[asianthree]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Why did it do that be my question.

Ugly rumors on X, hopefully have been reported and removed

[Arctic Fox]

I expect it will be shown to be "Human Error", but why have a set-up like this that makes the likelihood of a human error so high?

With Dulles being less than 30 miles from Ronald Reagan, why aren't all of the "commercial" flights limited to that airport?

Most capital cities now have a high speed rail connection between the city center and the nearest major airport.

[manaboutown]

Reagan has been a busy airport for many years. In the late 1960s I worked as a Patent Examiner on the 10th floor of a building in Crystal City. My office overlooked the airport and it was busy even back then. Dulles went into service in 1962 but members of Congress wanted to keep Reagan open as it was very convenient for them. They even had their own private parking lot there - probably still do. During Commencement in June of 1970 on the Georgetown campus lawn it was very difficult to hear the speakers as planes taking off from Reagan (National back then) kept flying over.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by manaboutown

Reagan has been a busy airport for many years. In the late 1960s I worked as a Patent Examiner on the 10th floor of a building in Crystal City. My office overlooked the airport and it was busy even back then. Dulles went into service in 1962 but members of Congress wanted to keep Reagan open as it was very convenient for them. They even had their own private parking lot there - probably still do. During Commencement in June of 1970 on the Georgetown campus lawn it was very difficult to hear the speakers as planes taking off from Reagan (National back then) kept flying over.

Reagan is the 26th busiest airport in the US, according to Top 100 US Airports FlightRadar24 | Plane Flight Tracker (which tracks in real time). The real problem isn't that Reagan is so busy, but that the Washington/NY corridor is the busiest air space in the USA.

Washington DC itself, probably being the most congested (& complicated) in the world.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by Arctic Fox

I expect it will be shown to be "Human Error", but why have a set-up like this that makes the likelihood of a human error so high?

With Dulles being less than 30 miles from Ronald Reagan, why aren't all of the "commercial" flights limited to that airport?

Most capital cities now have a high speed rail connection between the city center and the nearest major airport.

LaGuardia & Kennedy are only 8 miles apart and they're both busier than Reagan. People don't realize how many airports are out there and how close they are.

When I took off from my home base airport, when I was at 6B6, if I climbed to 10,000 feet (2 miles) and lost an engine, there were at least 8-10 airports I could glide to.

[Moderator]

It is intolerable to make any derogatory comments about any person based on religion, race, age, gender, etc.

Please remember this is a large community with many members from all parts of the world, representing all people.

Please refrain from posting messages that contain potential hot topics known as polarizing arguments.

A tone of “kindness” is appreciated for all discussions.

[npwalters]

I'm a former Army helicopter pilot qualified in all models of the Blackhawk. I have over 8000 flight hours and a significant number of NVG hours.

It is difficult under NVGs to determine how far away an observed light is. That is particularly true in an environment where there are many light sources - such as the DC area. If the crew was unaided the risk factors increase. An additional factor is that (contrary to news reports) this was not a highly experienced crew.

My GUESS, based on what I've read and seen, is that the Blackhawk pilot saw a light source that he thought was the airliner but was not. He reported to ATC that he had the aircraft in sight and would avoid it (pass behind or slow and let the airliner pass by). That took the onus off of ATC to direct a turn for either aircraft. The responsibility shifted to the Blackhawk and no deviation was required of the airliner.

The tower could (perhaps) have given better notice of where the RJ was and what runway he was approaching. It is unclear right now, but unlikely, that the Blackhawk had TCAS or ADS B which can give situational awareness of other aircraft.

The airliner was in a descent and apparently above the helicopter. That is a blind spot to the helicopter pilot(s) and likely to the airliner since the Blackhawk was near and below the RJ. The end to the tragedy was that the two aircraft collided - probably with the airliner descending into the helicopter.

In answer to another comment, it is very common to have helicopter low level routes below airport approach paths. It is done to keep the relatively slow helicopters out of the airspace used by larger - and faster -aircraft while allowing the rotorcraft to complete their mission. This particular route is inside the DC capital area and is VERY tightly controlled and available only to a very small set of aircraft.

It is certainly a tragic event. It is likely the Blackhawk crew was at fault (based on news reports). It is understandable - to me - how it happened. I, and every other pilot, have made a similar mistake that only by the grace of God did not end up in an accident.

[Blueblaze]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Why did it do that be my question.

