @Roller says he flies for a 121 airline. If that’s the case, if we ever bought a ticket on his carrier, or shipped something with his carrier we should be able to ask for all his employment and training records because “I PaY hIs SaLaRy.”

What would even be richer is if he flies for one of the major passenger 121 airlines here in the US… those guys took more money from the government during Covid to stay afloat via the CARES act than any E-4 taking $20 out of the collection plate.
 
MauleSkinner said:
So we’re back to closing DCA to fixed wing?
Click to expand...
Sooner to see the politicians taking the buss service or working on base.

Sluggo63 said:
Thanks for writing this. I was going to reply with essentially the same thing, but you were much more eloquent.

If @Roller has some sort of business, a customer should be able to get all of his records.

But the irony is, I think @Roller says he flies for a 121 airline. If that’s the case, if we ever bought a ticket on his carrier, or shipped something with his carrier we should be able to ask for all his employment and training records because “I PaY hIs SaLaRy.”

What would even be richer is if he flies for one of the major passenger 121 airlines here in the US… those guys took more money from the government during Covid to stay afloat via the CARES act than any E-4 taking $20 out of the collection plate.
Click to expand...

If I screwed up majorly and nailed another aircraft crashing both, you’d have my name, age, hours and every mistake I ever made in my life within a day, max two, complete with reporters trying to interview my family.

I have no doubt about that
 
Last edited:
Flymy47 said:
I question your understanding of that H word that rolls off your tongue so easily. Nobody is shirking responsibility for anything. Like everybody else has said, wait for the report to come out. You ever lost friends or family to an event like this?
Click to expand...


Well now, I reckon you don’t believe just because you’re wearin’ the uniform, you got a lock on the word “honor,” do ya?

Tell me this, why is it that the airline, who’s clearly blameless in this matter, had no qualms about announcin’ the names of their crew, but the folks who caused all this mess seem mighty reluctant to say a word?

Funny how the government’s always quick to tell Main Street there’s nothin' to worry about if we haven’t done a thing wrong, ain’t it?
 
One little thig to keep in mind in this whole "I'm paying you, therefore I should know" pi$$!ng contest: nobody forces the general public to buy an Apple product, an airline ticket, or a piece of clothing. But try not paying your taxes.
 
KE5BM said:
What would you like to know?
Sincerely,
An Active Servicemember

Aside from that, I'm 100% certain that you hold (or once held and have now retired from) a job with some company/business...maybe even your own that produces a product or service that someone purchases. Or you wouldn't have a job. Therefore, by your logic I should know "a lot more about what goes on inside <insert your business here>" because I, as the customer contribute to your salary.



I'm guessing you've never worked in a job where you use the services or buy the product your outfit produces? Or a product that your outfit supports?

I'm really not understanding y'all's points. Fact of the matter is - planes gotta fly, pilots (especially military) gotta train. What we have here is a very unfortunate accident. Like nearly ALL accidents, it could probably have been avoided. Now we wait for the professionals to do what they do and make whatever changes may be necessary. Thousands die everyday from avoidable accidents.

This whole perspective of "what were they doing there, anyway" reminds me of an instance in the Coast Guard back in 2011. Station Washington, DC was conducting routine small boat tactics training on the Potomoc River. Some radio wizard heard the training callouts and freaked out thinking there was a real attack that the Coast Guard was defending us from. Called 911, called the media. For about 6 hours, all the news networks were freaking out "WHY WOULD THEY BE DOING THIS!?" Oh, did I mention it was September 11th of that year? It didn't matter to us. We train when/however we can to ensure we're ready for the worst day imaginable.

Those pilots don't just train for that particular mission they're assigned to today...they're training and honing their skills for any mission they will fly in that aircraft for the rest of their career.
Click to expand...
Personally I don’t really need to know anything …. this was in response to a post a few pages back where someone was stating that DOD will often not reveal anything to other agencies like NTSB etc … thats unhealthy imho as all organizations need some level of outside oversight, especially organizations as powerful ( and costly) as DOD.
 
