Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Safety
PSA Crash with Helicopter at DCA… >

PSA Crash with Helicopter at DCA?

Search

Notices
Safety Accidents, suggestions on improving safety, etc

PSA Crash with Helicopter at DCA…

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-31-2025 | 06:25 AM
  #91  
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2025
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
From: Pilot
Default

In the United States, ATC professionals do not need to notify both aircraft of a point out. It is procedure to only notify one. In this case the tower controller was probably compliant.

PAT told the controller twice he had the aircraft in sight. PAT requested twice to maintain visual separation. PAT accepted legal responsibility twice. PAT did exactly what he said he would not do, impact the conflicted airliner.

There are a lot more safety concerns here I hope are addressed soon. The behavior of PAT seems blatantly incompetent. It's hard to accept such a screw up.
Reply
Old 01-31-2025 | 06:58 AM
  #92  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,149
Likes: 802
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Exclamation

Originally Posted by joepilot50
Seriously you can't help yourself....

What is offensive is using this accident without facts being known, bodies still in the Potomac, and not even a full day after the accident is using their lives lost as a springboard for your political BS.

Again keep it out of this thread and stop making me lose faith in humanity.
What he said. Keep the politics out of this thread.

The qualifications of those involved can be discussed after the NTSB report, if they find it relevant.
Reply
Old 01-31-2025 | 07:04 AM
  #93  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,149
Likes: 802
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by joepilot50
I know in other countries you can't tell someone cleared to land while someone else is line up and wait on the same runway, but that is allowed in the US. DCA is not the only airport that does this.
The US airline industry is almost as large as the rest of the world combined.

In fairness I think we've fixed the issue of planes landing on Po&Ho planes, by procedure and awareness. I'm more worried about incursions mid-field, which you can't see coming in advance.
Reply
Old 01-31-2025 | 07:31 AM
  #94  
JamesNoBrakes's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 97
From: Volleyball Player
Default

I haven't look at this hard, but did some estimation early on and it seems like about a mile out from touchdown, which even if the helo is "supposed" to be at 200 feet, does not seem like enough clearance to be running underneath arriving aircraft. Seems like a corridor for helo N/S traffic would need to be much further east, over land and the AF base, given the expected altitude of aircraft on approach over the water.
Reply
Old 01-31-2025 | 07:50 AM
  #95  
bababouey's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 898
Likes: 47
Default

Originally Posted by ABEHillbilly
In the United States, ATC professionals do not need to notify both aircraft of a point out. It is procedure to only notify one. In this case the tower controller was probably compliant.

PAT told the controller twice he had the aircraft in sight. PAT requested twice to maintain visual separation. PAT accepted legal responsibility twice. PAT did exactly what he said he would not do, impact the conflicted airliner.

There are a lot more safety concerns here I hope are addressed soon. The behavior of PAT seems blatantly incompetent. It's hard to accept such a screw up.
he never gave a distance and notification of converging paths though. I know the helo said visual, but the controller sensed something, which is why he pressed the helo to confirm visual again right before the impact.
Reply
Old 01-31-2025 | 08:14 AM
  #96  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jan 2024
Posts: 51
Likes: 2
Default

Former Army pilot here and it stings that the Army Helicopter caused this. Had they been at 200 feet like they were supposed to be, we wouldn't be having this conversation. The 200 feet altitude restriction was the last card in the deck.
Reply
Old 01-31-2025 | 08:18 AM
  #97  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2021
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 212
Default

Originally Posted by PilotdadCJDCMD
Former Army pilot here and it stings that the Army Helicopter caused this. Had they been at 200 feet like they were supposed to be, we wouldn't be having this conversation. The 200 feet altitude restriction was the last card in the deck.
Army Helo climbing above 200 feet the day before caused an RA on an RPA bird coming in, thank god they were over 1000 feet at the time and the RA triggered. Something has got to change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huVFZ__q2rI
Reply
Old 01-31-2025 | 08:18 AM
  #98  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,629
Likes: 155
Default

Originally Posted by PilotdadCJDCMD
Former Army pilot here and it stings that the Army Helicopter caused this. Had they been at 200 feet like they were supposed to be, we wouldn't be having this conversation. The 200 feet altitude restriction was the last card in the deck.
new video.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...ash-rcna190152
Reply
Old 01-31-2025 | 08:39 AM
  #99  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 293
Likes: 4
From: 767 FO
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777
In fairness I think we've fixed the issue of planes landing on Po&Ho planes, by procedure and awareness. I'm more worried about incursions mid-field, which you can't see coming in advance.

it wasn’t a p&h plane, but tell that to the FDX crew in Austin. I think they would disagree.
Reply
Old 01-31-2025 | 08:49 AM
  #100  
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2025
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
From: Pilot
Default

The New York Times reports that the PAT helicopter pilots were one woman and one man.

Let's see how "non-political" the political appointees of the NTSB can be this time around.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
PurdueFlyer
PSA Airlines
174
09-08-2021 08:26 AM
takingmessages
Safety
0
06-21-2020 08:11 AM
F4E Mx
Safety
8
07-06-2019 07:38 AM
ToiletDuck
Safety
5
08-08-2012 09:04 PM
alarkyokie
Hangar Talk
5
09-25-2008 03:01 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices