- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: .
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:21 pm to mmmmmbeeer
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:21 pm to mmmmmbeeer
quote:
If that's the case, why was her trainer just letting her fly a couple hundred over allowed altitude and missing the visual? Hell, it was her trainer on the damn ATC call saying visual confirmed.
Yeah, but he’s a dude. So no way it was his fault.
1
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:25 pm to tes fou
I think the runway change and traffic call were far enough ahead to not be a problem.
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:27 pm to FutureMikeVIII
Altitude creep is the answer of what doomed everybody last night - blackhawk pilots were scanning the sky instead of being told definitively where to be and the helo was rising the whole time
But zero chance these training flights will be performed this way and this close to busy airports moving forward.
But zero chance these training flights will be performed this way and this close to busy airports moving forward.
This post was edited on 1/30/25 at 5:29 pm
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:27 pm to SirWinston
Altitude creep doesn’t explain PAT not passing behind traffic as instructed
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:28 pm to 257WBY
quote:
Altitude wouldn’t have been relevant if PAT had passed behind the CRJ.
It’s absolutely relevant anywhere along the path with 200 ft max with or without traffic. And it should be a big deal anytime it happens. Fundamental tenet of aviation. I don’t know if that altitude increase was inadvertent or they thought they were further down the path but I’d like to know how often that happens there.
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:29 pm to 257WBY
quote:
Altitude creep doesn’t explain PAT not passing behind traffic as instructed
Yep. They announced they saw the plan and never changed heading as best I can tell? So even if they saw the next plane in line to land, they never moved or followed ATC. Is that regularly done? IDK
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:29 pm to TorchtheFlyingTiger
quote:
hate to scapegoat ATC but seems a less ambiguous point out might have prevented this in final few seconds. Instead of asking "PAT25, do you have a CRJ in sight?
As a retired FAA ATC with 36 years experience, I can pretty much guarantee that on initial contact with the PAT, in reference to the RJ, the controller gave all of the required information to the PAT, such as position, altitude, type, and intentions of the RJ. I am assuming the PAT said traffic in sight at that point. We didn’t hear that initial contact on the audio, just the update to the PAT. Once an aircraft says they have the traffic in sight and will maintain visual separation, you expect the aircraft to maintain visual separation.
This post was edited on 1/30/25 at 5:35 pm
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:33 pm to tes fou
quote:
I think the zig zag when they changed runways ends up shifting them from straight ahead in field of view with landing lights toward chopper to high and left, chopper pilot loses situational awareness at some point and now the CRJ is obscured by her overhead panel(she’s right seat). Next couple planes flying the approach are still dead ahead and right where she expects to see traffic. Also there is the altitude creep on the Blackhawk flight path, they appear to climb above their ceiling of 200ft.
Maybe they had on NODs? But otherwise the CRJ was essentially directly in their view and should have been with plenty angle up initially to be above the any back ground lights?
Point being, I just find it hard to believe they didn't see the CRJ right in front of them. There's a damn headlight on bright as hell.
ETA: There was also two pilots here. What was the second doing this entire time? Its not like this was a single seat that may have been preoccupied.
This post was edited on 1/30/25 at 5:35 pm
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:39 pm to GatorOnAnIsland
quote:
As a retired FAA ATC with 36 years experience, I can pretty much guarantee that on initial contact with the PAT, in reference to the RJ, the controller gave all of the required information to the PAT, such as position, altitude, type, and intentions of the RJ. I am assuming the PAT said traffic in sight at that point. We didn’t hear that initial contact on the audio, just the update to the PAT. Once an aircraft says they have the traffic in sight and will maintain visual separation, you expect the aircraft to maintain visual separation.
Ah, someone who knows wtf they’re talking about!
I guess 2 questions for you…
1. If the ATC saw a warning on his radar and both aircraft seemed unaware, what would the typical response be? Or are you saying that once visual is confirmed, ATC considers their job done and ignores radar on those two?
2. Saw where the Blackhawk would’ve been on a different radio system than the jet and would typically be manned by separate people. With only one ATC commanding both aircraft, should he have had them both on a single frequency so they could communicate directly to one another?
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:40 pm to GatorOnAnIsland
quote:any comment on the flight altitude of the helicopter?
As a retired FAA ATC with 36 years experience
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:43 pm to SteelerBravesDawg
CBS Evening News tonight said they haven't retrieved the black box yet but know where they are.
I hate media conflicting reports.
I am not deaf and know what I heard.
I hate media conflicting reports.
I am not deaf and know what I heard.
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:47 pm to Woodlands Tigah
quote:
Are you sure about that
They typically do not transport the dead unless the injured dies in transit.
Ok Hoss?
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:47 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
The reason is he's rambling and saying every random thought that pops in his head.
He’s bringing it up because he knows the helo pilot was a woman.
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:54 pm to 257WBY
quote:
Altitude wouldn’t have been relevant if PAT had passed behind the CRJ.
He was looking at the wrong aircraft
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:55 pm to mmmmmbeeer
Lofty queries, mate 
Posted on 1/30/25 at 6:05 pm to Pax Regis
quote:
He’s bringing it up because he knows the helo pilot was a woman.
He has no clue if shes well qualified or not
DEI isnt "women pilots: Its women pilots getttng jobs over men when they are less qualified.
Posted on 1/30/25 at 6:09 pm to GatorOnAnIsland
quote:
the controller gave all of the required information to the PAT, such as position, altitude, type, and intentions of the RJ
Yes but once the conflict alarm sounded, wouldn't it have been prudent to call for the RJ to go around? Not necessity saying he should have, but certainly could have.
Posted on 1/30/25 at 6:11 pm to LSU Grad Alabama Fan
Shut up you Alabama fig
Posted on 1/30/25 at 6:12 pm to LSUJuice
What's the latest on crash deaths? How many Military?
Posted on 1/30/25 at 6:12 pm to mmmmmbeeer
esp if they saw the helicopter altitude going out of bounds....
Should the ATC call that out?
Or is he over-tasked?
Should the ATC call that out?
Or is he over-tasked?
Page 47 of 73
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News