Timbeck2 said:
I’ll ignore the generalization of all PAT helicopters and focus on the one in question.

ATC: There’s an RJ over the Woodrow Wilson bridge at one thousand two hundred for runway three three.
PAT: Got him in sight can I maintain visual separation?
ATC: Approved
ATC: Hey PAT, you still have him in sight?
ATC: Hey PAT cross behind the RJ.

They saw it, they attempted to correct it and the helicopter still crashed into the RJ. What more could they have done? Imagine the bitching that would go on in this forum, myself included, if controllers second guessed pilots.
Click to expand...

After the prior days antics

“Negative, stay clear DCA delta”
 
Seems to me the heli routes are a valuable asset for a lot of reasons (which I get at least one (t)roller may not get; thanks, Eman, for that “word”).

The light signal idea seems reasonably plausible but I wonder about an even simpler one:

This is happening in Class B: ALL traffic - IFR or VFR - is operating on a clearance. Very similar to taxiing at any towered field. What if use of the heli routes requires a specific clearance (just like a taxi clearance) and, just like a taxi clearance, runway (centerline) crossing requires a clearance as well, with readback required? Specific holding locations and procedures awaiting such clearances would be developed and mapped (even a light signal system would require this part). We’re talking helos exclusively here, so the holds could be adapted accordingly (and the number cleared onto the route would control the volume needing to hold).

At least do this for the most risky routes?
 
Timbeck2 said:
I’ll ignore the generalization of all PAT helicopters and focus on the one in question.

ATC: There’s an RJ over the Woodrow Wilson bridge at one thousand two hundred for runway three three.
PAT: Got him in sight can I maintain visual separation?
ATC: Approved
ATC: Hey PAT, you still have him in sight?
ATC: Hey PAT cross behind the RJ.

They saw it, they attempted to correct it and the helicopter still crashed into the RJ. What more could they have done? Imagine the bitching that would go on in this forum, myself included, if controllers second guessed pilots.
Click to expand...
Maybe give the PAT crew a bit more info like more detailed location and distance based on whatever radar returns they were monitoring - it is hard to say but perhaps having this info would be help them realize that they were looking at the wrong target all along ….
 
Roller said:
Well now, I reckon you don’t believe just because you’re wearin’ the uniform, you got a lock on the word “honor,” do ya?

Tell me this, why is it that the airline, who’s clearly blameless in this matter, had no qualms about announcin’ the names of their crew, but the folks who caused all this mess seem mighty reluctant to say a word?

Funny how the government’s always quick to tell Main Street there’s nothin' to worry about if we haven’t done a thing wrong, ain’t it?
Click to expand...
You reckon wrong, my friend. I haven't worn the uniform for a good long while. But I still know what the word means, because I lived it and breathed it for decades surviving in third world holes, and it'll never leave my body. I did right by Family, God, and Country. I've got nothing left for you.

I ask you again, have you ever lost somebody to a tragedy like this? I have. Carried them out on my aircraft. Kids I trained, pilots who made a mistake, and then gone. We all knew what happened, and there's nothing we could do to change it except wrap our arms around each other and the families. Same thing that's hopefully happening now for the airline victims AND PAT crew families. They all deserve to be remembered. Blame will come in due time, but let the process be completed.

You preach all you want and talk down, but I know what the CVR sounds like when a friend says sorry to his crew right before it ends. So yeah, some of us are maybe a little emotionally attached to something like this with all the stupid crap that's being ran through the "media".

That said, you take your main street conspiracy theories and have fun brother. DOD will be rollin' strong, flying low level, goggles down, through a city near you.

-Flymy47 out!
 
Llewtrah381 said:
I wonder about an even simpler one
Click to expand...
Even simpler. Don't allow visual separation between traffic on Route 4 and traffic landing runway 33.

As you said, everyone in Class B is operating on a clearance and must comply with ATC instructions.

When evaluating a proposed change, ask "Then what?"

i.e. "Eliminate all the helicopter routes around DCA" Then what? Where will those helicopters go and what problems will that create.
 
