Midair at FDK (Frederick, MD)

Jaybird180 said:
It seems that either version makes it appear the Cirrus pilot is at fault.
Click to expand...

It depends how credible the witness on the ground is about a casual observation. Can he really say for certain that the helicopter was not climbing?
 
Wheels said:
I thought the 1300 TPA for the plane was MSL. If the crash happened at 1100-1200 AGL he was still above pattern altitude. That would mean that the helo was way above his altitude and the Cirrus pilot was above his altitude, probably trying to locate the helo before he descended.
Click to expand...

True, I didn't think the report was in AGL, well, if that's the facts, then the helo pilot and CFI got them all killed.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Cirrus pilot is definitely at fault, you can't run over kids just cause they are in the road. Only question is how much blame does the helicopter pilot share? Looks to be > 0
Click to expand...

If the accident happened at 1100-1200AGL, the helo driver is clearly at fault for being off altitude.
 
Henning said:
If the accident happened at 1100-1200AGL, the helo driver is clearly at fault for being off altitude.
Click to expand...

I dont hear him receiving a hard altitude restriction. The helo pattern altitude is also not published in AFD or FAA master record.
 
weilke said:
I dont hear him receiving a hard altitude restriction. The helo pattern altitude is also not published in AFD or FAA master record.
Click to expand...
no....but it is SOP for the Helo guys and it's below the FW. :rolleyes:
 
I don’t believe I would be very good at guessing altitude while looking up at an aviation accident.
I suspect the altitude of both changed quickly.
I doubt I would be able to recognize a few hundred feet of altitude from a ground perspective.
I have an altimeter in my aircraft and listen to ATIS to help me with judging height above the ground.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
no....but it is SOP for the Helo guys and it's below the FW. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

And that's the elephant in the room no one is talking about. Everyone seems so invested in finding pilot fault, that they're not looking at the big picture. The real fault lies with this airport's really stupid SOPs and only partially functional tower.
 
Unwritten rules cause more problems than they solve.
 
Dav8or said:
And that's the elephant in the room no one is talking about. Everyone seems so invested in finding pilot fault, that they're not looking at the big picture. The real fault lies with this airport's really stupid SOPs and only partially functional tower.
Click to expand...

I brought that up first thing, most of the places I have flown into that had regular intermingling rotor and fixed wing ops, this accident would have been impossible because the patterns had at most one crossing of paths that was perpendicular and had several hundred feet of altitude separation. A tower without radar is severely handicapped and in my book should not exist..

I bet the transponder on the helo was off or inop because the tower had ADS-B info and didn't call the traffic for him.
 
Don't mind ClimbnStink. He's not concerned with things like facts, evidence, reason, or intelligence.
 
I can almost guarantee how the NTSB report will read. Lots of analysis of visual sight lines from the relative positions of both aircraft but the final decision: Mutual failure to see and avoid the other aircraft. Contributing cause would be the bone headed air traffic controller.

Not entirely different from when the NTSB collided with the FAA down in Virginia a while back.
 
flyingron said:
I can almost guarantee how the NTSB report will read. Lots of analysis of visual sight lines from the relative positions of both aircraft but the final decision: Mutual failure to see and avoid the other aircraft. Contributing cause would be the bone headed air traffic controller.

Not entirely different from when the NTSB collided with the FAA down in Virginia a while back.
Click to expand...
Ah....yup. +2.:yes:

Only difference there is that with the VA accident....the Piper (who was squawking a Potomac code) was hit from behind by the Bonanza.....with no warning from Potomac approach....well, he was warned, but there was roughly a 20 sec delay....following the impact. :mad2:
 
Last edited:
Checkout_my_Six said:
Ah....yup. +2.:yes:

Only difference there is that with the VA accident....the Piper (who was squawking a Potomac code) was hit from behind by the Bonanza.....with no warning from Potomac approach....well, he was warned, but there was roughly a 20 sec delay....following the impact. :mad2:
Click to expand...