An airliner on final at 350' is about 30 seconds from wheels down. It doesn't make one damn bit of difference if that chopper was at 200' or 350'. The legal vertical separation at ALL altitudes is 500 FEET! And that chopper shouldn't have be crossing the active runway's glidepath at ANY altitude lower than 14,500', anyway. That's the typical ceiling of class B airspace under the control of a major towered airport.

I don't care what altitude it was at, crossing a commercial airliner's glidepath on short final is idiotic and ordinarily illegal. Doing it at night with night vision goggles is stupid squared. ATC granting clearance to do such a dumbass thing is criminal, and whoever told that controller it was OK for the army to play in traffic near the nation's capital airport should be liable for 67 counts of criminally negligent manslaughter.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Blueblaze

An airliner on final at 350' is about 30 seconds from wheels down. It doesn't make one damn bit of difference if that chopper was at 200' or 350'. The legal vertical separation at ALL altitudes is 500 FEET! And that chopper shouldn't have be crossing the active runway's glidepath at ANY altitude lower than 14,500', anyway. That's the typical ceiling of class B airspace under the control of a major towered airport.

I don't care what altitude it was at, crossing a commercial airliner's glidepath on short final is idiotic and ordinarily illegal. Doing it at night with night vision goggles is stupid squared. ATC granting clearance to do such a dumbass thing is criminal, and whoever told that controller it was OK for the army to play in traffic near the nation's capital airport should be liable for 67 counts of criminally negligent manslaughter.

You should have tried to get at least a few facts correct before spending so much time typing your rant.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by npwalters

I'm a former Army helicopter pilot qualified in all models of the Blackhawk. I have over 8000 flight hours and a significant number of NVG hours.

It is difficult under NVGs to determine how far away an observed light is. That is particularly true in an environment where there are many light sources - such as the DC area. If the crew was unaided the risk factors increase. An additional factor is that (contrary to news reports) this was not a highly experienced crew.

My GUESS, based on what I've read and seen, is that the Blackhawk pilot saw a light source that he thought was the airliner but was not. He reported to ATC that he had the aircraft in sight and would avoid it (pass behind or slow and let the airliner pass by). That took the onus off of ATC to direct a turn for either aircraft. The responsibility shifted to the Blackhawk and no deviation was required of the airliner.

The tower could (perhaps) have given better notice of where the RJ was and what runway he was approaching. It is unclear right now, but unlikely, that the Blackhawk had TCAS or ADS B which can give situational awareness of other aircraft.

The airliner was in a descent and apparently above the helicopter. That is a blind spot to the helicopter pilot(s) and likely to the airliner since the Blackhawk was near and below the RJ. The end to the tragedy was that the two aircraft collided - probably with the airliner descending into the helicopter.

In answer to another comment, it is very common to have helicopter low level routes below airport approach paths. It is done to keep the relatively slow helicopters out of the airspace used by larger - and faster -aircraft while allowing the rotorcraft to complete their mission. This particular route is inside the DC capital area and is VERY tightly controlled and available only to a very small set of aircraft.

It is certainly a tragic event. It is likely the Blackhawk crew was at fault (based on news reports). It is understandable - to me - how it happened. I, and every other pilot, have made a similar mistake that only by the grace of God did not end up in an accident.

Nice to hear from someone who knows what he's talking about.

I think you're right in everything you typed, other than I believe ATC has to share some of the fault with the BH pilots (I thought I read there were at least 2, if not 3 "pilots" on that aircraft, at least one of which, was an "Instructor"?)

If the facts are as presented in all the news reports are accurate, ATC had a CA alert. The Controller was apparently satisfied in his own mind, that the BH really had the CRJ in sight and wasn't mistaken. The Controller didn't rely on his own equipment, which indicated there was something amiss.

It's sort of the like the guy who refuses to rely on his instruments, because he sees it differently, outside the window.

(You don't think the BH had TCAS or ADS-B?)

[bmcgowan13]

Although this occurred in DC it is deeply personal to many in the aviation community. Military, commercial, corporate, GA pilots and controllers of every sort truly "felt" this. They are shaken by the events. This is never supposed to be able to happen...

This was posted by an air traffic controller online....

"An aircraft accident happened over the Potomac river tonight. If you know me then you understand that a tragedy like this resonates across the country and strikes at the heart of all air traffic controllers across the nation. I feel deeply for the families that lost loved ones this night. There aren’t words that my profession can offer to heal the pain, but I hope you know that we’ve lost a part of ourselves tonight. We exist to serve you in silence and we take it to heart when events like tonight come to fruition. We live in this pain and will carry it for all of our lives. Please think about those that you cannot relate with. Understand that our job comes with consequences and a penalty that cannot be understood by those that do not do this unforgiving job. By no means is this an excuse. This is the testimony of a man who cares and does his best every single day that you trust him to do so. My colleagues are one and the same."