Larry in TN said:
Then why do approach plates list any runway at all?

A couple of examples of charted visual approaches that serve multiple runways can be found at SFO.

QUIET BRIDGE VISUAL Rwys 28L/R
TIPP TOW VISUAL Rwy 28L/R (Published as two separate charts, one for 28L and one for 28R by Jepps)

Then there is one that serves only one runway.

FMS BRIDGE VISUAL Rwy 28R
Click to expand...
Those are parallel runways. The same Order 8260.61A treats them differently:

d. A CVFP may be developed for multiple parallel runways and depicted on a single approach chart, provided: (1) The CVFP incorporates a common ground track. (2) One common, prominent, visually identifiable landmark is used in the naming convention for the CVFP.​
​
As far as IFR approaches go, IIRC, the convention is to name the runway if it has straight-in minimums, otherwise they give it a letter. But we aren't talking about IFR approaches here; visual approaches have different charting requirements, else why the need for 8260.61A?

You said you used to fly this approach in a simulator, right? Could the simulator have had a field of vision issue that made flying over the river impossible, so they followed the highway as a workaround?
 
AV8R_87 said:
One little thig to keep in mind in this whole "I'm paying you, therefore I should know" pi$$!ng contest: nobody forces the general public to buy an Apple product, an airline ticket, or a piece of clothing. But try not paying your taxes.
Click to expand...
Well that's not true. I've been on govt contracts where I was issued an iPhone. You paid for that.
 
Sooo....they just now recovered all of the victims from the river. My goodness what if someone was alive, but ultimately perished because they were in the water all this time! Perhaps drowned. Why did it take so long to recover them?
 
Princesspilot206 said:
Sooo....they just now recovered all of the victims from the river. My goodness what if someone was alive, but ultimately perished because they were in the water all this time! Perhaps drowned. Why did it take so long to recover them?
Click to expand...
I recall that the divers were down there relatively soon after the collision and determined no one was still alive. Then there's no need to rush recovery if that would increase the danger to the personnel.
 
dtouri and company, re runway 33 visual approach.

I have driven I 295 hundreds of tie when there were airliners on that approach. They all fly it the same, plus or minus about 100 yards.
Just south of the Wilson I 495 bridge, they angle slightly to the east, and establish on 295 northbound.
295 has some minor wiggles, they just average it out.
They are at about a thousand feet, and descending, 295 is ascending slightly.
Just past the Blue Plains and Naval Research station, they start about a standard rate turn to the west, and line up on 33.
As they complete that turn, they are over the river with red over white, and speed set for the weight and runway length.

As a pilot, my driving scan always monitors those planes, and marvel at how nearly identical the paths are.

As a passenger, I have landed on 33, and am very aware how low we are when looking out the right side windows at the ridge we are flying parallel to. VFR it is easy, just follow the Interstate till you need to turn.
 
geezer said:
dtouri and company, re runway 33 visual approach.

I have driven I 295 hundreds of tie when there were airliners on that approach. They all fly it the same, plus or minus about 100 yards.
Just south of the Wilson I 495 bridge, they angle slightly to the east, and establish on 295 northbound.
295 has some minor wiggles, they just average it out.
They are at about a thousand feet, and descending, 295 is ascending slightly.
Just past the Blue Plains and Naval Research station, they start about a standard rate turn to the west, and line up on 33.
As they complete that turn, they are over the river with red over white, and speed set for the weight and runway length.

As a pilot, my driving scan always monitors those planes, and marvel at how nearly identical the paths are.

As a passenger, I have landed on 33, and am very aware how low we are when looking out the right side windows at the ridge we are flying parallel to. VFR it is easy, just follow the Interstate till you need to turn.
Click to expand...
That they do it or that it makes a nicer ride for the passengers and easier for the pilot isn't in dispute, at least by me. My point is that the instructions say follow the river, not some highway. A helicopter crew going the opposite direction along the east shore might expect their called traffic to be doing exactly that and start scanning the wrong piece of sky. Not to mention all the headgear I suppose Army pilots wear, like helmets, goggles, visors, boom mics and having window posts and glareshields blanking out critical areas. It could've been better had they been nose-to-nose and where the chart called for, imo.
 