I didn't say that the the mechanism was the same, just that the conclusions: mutual failure to see and avoid and contributing factors from ATC were going to be the result.

But since you mentioned it, you got it wrong. The aircraft were converging at a fairly shallow angle. While the Beech was going faster, it didn't "hit the Piper from behind." In fact, the Piper's prop chopped into the Bo right behind the pilot seats.

Here are pictures from the TSB report on that accident showing where they should have been able to observe each other 37 seconds before impact.

From the Bonanza:
A12H0001-appex-c.png


From the Piper:
A12H0001-appex-c-2.png
 
yes....it was from behind the Piper. The Bo was in a climbing turn....and climbed up into the Piper from behind.....and the Piper cut the tail off of the Bo. Let's see those animations few seconds before impact.:wink2:

TR....the man flying the Piper is a good friend of mine.
 
Last edited:
If anyone believes this can't happen to themselves because they are so vigilant are fooling themselves. The problem with collision situations is that we spot motion, and one of the factors required for a collision is that the object stays in the same spot relative to you, it's just getting bigger. It's easy to spot traffic that will miss you, much more difficult to spot traffic that will hit you.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
If anyone believes this can't happen to themselves because they are so vigilant are fooling themselves. The problem with collision situations is that we spot motion, and one of the factors required for a collision is that the object stays in the same spot relative to you, it's just getting bigger. It's easy to spot traffic that will miss you, much more difficult to spot traffic that will hit you.
Click to expand...
Exactly. See and avoid won't save you, electronics won't save you, radios won't save you, and ATC certainly will not save you. If you can't take dying stay in the kitchen.
 
Henning said:
If anyone believes this can't happen to themselves because they are so vigilant are fooling themselves. The problem with collision situations is that we spot motion, and one of the factors required for a collision is that the object stays in the same spot relative to you, it's just getting bigger. It's easy to spot traffic that will miss you, much more difficult to spot traffic that will hit you.
Click to expand...

Especially when your windshield is dirty!
 
My perspective is that traffic can be very hard to see, so expecting people to will always result in these kinds of tragedies. When you don't have TAS you think you're doing a pretty good job looking out the window, IMO you are not. With TAS there are so many targets that you never see. Even when the target is ID and you are looking in the exact right place for them they can be hard to spot. The first aircraft I had with TAS changed my perceptions about see and avoid. I would like to see a busy airport like FDK with radar.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Exactly. See and avoid won't save you, electronics won't save you, radios won't save you, and ATC certainly will not save you. If you can't take dying stay in the kitchen.
Click to expand...

That's not the point he is trying to make. It takes everyone on their toes to avoid bad situations. Even then there is danger, but it should be much reduced. If one is lulled into a false sense of security because he bought thousands of dollars worth of traffic equipment he becomes a liability to himself and everyone else.

My theory on this is that everyone screws up. If I screw up and miss something, it's much more likely someone who is on their toes will see the problem and save our bacon rather than the person who is relaxed and not on their toes, that could make my screwup cost both our lives. (Just talking in general here, not about the accident or pilots in this thread.)
 
It's really tough to see an airplane from the background of the ground. I have no trouble when standing on the ground with audio clues to tell me where to look in clear blue sky, completely different from a cockpit
 
teejayevans said:
It's really tough to see an airplane from the background of the ground. I have no trouble when standing on the ground with audio clues to tell me where to look in clear blue sky, completely different from a cockpit
Click to expand...
So....why didn't ATC see everything? :dunno:
 
No he is saying you fly you die. Odds will gotcha eventually. Seeing as this blue marble is getting crowded GA being dangerous is a net positive for humanity.
 
Pedals2Paddles said:
Don't mind ClimbnStink. He's not concerned with things like facts, evidence, reason, or intelligence.
Click to expand...
Why is this guy not banned? Nothing but insults from him. This place is a joke if they let this continue.
 
