DCA prelim released
03-14-2025 | 08:34 AM
#11
Line holder
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,179
Likes: 259
From: Aircraft & Seat: old & hard
https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Documents/DCA25MA108%20Prelim.pdf
The actual report so you don't have to slog through the Twitter dumpster fire that doesn't have the right link anymore.
The actual report so you don't have to slog through the Twitter dumpster fire that doesn't have the right link anymore.
03-16-2025 | 03:29 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,244
Likes: 2
From: Baja Vermont
Merging target calls apply above 10,000 and when pilot has accepted visual separation. The controller did confirm that PAT 25 had visual contact
03-16-2025 | 10:47 PM
#13
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 972
Likes: 1
When the controller saw the slow descent, they called EAL401 and said, 'Eastern 401, how are things coming along out there?.
That is very similar to PAT25: "PAT25, do you have the CRJ in sight".
Today EAL 401 would get: "LOW ALTITUDE ALERT [call sign], CHECK YOUR ALTITUDE IMMEDIATELY."
Shouldn't PAT25 been given: TRAFFIC ALERT [call sign] [position of aircraft], ADVISE YOU TURN LEFT/RIGHT [heading] AND/OR CLIMB/DESCEND [specific altitude if appropriate] IMMEDIATELY -or- TRAFFIC ALERT, [call sign], traffic 11 o’clock, half a mile, same altitude, advise you [instruction] immediately."
03-17-2025 | 05:44 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,562
Likes: 1,227
Before EAL 401, controllers would sometimes give informal or implied altitude reminders. After the crash, ATC began using standardized phraseology to issue altitude alerts more explicitly.
When the controller saw the slow descent, they called EAL401 and said, 'Eastern 401, how are things coming along out there?.
That is very similar to PAT25: "PAT25, do you have the CRJ in sight".
Today EAL 401 would get: "LOW ALTITUDE ALERT [call sign], CHECK YOUR ALTITUDE IMMEDIATELY."
Shouldn't PAT25 been given: TRAFFIC ALERT [call sign] [position of aircraft], ADVISE YOU TURN LEFT/RIGHT [heading] AND/OR CLIMB/DESCEND [specific altitude if appropriate] IMMEDIATELY -or- TRAFFIC ALERT, [call sign], traffic 11 o’clock, half a mile, same altitude, advise you [instruction] immediately."
When the controller saw the slow descent, they called EAL401 and said, 'Eastern 401, how are things coming along out there?.
That is very similar to PAT25: "PAT25, do you have the CRJ in sight".
Today EAL 401 would get: "LOW ALTITUDE ALERT [call sign], CHECK YOUR ALTITUDE IMMEDIATELY."
Shouldn't PAT25 been given: TRAFFIC ALERT [call sign] [position of aircraft], ADVISE YOU TURN LEFT/RIGHT [heading] AND/OR CLIMB/DESCEND [specific altitude if appropriate] IMMEDIATELY -or- TRAFFIC ALERT, [call sign], traffic 11 o’clock, half a mile, same altitude, advise you [instruction] immediately."
03-17-2025 | 07:18 AM
#15
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,200
Likes: 815
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
But in fairness, I don't think the phraseology is even required with acknowlged visual sep. Or at least it wasn't before.
The resolution on that system is probably only good enough for normal IFR separation anyway, not for in-extremis conflict resolution via lateral separation (even TCAS can't do that).
03-17-2025 | 08:41 AM
#16
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 972
Likes: 1
"Traffic Alert" must be issued regardless of prior visual contact. I believe the controller was task-saturated and truncated the required call to an EAL401 type informal call.
If that is the way it has always been done, then we have a bigger issue as pilots.
I'm no different in the sense when I know I'm working with a highly qualified pilot I tend to relax too!
03-17-2025 | 06:23 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,244
Likes: 2
From: Baja Vermont
The ATC "Collision Alert" isn't designed for visual separation, it's designed for IFR separation. Radar doesn't have the resolution for visual separation. It alerts the controller for him or her to potential for loss of separation. Look up "merged targets identification" in 7110.65.
What you're thinking of, I suspect, applies for traffic above 10,000'.
What you're thinking of, I suspect, applies for traffic above 10,000'.
03-17-2025 | 06:42 PM
#19
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 972
Likes: 1
The ATC "Collision Alert" isn't designed for visual separation, it's designed for IFR separation. Radar doesn't have the resolution for visual separation. It alerts the controller for him or her to potential for loss of separation. Look up "merged targets identification" in 7110.65.
What you're thinking of, I suspect, applies for traffic above 10,000'.
What you're thinking of, I suspect, applies for traffic above 10,000'.
What was alert was that other than a TA?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