Princesspilot206 said:
Sooo....they just now recovered all of the victims from the river. My goodness what if someone was alive, but ultimately perished because they were in the water all this time! Perhaps drowned. Why did it take so long to recover them?
Click to expand...
No one could have survived more than an hour at best in that cold water. At that point it becomes a recovery operation. Diving in very cold, murky water, working through mangled wreckage and carefully removing the remains without the divers becoming victims themselves. Plus there aren’t that many people really qualified for that operation. They’re working long shifts, getting phsyically and mentally wiped out, and if they try to rush, mistakes and an accident are bound to happen.

It’s frustrating for the families, but there is no chance that anyone was alive for long. I’m not trying to be rough, just realistic and direct.
 
Flymy47 said:
You reckon wrong, my friend. I haven't worn the uniform for a good long while. But I still know what the word means, because I lived it and breathed it for decades surviving in third world holes, and it'll never leave my body. I did right by Family, God, and Country. I've got nothing left for you.

I ask you again, have you ever lost somebody to a tragedy like this? I have. Carried them out on my aircraft. Kids I trained, pilots who made a mistake, and then gone. We all knew what happened, and there's nothing we could do to change it except wrap our arms around each other and the families. Same thing that's hopefully happening now for the airline victims AND PAT crew families. They all deserve to be remembered. Blame will come in due time, but let the process be completed.

You preach all you want and talk down, but I know what the CVR sounds like when a friend says sorry to his crew right before it ends. So yeah, some of us are maybe a little emotionally attached to something like this with all the stupid crap that's being ran through the "media".

That said, you take your main street conspiracy theories and have fun brother. DOD will be rollin' strong, flying low level, goggles down, through a city near you.

-Flymy47 out!
Click to expand...


Yeah, I have
 
The runway 1 visual approach plate says follow the river.

Changing that clearance to "Visual to runway 33 removes you from the river, as turning inbound from over the river is simply impossible with an airliner. As soon as you accept that runway, you are cleared to leave the river approach, and maneuver to 33.

Do you have access to a runway 33 plate that does literally says "Follow the river to the runway"?
 
Roller said:
Sooner to see the politicians taking the buss service or working on base.



If I screwed up majorly and nailed another aircraft crashing both, you’d have my name, age, hours and every mistake I ever made in my life within a day, max two, complete with reporters trying to interview my family.

I have no doubt about that
Click to expand...
Do/did you fly for a Part 121 carrier that took CARES money during Covid?
 
Last edited:
It is hard to believe those military pilots had never noticed the planes flying over 295, and the complete absence of planes coming up the river at 300 feet, head to head as you call for them to fly.
 
geezer said:
It is hard to believe those military pilots had never noticed the planes flying over 295, and the complete absence of planes coming up the river at 300 feet, head to head as you call for them to fly.
Click to expand...

Eh. I’d ask any fire truck driver, driving a big red or yellow truck with lights blazing and sirens blaring, how often a car will “not see them” and pull right out in front of them.

If the crew of the helo (or either one of them) identified the wrong aircraft in the beginning, confirmation bias would lead them to believe that that aircraft is the one to watch.

I did a few research papers on human factors in aviation in college days. It’s amazing that if one is expecting to see/hear something, the mind will make them see/hear it, regardless of what was actually displayed/orated. And if it’s a group, one confirmation can make the entire group believe they see/hear the same thing.
 
geezer said:
The runway 1 visual approach plate says follow the river.

Changing that clearance to "Visual to runway 33 removes you from the river, as turning inbound from over the river is simply impossible with an airliner. As soon as you accept that runway, you are cleared to leave the river approach, and maneuver to 33.

Do you have access to a runway 33 plate that does literally says "Follow the river to the runway"?
Click to expand...
It says "...follow the Potomac River to the airport." Not to any named runway like other CVFP do in the plan view.