PaulS said:
That's not the point he is trying to make. It takes everyone on their toes to avoid bad situations. Even then there is danger, but it should be much reduced. If one is lulled into a false sense of security because he bought thousands of dollars worth of traffic equipment he becomes a liability to himself and everyone else.

My theory on this is that everyone screws up. If I screw up and miss something, it's much more likely someone who is on their toes will see the problem and save our bacon rather than the person who is relaxed and not on their toes, that could make my screwup cost both our lives. (Just talking in general here, not about the accident or pilots in this thread.)
Click to expand...

Problem is that many do not think like this. They DEPEND upon the technology to the degree that they are NOT watching. Watching should be co-operative with technology, but we get lulled into a false sense of security thinking that the tech is there and is more reliable, but we fail to understand its limitations.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Why is this guy not banned? Nothing but insults from him. This place is a joke if they let this continue.
Click to expand...

:mad2: Says the guy who does nothing but insult everyone and spread lies. Comical. For your reference, pointing out that you ignore facts and evidence in favor of blind assumptions is not an insult. It is yet another fact. Something you're woefully unfamiliar with. As is evident by this discussion.
 
Name mispelling and insulting my intelligence, over a difference of opinion. You should be ashamed of yourself.
 
Posting a blind assumption, and blatant made up lies does not constitute a difference of opinion. Once again, correcting your misinformation does not constitute an insult. However, you posting intentional misinformation represented as fact IS insulting and IS libel.
 
Pedals2Paddles said:
Posting a blind assumption, and blatant made up lies does not constitute a difference of opinion. Once again, correcting your misinformation does not constitute an insult. However, you posting intentional misinformation represented as fact IS insulting and IS libel.
Click to expand...

OK you two........

Get a room , kiss and make up....:rolleyes:
 
Pedals2Paddles said:
Posting a blind assumption, and blatant made up lies does not constitute a difference of opinion. Once again, correcting your misinformation does not constitute an insult. However, you posting intentional misinformation represented as fact IS insulting and IS libel.
Click to expand...
You believe one party is at fault and blame the other I feel the opposite, simple. Only I don't lower myself to childish name calling. And about those insults how about an apology? If you are so even keeled and honest on the level and all.
 
ClimbnSink said:
You believe one party is at fault and blame the other I feel the opposite, simple.
Click to expand...
Wrong. I don't believe either and never said such a thing. I believe in evaluating the facts and available evidence. You ignored facts and evidence, and made false statements based only on personal opinions. Simple.

ClimbnSink said:
Only I don't lower myself to childish name calling. And about those insults how about an apology? If you are so even keeled and honest on the level and all.
Click to expand...
Wrong. You've been calling the cirrus pilot childish names the whole time. As is usual, in most threads you participate in.

Next.
 
One of the things to remember when looking for traffic is it helps to move your head around as far as possible.
 
Pedals you claim to be fair and balanced. And to possess the moral high ground, so where is my apology?
 
For calling you ClimbnStink? Sorry. For pointing out all your constant misinformation, complete lies, blind assumptions, insulting name calling, libel, and general horrid attitude, I make no apology, nor is one warranted.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Why is this guy not banned? Nothing but insults from him. This place is a joke if they let this continue.
Click to expand...

Pot meet kettle.

I'll give you 4 to 1 odds that you're on 4 times as many people's "ignore" list as he is.

Time for you to refill your prescription for penis enlargement pills?
 
Last edited:
Ignore lists are the standard? What is funny Tim is folks like you and pedals that claim the moral high ground yet are the nastiest. Just cause you feel smug handing out insults doesn't mean you ain't rolling in poop with the rest of us pigs. Delusions of high class I suppose. I love you, fellow human peasant.
 
Not at all. I've been called a "dick" here and in almost every case I deserved it.

But I didnt go whining to the MC, so every post where I've been called a dick, is still here for all to enjoy.

You, OTOH, a person who portrays himself as Mr "You need Grow a Dick or just stay in the house and hide", whine to the MC to get a post removed.

Hmmm, who really needs to grow a dick here?

At least that's the view from my porch.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top