[Boffin]

I was taught to trust my instruments.

[bob47]

Originally Posted by npwalters

I'm a former Army helicopter pilot qualified in all models of the Blackhawk. I have over 8000 flight hours and a significant number of NVG hours.

It is difficult under NVGs to determine how far away an observed light is. That is particularly true in an environment where there are many light sources - such as the DC area. If the crew was unaided the risk factors increase. An additional factor is that (contrary to news reports) this was not a highly experienced crew.

My GUESS, based on what I've read and seen, is that the Blackhawk pilot saw a light source that he thought was the airliner but was not. He reported to ATC that he had the aircraft in sight and would avoid it (pass behind or slow and let the airliner pass by). That took the onus off of ATC to direct a turn for either aircraft. The responsibility shifted to the Blackhawk and no deviation was required of the airliner.

The tower could (perhaps) have given better notice of where the RJ was and what runway he was approaching. It is unclear right now, but unlikely, that the Blackhawk had TCAS or ADS B which can give situational awareness of other aircraft.

The airliner was in a descent and apparently above the helicopter. That is a blind spot to the helicopter pilot(s) and likely to the airliner since the Blackhawk was near and below the RJ. The end to the tragedy was that the two aircraft collided - probably with the airliner descending into the helicopter.

In answer to another comment, it is very common to have helicopter low level routes below airport approach paths. It is done to keep the relatively slow helicopters out of the airspace used by larger - and faster -aircraft while allowing the rotorcraft to complete their mission. This particular route is inside the DC capital area and is VERY tightly controlled and available only to a very small set of aircraft.

It is certainly a tragic event. It is likely the Blackhawk crew was at fault (based on news reports). It is understandable - to me - how it happened. I, and every other pilot, have made a similar mistake that only by the grace of God did not end up in an accident.

Just curious, based on your experience, how could the helicopter crew not see the airplane? In the more recent videos of the crash, the airplane landing lights are a blinding light coming straight at the camera. It's hard to imagine that the helicopter crew wouldn't see this if they even glanced to their left.

[CarlR33]

Reading the various comments above I would think when large numbers of lives are at stake that commercial aircraft would have their own space as the helicopter can land anywhere? I heard the air traffic controllers were cut back (from 2 to 4?) which again given the number of lives at stake is simply inexcusable especially since I heard they may have been distracted. Unacceptable.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by bob47

Just curious, based on your experience, how could the helicopter crew not see the airplane? In the more recent videos of the crash, the airplane landing lights are a blinding light coming straight at the camera. It's hard to imagine that the helicopter crew wouldn't see this if they even glanced to their left.

I have no where near as many hours in the cockpit as others who have posted, but I do have enough to know that pilots primarily rely on their peripheral vision, which is better able to distinguish "movement", thus the words "scanning for traffic". In an airplane, your head has to be on a slow swivel when searching for traffic. It's usually the only way to pick out a "small speck", 2 miles away. I haven't been in the cockpit since ADS-B was mandated, but I can't imagine it's changed much, as it's primarily "out-going", I believe?

Apparently the 2 pilots in the BH were wearing night-vision googles, which I've been told are something like looking at the world through a toilet paper roll ... little or no peripheral vision.

Coincidentally, I also have some experience in the ATC world and made a post regarding that, but it was deleted by the Moderators. That's fine, that's their right and I'm not going to argue the point. I am going to make a similar point, but hopefully without the specifics that caused that post to be deleted.

Like many other challenging employment positions in today's world, the standards have been lowered, simply to put "bodies in seats". It's not an easy task, as X number of people are needed and if you can't hire enough of the "best and the brightest", you have to take what you can get.

Some folks want to attribute lower standards to a specific political or social agenda. In the ATC world, that's simply not the case. It's the reality of the job marketplace. There's a severe shortage of available and competent Controllers and the FAA over the last few years has lowered their admission standards.

At the same time, the technology has improved dramatically and the hope has always been that the improved technology would make up for the lower standards. I think in this instance, as myself and a number of others have mentioned, ATC is going to take part of the blame and rightly so, in my opinion. With today's technology, two 100% operational aircraft shouldn't collide in the sky.