I don't know that the clearance was changed to a "Visual to runway 33", do you? It could have happened, I just don't know if it did. I heard they were cleared for the Mount Vernon Visual and asked to accept/circle to runway 33. That doesn't change the route to the airport in my mind. And what's all this "impossible" stuff with an airliner? It should just depend on indicated airspeed and I've done it in corporate jets myself. In fact, since my last post, I did it in my Redbird TD2 simulator! I started 10 south and pushed the knobs basically to the stops and drove it right to the runway via a tangent course to a bend in the east shore at 160 KIAS all the way to the runway. I'm not saying anybody could do it though. That TD2 is a blitch.

Runway 33 plates are IFR, not the same thing.
 
Watching Dan Millican's update this evening. He played audio from a couple recent near misses of a PAT helo and a RJ. In both cases, the PAT non- chalantly said "traffic in sight, request visual separation" and ATC fired back "VS approved". It certainly sounded like something they had both done a thousand times. I suspect the PAT helos did this every night. The airliners were just part of the scenery to them.

Normalization of deviance.
 
bonefishpete said:
I don't think we'll ever find a definitive answer just like the Korean crash.
Click to expand...
We have two CVRs, two FDRs, ATC radar, and a bajillion camera angles. I don't think it's gonna be too difficult to figure out.
dtuuri said:
That they do it or that it makes a nicer ride for the passengers and easier for the pilot isn't in dispute, at least by me. My point is that the instructions say follow the river, not some highway.
Click to expand...
dtuuri said:
It says "...follow the Potomac River to the airport." Not to any named runway like other CVFP do in the plan view.
Click to expand...
It's called the MOUNT VERNON VISUAL RUNWAY 1. When you're no longer going to runway 1, you're no longer on that procedure and you can maneuver as necessary.
 
Ugh. Some of these media reports are just flat out confusing the public. The female Captain was not “commanding the flight.” She’s a Captain but that means absolutely nothing in the cockpit. The briefed pilot in command for the flight would be the more experienced CW2 IP conducting the eval. The Captain may or may not (remains to be seen) have a pilot in command (PC) sign off. But even if she did, she would not be acting PC or allowed to log PC (military logging) if even on the controls.

Another thing. Yes an H-60 generally flys nose low in cruise flight as do most traditional helicopters. But, the the speeds (104 GS) they were traveling at just prior to impact, they were pretty close to nose level. Wind (320 @10-15) was roughly a crosswind and with the temp / alt at the time, difference between indicated and true AS would be negligible. If I had to guess, at the most they’d be one degree nose low. The nose doesn’t really start to seriously tuck until you get above 140-150 indicated. Even then, it’s only a few degrees below horizon. Point being, the nose wasn’t below the horizon enough to hide an airliner above them.
 
Last edited:
Hi, I have a question for the group and apologize if this has already been covered (I looked)
Would not a simple ADSB-in receiver prevented this tragedy?
I saw one post that said "ADSB wouldn't have helped" but no elaboration and couldn't tell if they were referring to -in or -out.
The reason I ask is ADSB-in has been a game changer for me, since the 2020 mandate. I do not have near the experience of the people on this group (vfr and only 4000 hours), but for me, when a controller calls traffic, it makes it very easy to correlate with the ADSB pic and verify I am looking at the right guy. I think it is a common occurrence to misidentify traffic and while the -in picture is not a panacea and should not be subsituted for a scan outside, it really helps, and given there were two other people on the helo, one of them could have been looking at the ADSB pic and told the pllot they were looking at the wrong traffic.
One might say it is a tactical aircraft and a civil adsb receiver has no place on it, but I would say "not flying your helicopter into an airliner" is part of the tactical mission.
 
Jim K said:
… In both cases, the PAT non- chalantly said "traffic in sight, request visual separation" and ATC fired back "VS approved". It certainly sounded like something they had both done a thousand times.…
Click to expand...

The OB370 podcast I posted speaks to this; it’s specifically in the 7110. One of many things I learned from that episode.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top